Saudi Pro League · 2025Prince Saud bin Jalawi Stadium

Al-Qadsiah 3–1 Al Najma · Saudi Pro League

3–1Historical match

A completed match from a finished season. This page is the record of what happened.

Match at a glance

Al-Qadsiah won 3–1.

Shots
158
Shots on target
84
Expected goals
2.450.42
Possession
53%47%

Full time

What the match recorded

Al-Qadisiyah FC beat Al Najma 3–1. Recorded in this match (Al-Qadisiyah FC – Al Najma): shots 15–8, shots on target 8–4, expected goals 2.45–0.42, possession 53%–47%. This is what was recorded. It is not a claim that the result was foreseeable.

This match

Match statistics

  • Shots15 shots8 shotsAl-Qadsiah 15 shots, Al Najma 8 shots
  • Shots on target8 shots4 shotsAl-Qadsiah 8 shots, Al Najma 4 shots
  • Expected goals2.45 xG0.42 xGAl-Qadsiah 2.45 xG, Al Najma 0.42 xG
  • Possession53%47%Al-Qadsiah 53%, Al Najma 47%
  • Corners10 corners1 cornerAl-Qadsiah 10 corners, Al Najma 1 corner
  • Fouls9 fouls7 foulsAl-Qadsiah 9 fouls, Al Najma 7 fouls
  • Yellow cards0 cards2 cardsAl-Qadsiah 0 cards, Al Najma 2 cards

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.
  • The fixture season differs from the competition's configured active season.
Analysis cutoff: Sat, 30 Aug 2025, 22:00 UTC · analysis-v4

Unavailable analysis

The retained evidence does not clear the minimum gates.

Sections that would imply a supported comparison are intentionally omitted.