Hampton County 0 - 5 Gildsey City

Key Events:

• 17' Yellow card to Hampton County Xinping Boon
• 23' Gildsey City Luis Pinto scores, assisted by Rafael Paez
• 24' Yellow card to Gildsey City Pedro Cardoso
• 36' Gildsey City Rafael Paez scores, assisted by Pedro Cardoso
• 41' Gildsey City Jingyu Chang scores, assisted by Luis Pinto
• 43' Yellow card to Gildsey City Jingyu Chang
• 60' Gildsey City Roland Gaillard scores, assisted by Xinping Boon
• 74' Yellow card to Hampton County Derek Stewart
• 76' Gildsey City Senad Tomić scores, assisted by Xinping Boon
• 78' Yellow card to Gildsey City Rafael Paez
• 89' Yellow card to Gildsey City Rasim Redžić

Expected Goals (xG) Analysis: Hampton County’s 1.26 xG brought no goals, while Gildsey City scored five from an estimated 3.74 xG. That is a clear over-performance by the visitors and an under-performance by the hosts, whose five shots all found the target without producing a score. The gap in shot volume—19 to five—helps explain the result: Gildsey City created more opportunities and converted at a rate beyond the quality estimate, while Hampton County’s possession and corner advantage did not translate into enough chances. The xG figures make the five-goal margin look somewhat larger than the underlying chance quality alone would predict; the scoreline, however, records what happened rather than what an estimate expected.

• Hampton County had no standout performers rated 7.0 or higher.
• Luis Pinto (7.3) - Scored once and assisted once in a decisive contribution to the visitors’ attack.
• Rafael Paez (7.0) - Scored and assisted, though also received a yellow card.
• Xinping Boon (7.0) - Supplied two assists as Gildsey City completed the five-goal tally.

For Hampton County, the figures offer a frustrating contrast: more of the ball, more corners and more successful dribbles, but a 0-5 defeat all the same. Five shots on target would often be enough to make a match competitive; here, the home side’s possession did not yield a goal, and the visitors’ greater volume of attempts repeatedly changed the contest. Gildsey City were more direct in the decisive measure, scoring three times before half-time and adding twice more after the break. Their four yellow cards and Hampton County’s two made for a busy disciplinary ledger, but neither side saw a red card. The final score is emphatic, with the chance-quality estimates adding one useful qualification: Gildsey City earned a convincing win and finished their opportunities with unusual generosity toward the scoreboard.