Staby Tun City 1 - 3 Teetton United

Key Events:

• 17' Teetton United Xinping Boon scores, assisted by Saliou Sow
• 23' Yellow card to Staby Tun City Xinping Boon
• 45' Yellow card to Teetton United Saliou Sow
• 70' Staby Tun City Sunday Muhammed scores
• 74' Yellow card to Staby Tun City Luca Colombo
• 78' Teetton United Lindomar Da Silva scores, assisted by Bruno Rossi
• 82' Teetton United Luca Colombo scores, assisted by Xinping Boon

Expected Goals (xG) Analysis: The Gazzetta chance-quality estimate put Staby Tun City at 2.37 xG and Teetton United at 3.73. Against those figures, Staby scored once from chances worth more than two expected goals, while Teetton scored three from a substantially stronger chance total. Both sides finished below their xG, but the gap between the teams’ estimates reflects the larger point: Teetton created the better overall body of opportunities and backed that up with a 14-7 advantage in shots on target. Staby’s 13 corners and 51% possession indicate plenty of time in the attacking half, but those advantages did not translate into enough clear reward. Teetton had less of the ball and far fewer corners, yet its direct threat was much more persistent. The final score was not a statistical accident; it was a practical distinction between territorial pressure and shots that tested the goalkeeper.

Staby’s equaliser through Sunday Muhammed in the 70th minute briefly brought the match level and gave the hosts a result to pursue after a long stretch of pressure. But Teetton responded within eight minutes, with Lindomar Da Silva finishing a move assisted by Bruno Rossi, then extended the lead again four minutes later. The late goals turned a level score into a clear away win, and the sequence left little room for Staby to rebuild its attack.

The balance of the numbers tells a slightly odd-looking story: Staby had the possession, corners and more dribbles, while Teetton recorded more shots, far more shots on target and twice as many tackles. Staby were not short of opportunities to exert pressure, but Teetton were more effective at turning the match into a contest of defensive work and meaningful attempts. At 1-3, the hosts’ territorial edge remained visible in the statistics; Teetton’s greater threat was the part that settled the match.