UEFA Conference League · 2026

FK Borac Banja Luka 1–0 ML Vitebsk · UEFA Conference League

1–0Full-time analysis

This page describes the completed match context. The result is not presented as a prior forecast.

Match at a glance

FK Borac Banja Luka won 1–0.

Shots on target
112
Possession
61%39%

Full time

What the match recorded

FK Borac Banja Luka beat ML Vitebsk 1–0. Recorded in this match (FK Borac Banja Luka – ML Vitebsk): shots on target 11–2, possession 61%–39%, corners 8–1, fouls 15–14. This is what was recorded. It is not a claim that the result was foreseeable.

This match

Match statistics

  • Shots on target11 shots2 shotsFK Borac Banja Luka 11 shots, ML Vitebsk 2 shots
  • Possession61%39%FK Borac Banja Luka 61%, ML Vitebsk 39%
  • Corners8 corners1 cornerFK Borac Banja Luka 8 corners, ML Vitebsk 1 corner
  • Fouls15 fouls14 foulsFK Borac Banja Luka 15 fouls, ML Vitebsk 14 fouls
  • Yellow cards1 card3 cardsFK Borac Banja Luka 1 card, ML Vitebsk 3 cards
  • Blocked shots5 blocks3 blocksFK Borac Banja Luka 5 blocks, ML Vitebsk 3 blocks
  • Offsides1 offside0 offsidesFK Borac Banja Luka 1 offside, ML Vitebsk 0 offsides

Evidence quality

How much supports this analysis

Grade D · UnavailableUnavailable — unavailable
Season samples1 / 1home / away teams
Recent samples1 / 1last-five windows
FreshnessLess than one dayfrom nearest prior match
  • At least one team has fewer than the configured season sample.
  • At least one team has an incomplete last-five window.
  • Recorded xG is incomplete, so xG context is omitted where unavailable.

Known unknowns

  • Lineups, injuries, suspensions and tactical changes are not available in the retained dataset.
  • Some metrics are unavailable or below their observation minimum: goals_for, goals_against, xg_for, xg_against, shots, shots_on_target, possession, corners, cards, fouls.
  • The completed-match sample is too small for broad style conclusions.
Analysis cutoff: Thu, 6 Aug 2026, 22:30 UTC · analysis-v4

Unavailable analysis

The retained evidence does not clear the minimum gates.

Sections that would imply a supported comparison are intentionally omitted.