Fulham
ChelseaThe 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: Chelsea was the better side by chances too.
| Minute | Goal | Team | Shot xG | Assist |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0' | João Pedro | 0.43 | Cole Palmer | |
| 22' | Joshua King | 0.05 | Timothy Castagne | |
| 40' | Morgan Rogers | 0.45 | Maxence Lacroix | |
| 48' | Cole Palmer | 0.28 | João Pedro | |
| 53' | Gonzalo García | 0.64 |
| Minute | Player | Team | xG | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 53' | Gonzalo García | 0.64 | goal, header | |
| 35' | Romeo Lavia | 0.59 | saved, from a corner | |
| 40' | Morgan Rogers | 0.45 | goal |
Shots: Fulham 14, Chelsea 18; big chances (xG 0.3 and above): 1 and 3.
In the first half xG was Fulham 0.43, Chelsea 2.08: a big edge for Chelsea. In the second half xG was Fulham 1.04, Chelsea 0.56: a small edge for Fulham. The edge in chances passed from Chelsea to Fulham.
Fulham: −3.9 for the season (15 in the table). Chelsea: +3.2 (5). The gap between points and xPTS is built from matches like this one.