Roma’s dramatic 3–3 draw against Napoli was a contest of contrasting attacking strengths: the Giallorossi produced more shots, but the hosts created better chances overall.
Gian Piero Gasperini’s side registered 24 attempts and 1.96 expected goals, compared with 15 shots and 2.98 xG for Napoli. Yet decisive finishing from Matías Soulé and Leonardo Balerdi ensured Roma left the Maradona with a point after recovering from both 2–0 and 3–2 down.
Expected goals measure the quality of shooting opportunities rather than determine what the final score should have been. Here, the figures help explain both Napoli’s threat and the efficiency behind Roma’s comeback.
Roma’s shot volume tells only part of the story
Roma’s 24 attempts generated an average of approximately 0.08 xG per shot. That reflects a willingness to keep attacking, but also shows that many of their efforts came from relatively difficult positions.
Soulé’s goal was a perfect example. His strike to reduce the deficit to 2–1 carried a value of just 0.06 xG, underlining the difficulty of converting that particular opportunity.
Balerdi’s two equalisers came from considerably more promising situations. His goal for 2–2 was worth 0.60 xG, while the chance he converted to make it 3–3 carried a value of 0.39 xG.
Together, those two opportunities accounted for 0.99 xG — just over half of Roma’s entire total. The remaining 22 attempts contributed a combined 0.97 xG, highlighting how important it was to take those two chances.
Roma finished with three goals from 1.96 xG, outperforming their expected total by 1.04 goals.
Napoli created fewer shots but greater danger
Napoli’s average of approximately 0.20 xG per attempt was around 2.4 times Roma’s figure. Despite taking nine fewer shots, the hosts generated 1.02 more expected goals.
However, the chances Napoli converted were not always their most inviting.
Anguissa’s overhead kick carried a value of 0.07 xG, while McTominay’s long-range strike for 3–2 was rated at just 0.02 xG. His earlier goal to make it 2–0, worth 0.64 xG, was the clearest scoring opportunity of the three.
Those scoring attempts totalled only 0.73 xG. Napoli’s other 12 shots therefore contributed 2.25 xG without producing a goal.
That distinction matters: Napoli’s three goals closely matched their overall 2.98 xG, but the way they reached that total involved difficult finishes alongside missed opportunities.
The numbers behind the six-goal draw
| Statistic | Roma | Napoli |
|---|---|---|
| Goals | 3 | 3 |
| Shots | 24 | 15 |
| Expected goals | 1.96 | 2.98 |
| Average xG per shot | 0.08 | 0.20 |
| Goals above xG | +1.04 | +0.02 |
Comparisons calculated from the supplied xG figures. Values can vary between statistical providers.
A comeback built on more than persistence
Roma’s recovery gathered pace through Soulé’s goal in the 69th minute and Balerdi’s first equaliser in the 74th. Even after McTominay restored Napoli’s lead in the 83rd minute, Balerdi struck again in the 89th to secure the draw. Match timeline: StatMuse.
The takeaway is not that Roma dominated simply because they took more shots, nor that Napoli were automatically entitled to victory because they generated more xG.
Instead, the figures show a Roma side that combined persistence with decisive execution. There are defensive situations to review after allowing 2.98 xG, but converting their best openings — and finding an outstanding finish through Soulé — allowed the Giallorossi to turn a difficult evening into a valuable point.
Leave a Reply