Udinese opened their Coppa Italia campaign with a 1-0 win over Padova on 15 August, edging a tactically tight contest despite having 47.0% possession. The home side’s 3-4-2-1 faced Padova’s 3-5-2, with the visitors controlling more of the ball at 53.0% but offering little penetration: Padova produced eight shots and none on target. Udinese generated 10 attempts, only two of them on target, so the margin for error remained narrow throughout. Padova’s goalkeeper faced those two efforts and recorded a 50.0% save percentage, reflecting the decisive difference between the sides rather than sustained attacking dominance. Without xG data or listed scorers, the scoreline and shot profile best explain the match: Udinese were more accurate when it mattered, while Padova’s possession did not translate into a shot on goal. Udinese begin the season with a clean-sheet cup victory.
Read it this way: PSxG conceded is how dangerous the shots on target were, Goals conceded is how many actually went in, Goals saved is the gap between the two (higher is better, a minus means he should have saved more), and Save % is the share of on-target shots kept out.
Udinese GK
PSxG conceded0.00
Goals conceded0
Goals saved0.00
Padova GK
PSxG conceded–
Goals conceded1
Save %50.0%
Udinese's keeper performed right in line with expectations, while Padova's keeper kept out 50% of the shots on target.
Game finished. Sign up to access full-season histograms, opponent-pulse modules, and referee-tendency analytics.
Inside the dashboards
Attack vs DefensexG, shots & goals — Home/Away per competition
Form Index & ReboundL5 momentum bar with rebound state per team
Goal Geolocation MapWhere the team scores & concedes — pitch heat
Cards IntelligenceYellow/Red filtered by referee & formation
Corner MasteryDistribution per opponent & tactical context
Top Scorers Cross-RefSquad ranked vs opponent & double-scorer combos
Referee TendencyTeam output under each referee they played for
Goalkeeper WeaknessWhere the keeper concedes — by zone & foot
