Pridge 4 - 3 Kend Con

Key Events:

• 10' Kend Con Seungwoo Jeong scores
• 14' Pridge Michel Lemoine scores
• 14' Yellow card to Kend Con Zdravko Ivanišević
• 25' Yellow card to Kend Con Allan Carroll
• 27' Kend Con Pedro Chagas scores, assisted by Jorge Alvez
• 41' Yellow card to Kend Con Jeremy Bird
• 63' Pridge Zdravko Ivanišević scores, assisted by Jorge Alvez
• 70' Kend Con Rajko Lalović scores, assisted by Jeremy Bird
• 81' Pridge Philippe Robert scores, assisted by Seungwoo Jeong
• 83' Pridge Pedro Chagas scores, assisted by Phillip Lewis

Expected Goals (xG) Analysis: Pridge scored four from an xG of 1.82, substantially exceeding the chance quality measured by the Gazzetta estimate. Kend Con scored three from 4.43 xG, leaving a considerable gap between the visitors’ expected and actual return. The shots tell the same broad story: Kend Con registered 20 attempts, 16 on target, while Pridge put all seven of its shots on target. The visitors created more and repeatedly tested the goal, but Pridge made its smaller attacking return count with unusual efficiency. That contrast is the tactical puzzle of the scoreline: Kend Con had the volume and the higher xG, while Pridge found the decisive finishes when the match was still there to be taken.

No players from either side recorded a rating of 7.0 or higher.

For Pridge, the late sequence was the difference: Philippe Robert levelled matters in the 81st minute, then Pedro Chagas scored two minutes later to complete the home side’s four-goal tally. The win was not built on territorial control or a greater supply of chances; possession was even, and Kend Con had the clear advantage in shots. It was built on Pridge converting its opportunities and staying in the contest after Rajko Lalović restored Kend Con’s lead in the 70th minute.

Kend Con’s three yellow cards came before the final flurry, while Pridge finished without a booking. The visitors’ attacking output was substantial, but the final score remains 4-3 to Pridge: four goals from seven shots proved more consequential than 20 attempts and the higher xG. A result this lopsided against the chance ledger is not a tactical blueprint so much as a reminder that the ledger does not take the field.