Heerenveen 1–0 NEC Nijmegen
What the chances were worth
The scoreline says 1–0; by chance quality the match ran 1.46–1.23.
What the model expected
Its probabilities for this match, logged before kick-off and never changed. The result is highlighted.
The model made Heerenveen to win its most likely call before kick-off, and that is what happened. It had the result at 40% beforehand.
One match tells you nothing on its own — whether these percentages are any good is the whole point of the calibration page, where every one of them is scored.
The brain read
Little between them on chances created — the xG read 1.5–1.2, shots 8–21 with 2–2 on target. NEC Nijmegen got into the box far more often (15 shots inside it to 7) and NEC Nijmegen held 62% of the ball. NEC Nijmegen's finishing let them down — 0 from 1.2 xG despite 2 of 21 shots on target (a finishing read inferred from shots on target and goals vs xG — not measured shot placement). On chances created the game was tighter than the 1–0 suggests.
A second opinion written by rule from the numbers on this page — where the shot picture and the xG disagree, it says so rather than picking a winner. Backward-looking only; it claims nothing about any future result.
The match in numbers
As returned by the data feed at full time. Bars show each side’s share of the stat.