Aggregated team performance data including expected goals, shots, possession, corners, and discipline stats.
| Team | League | MP | Goals | Avg xG | Shots/G | Poss% | Corners/G | Cards/G |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manchester City | Carabao Cup | 6 | 14 | — | 15.8 | 66% | 5.3 | 1.8 |
| Fulham | Carabao Cup | 4 | 5 | — | 13.5 | 62% | 6 | 1 |
Expected Goals (xG) is the single most important advanced metric in modern football analytics. It measures the quality of scoring chances by assigning each shot a probability of being scored, based on factors like distance, angle, assist type, and whether it was a header. A penalty is worth about 0.76 xG, while a long-range shot might be just 0.03.
The Avg xG column shows how many goals a team is expected to score per match based on their shot quality. Teams with high xG but lower actual goals are likely due a positive regression — they are creating chances but not converting them yet. The reverse (low xG, high goals) suggests a team overperforming that may regress. Read our detailed xG explainer for a deeper dive.
Shots per game indicates offensive intent — teams averaging 15+ shots are creating volume. But shots alone do not tell you about quality, which is why xG is the more reliable predictor. A team with 10 shots and 1.8 xG is more dangerous than one with 16 shots and 1.2 xG.
Possession (highlighted green above 55%) reflects control but not necessarily dominance. Some of Europe's best counter-attacking teams thrive on low possession. For betting, possession is most useful in predicting corner counts (high-possession teams win more) and tempo (high-possession games tend to be lower scoring).
The Cards/G column tracks total cards per match per team. This is useful for the cards/bookings market, which some bookmakers offer as over/under on total cards or total booking points. Teams with aggressive pressing styles or those frequently defending deep tend to commit more fouls and receive more cards. Cross-reference with form — teams on losing streaks often accumulate more cards from frustrated tackles. Check our corner data alongside cards, as set-piece-heavy teams with high card counts create chaotic matches ideal for Over bets.
| Wigan Athletic | Carabao Cup | 3 | 2 | — | 6.3 | 42% | 2.7 | 2 |
| Chelsea | Carabao Cup | 5 | 11 | — | 14 | 60% | 4.4 | 3.8 |
| Arsenal | Carabao Cup | 6 | 9 | — | 14 | 54% | 6 | 1.3 |
| Newcastle United | Carabao Cup | 5 | 9 | — | 14.6 | 53% | 5.4 | 2 |
| Reading | Carabao Cup | 3 | 4 | — | 10.3 | 47% | 4 | 0.7 |
| Wolverhampton Wanderers | Carabao Cup | 3 | 8 | — | 15.7 | 48% | 4.7 | 2.3 |
| Swansea City | Carabao Cup | 4 | 8 | — | 13 | 49% | 4.3 | 1.5 |
| Crystal Palace | Carabao Cup | 3 | 5 | — | 13.3 | 42% | 4 | 1 |
| Barnsley | Carabao Cup | 3 | 4 | — | 9.7 | 56% | 2.3 | 1 |
| Sheffield Wednesday | Carabao Cup | 3 | 4 | — | 5.7 | 40% | 1.7 | 1.7 |
| Millwall | Carabao Cup | 3 | 4 | — | 12.3 | 50% | 5 | 2.7 |
| Southampton | Carabao Cup | 3 | 5 | — | 11.7 | 49% | 6.3 | 2.3 |
| Cardiff City | Carabao Cup | 5 | 10 | — | 16.4 | 57% | 7.2 | 1.8 |
| Brighton & Hove Albion | Carabao Cup | 3 | 12 | — | 17.7 | 57% | 4.3 | 1.7 |
| Bradford City | Carabao Cup | 3 | 6 | — | 10 | 33% | 4.3 | 2.3 |
| Wycombe Wanderers | Carabao Cup | 4 | 5 | — | 10.8 | 51% | 4.8 | 1.8 |
| Grimsby Town | Carabao Cup | 4 | 6 | — | 10.8 | 44% | 5.3 | 1.3 |
| Cambridge United | Carabao Cup | 3 | 5 | — | 9.7 | 37% | 4.3 | 0.7 |
| Doncaster Rovers | Carabao Cup | 3 | 6 | — | 14 | 49% | 6 | 1.3 |
| Brentford | Carabao Cup | 4 | 8 | — | 8 | 44% | 2.5 | 0.8 |
| Huddersfield Town | Carabao Cup | 3 | 3 | — | 9 | 31% | 2 | 1 |
| Wrexham | Carabao Cup | 4 | 9 | — | 14.8 | 45% | 4.5 | 0.5 |
| Lincoln City | Carabao Cup | 3 | 5 | — | 17.7 | 47% | 5 | 2 |
| Port Vale | Carabao Cup | 3 | 2 | — | 8 | 31% | 5 | 0.3 |
| Accrington Stanley | Carabao Cup | 3 | 5 | — | 9 | 35% | 1.7 | 3.7 |