Crystal Palace
Ipswich TownThe score says how it ended. xG says how it should have ended: it is the sum of the chances each shot was worth, not an opinion about the game.
The score matched the game: Ipswich Town was the better side by chances too.
| Team | Goals | xG | Goals − xG | Expected points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 0.94 | +1.1 | 0.71 | |
| 3 | 2.03 | +1.0 | 2.09 |
| Minute | Goal | Team | Shot xG | Assist |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13' | Anan Khalaili | 0.04 | Daichi Kamada | |
| 22' | Emersonn | 0.39 | Leif Davis | |
| 44' | Leif Davis | 0.47 | Emersonn | |
| 74' | Jørgen Strand Larsen | 0.07 | Daichi Kamada | |
| 89' | Zian Flemming | 0.64 |
| Minute | Player | Team | xG | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 89' | Zian Flemming | 0.64 | goal | |
| 44' | Leif Davis | 0.47 | goal, header | |
| 78' | Anan Khalaili | 0.40 | off target |
Shots: Crystal Palace 11, Ipswich Town 12; big chances (xG 0.3 and above): 1 and 3.
In the first half xG was Crystal Palace 0.17, Ipswich Town 0.98: a clear edge for Ipswich Town. In the second half xG was Crystal Palace 0.76, Ipswich Town 1.10: a small edge for Ipswich Town. The edge in chances lasted the whole match. Crystal Palace scored 2 from 0.94 xG: more than they created. As a rule, finishing like this evens out over time.
Crystal Palace: −2.5 for the season (20 in the table). Ipswich Town: +0.8 (14). The gap between points and xPTS is built from matches like this one.