KFUM vs Tromsø preview

Norway flag 2026 Eliteserien, Norway
KFUM Arena Fri, 29 May - 5:00 PM
Eliteserien
KFUM KFUM
0 – 0
Tromsø Tromsø
Full Time Fri, 29 May 5:00 PM
Round 11 Regular Season

CONTEXT

The encounter between KFUM and Tromsø concluded with a 0-0 draw after ninety minutes of play. Tromsø held sixty percent possession yet created insufficient clear chances to break the deadlock. KFUM maintained a compact defensive structure that limited opportunities for the visitors. The score remained level at halftime with both sides unable to find the net. Tromsø entered as the stronger side according to available indicators but the final outcome produced a significant deviation of 70.8 percent from pre-match positioning. Efficiency metrics stayed in line with observed patterns throughout the contest. No red cards were issued and the match proceeded without major interruptions. The absence of xG values prevents deeper assessment of chance quality but the result stands as a factual record of the fixture.

TL;DR

  • Structural deviation: Tromsø recorded a 70.8 percent significant deviation from pre-match positioning.
  • Efficiency shift: Efficiency remained in line with observed performance patterns.
  • xG alignment: No xG data was recorded so alignment could not be evaluated.
  • Market alignment: The draw result was not aligned with pre-match market positioning.
  • xG expectations: xG expectations remain unavailable due to missing underlying data.
  • Event impact: The 0-0 draw produced a balanced outcome without decisive scoring events.
  • Red card distortion: No red cards occurred so no distortion affected match dynamics.
No standings statistics available.
No head-to-head records found.
0.5+ goals: 85%
1.5+ goals: 70%
2.5+ goals: 50%
3.5+ goals: 25%
Confidence: High (≥8 matches)

Quality vs Volume

Home: xG 1.8, Shots 12, xG/Shot 0.15
Away: xG 1.5, Shots 14, xG/Shot 0.11

Open Play vs Set Play

Open Play: 65%
Set Play: 35%

Expected Points

TeamxPts
Home1.8
Away1.2
ℹ️ Methodology: Expected Goals (xG) measures shot quality
S. Kringstad
S. Kringstad
Referee • 25 matches
Fouls / Match
Referee 0.52
League Avg 0
Yellow Cards / Match
Referee 0.12
League Avg 0
Red Cards / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Penalties / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
O. Skogsrud Haukåsen
O. Skogsrud Haukåsen
1st Assistant • 0 matches
Fouls / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Yellow Cards / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Red Cards / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Penalties / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
L. Nymoen
L. Nymoen
2nd Assistant • 0 matches
Fouls / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Yellow Cards / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Red Cards / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Penalties / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
A. Bodding
A. Bodding
4th Official • 0 matches
Fouls / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Yellow Cards / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Red Cards / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
Penalties / Match
Referee 0
League Avg 0
KFUM J. Isnes
J. Isnes
VS
Tromsø J. Vik
J. Vik
1
Avg Points / Game (Last 100 Matches)
2.08
1.17 i
Last 6 Opponents
Rosenborg Rank: 61 W
Brann Rank: 69 L
Viking Rank: 79 L
Vålerenga Rank: 58 D
Sarpsborg 08 Rank: 60 W
HamKam Rank: 61 L
Avg Points / Game (Last 6 Matches)
1.33 i
Last 6 Opponents
Aalesund Rank: 45 D
Bodø / Glimt Rank: 82 L
Molde Rank: 67 W
Start Rank: 51 D
Brann Rank: 68 L
Sandefjord Rank: 61 W
1
Head to Head (Wins - Draws - Losses)
1 - 0 - 3
3

Win Probabilities

Live Win Probability (90 Min)
Home KFUM
32.99%
Draw
29.22%
Away Tromsø
37.79%

Movement

Changes since opening
KFUM
+29.76%
Draw
-62.62%
Tromsø
+32.86%

Team Power Ranking

i
What is Power Ranking?
Power ranking is SportMonks' model-based team strength indicator. Historical input capped to 2 seasons.
57.25
68
0 (Weakest) 100 (Strongest)
Metric
KFUM
Tromsø
Power Score
57.25
68
League Position
10
2
Global Rank
565
257

Form Analysis Opponent-Weighted

Line chart of recent results (points/trend). Friendlies excluded by default. Hover for opponent, result, xG/xGA and power ranking — based on last 6 matches.

–
vs
KFUM — Opponent-weighted form score
Tromsø — Opponent-weighted form score
Win (3 pts) Draw (1 pt) Loss (0 pts) KFUM Tromsø

Heatmaps Ball coordinates

Attack and defence zones from ball position data. Filters: last 6 matches (overall/home/away), time period, competition.

–
vs

KFUM

Left / Center / Right —
Opposition half density —
vs season average —

Tromsø

Left / Center / Right —
Opposition half density —
vs season average —
Possession Efficiency data not available for this match.

Set Pieces Efficiency Attack & Defence

Set-piece reliance and strength using expected metrics and actual outcomes for each team.

KFUM ⚠ Proxy
vs
⚠ Proxy Tromsø
Created Set-piece attacking threat
KFUM Tromsø
Set-piece xG Share Share of total expected goals generated from set pieces. Higher = more set-piece reliant in attack.
—
—
Goals per Match Average set-piece goals scored per match.
0.00 0.00
vs Expected (xG) Goals scored minus set-piece xG. Positive = overperforming; Negative = underperforming expectations.
— vs —
Conceded Set-piece defensive exposure
KFUM Tromsø
Set-piece xGA Share Share of total expected goals conceded from set pieces. Higher = more exposed to set pieces defensively.
—
—
Conceded per Match Average set-piece goals conceded per match.
0.00 0.00
vs Expected (xGA) Goals conceded minus set-piece xGA. Positive = conceding more than expected (bad); Negative = conceding less than expected (good).
— vs —
xG set-piece data unavailable for both teams. Values estimated using proxy metrics (shots, dangerous attacks). Confidence: Medium.
KFUM
Tromsø
xG Share = set-piece xG ÷ total xG
vs Expected = goals − set-piece xG

Counter / Transition Attack & Defence

What happens in the 15 seconds immediately after possession changes hands — based on Last 6 matches.

–
KFUM
vs
Tromsø
Attack After Winning Possession transition → offence
KFUM Tromsø
Goals per Match Average goals scored within 15s of winning the ball per match. ↑ better
—
—
Shots per Match Average shots taken within 15s of winning the ball per match. ↑ better
—
—
Dangerous Attacks Average dangerous attacks launched within 15s of winning possession per match. ↑ better
—
—
Transition Efficiency Index Composite score (0–1) of how efficiently this team attacks within 15s of winning the ball. Higher = more dangerous on transition. Higher = stronger on the counter
KFUM 0.00
Tromsø 0.00
Defence After Losing Possession loss → defensive exposure
KFUM Tromsø
Goals Conceded Average goals conceded within 15s of losing the ball per match. ↓ better
—
—
Shots Conceded Average shots conceded within 15s of losing the ball per match. ↓ better
—
—
Dangerous Attacks Conceded Average dangerous attacks allowed within 15s of losing possession per match. ↓ better
—
—
Vulnerability Index Composite score (0–1) of how exposed this team is within 15s of losing the ball. Lower = better at preventing transition attacks. Lower = better transition defence
KFUM 0.00
Tromsø 0.00
KFUM
Tromsø
Window = 15s post-possession change
Index = 0–1 composite score

PRESSURE INDEX

Momentum phases from smoothed minute-by-minute pressure.

  • Tromsø had peak pressure around 82'.
  • Tromsø started the game with stronger pressure.
KFUM Pressure Tromsø Pressure
⚡
Pressure Index: Tromsø reached the top pressure at 82' (100.00).

Team Head to Head Last 6 Seasons

Summary of 4 matches between these sides — filtered by competition and venue context.

KFUM KFUM Home
4 matches
Tromsø Tromsø Away
Match Record
1
Wins
3
0
Draws
0
3
Losses
1
Goals
3
Goals Scored
7
7
Goals Conceded
3
-4
Goal Difference
+4
Expected Goals
0
xG
0
0
xGA
0

Data last updated: 2026-05-29T16:30:45+00:00

STARTING XI

Match Formation 3-4-1-2
Match Formation 5-3-2
Pitch
E. Ødegaard
Norway
1 E. Ødegaard
D. Schneider
Norway
2 D. Schneider
F. Berglie
Norway
5 F. Berglie
E. Franke Saunes
Norway
19 E. Franke Saunes
H. Hoseth
Substitution
Norway
14 H. Hoseth
R. Rasch
Substitution
Norway
7 (C) R. Rasch
T. Haltvik
Substitution
Norway
17 T. Haltvik
D. Gyedu
Norway
42 D. Gyedu
M. Retsius Grødem
Substitution
Norway
28 M. Retsius Grødem
M. Vinjor
Substitution
Norway
9 M. Vinjor
B. Njie
Norway
10 B. Njie
J. Haugaard
Denmark
1 J. Haugaard
S. Håvik Innvær
Norway
37 S. Håvik Innvær
A. Kinteh
25 A. Kinteh
T. Kvalvågnes Guddal
Norway
21 T. Kvalvågnes Guddal
V. Skjærvik
Substitution
Norway
4 V. Skjærvik
L. Jean Cornic
Norway
2 L. Jean Cornic
J. Hjertø-Dahl
Substitution
Norway
6 J. Hjertø-Dahl
R. Yttergård Jenssen
Norway
11 (C) R. Yttergård Jenssen
D. Edvardsson
Sweden
5 D. Edvardsson
H. Larsen
Norway
22 H. Larsen
D. Braut
Substitution
Norway
9 D. Braut

General Information

Date & Time
May 29, 2026, 05:00 PM
Competition
2026 Eliteserien, Norway · Round 11 · Regular Season
Stadium
KFUM Arena
Capacity
1500
Pitch Surface
Artificial turf
Weather
☀️ 12°C, Fair
Referees
Sigurd Smehus Kringstad
Ole Andreas Skogsrud Haukåsen
Line Cathrine Nymoen
Anders Bodding

Statistics

Possession
KFUM
42%
Tromsø
58%

Top Statistics

0 Big Chances Created 1
4 Shots 6
27 Dangerous attacks 60
40 Possession 60
3 Corners 5
9 Free kicks 15
1 Yellow Cards 1

Match Overview

1 Injuries 0
5 Substitutions 3
12 Dribble Attempts 7
16 Throwins 20
13 Goal Kicks 5
7 Successful Dribbles 2
58 Successful Dribbles Percentage 29
0 Hit Woodwork 1
62 Ball Safe 49
2 Goal Attempts 8

Attacking

0 Counter Attacks 1
0 Big Chances Missed 1
74 Attacks 141

Possession

63 Long Passes 70
27 Successful Long Passes 37
314 Successful Passes 510
43 Successful Long Passes Percentage 53
78 Successful Passes Percentage 86
401 Passes 593
0 Key Passes 6

Defensive

12 Tackles 13
10 Interceptions 6
41 Duels Won 46
3 Saves 1

Build-up

2 Accurate Crosses 5
11 Total Crosses 23

Discipline

15 Fouls 9

Lineup

Referee : Sigurd Smehus Kringstad

Starting XI ▼

1
Emil Ødegaard
Emil Ødegaard Goalkeeper
6.94
2
Daniel Schneider
Daniel Schneider Defender
6.79
5
Fredrik Berglie
Fredrik Berglie Defender
6.41
19
Eirik Saunes
Eirik Saunes Defender
7.08
7
Robin Rasch
Robin Rasch (C) Midfielder
6.82
27
T. Sørås
T. Sørås
Midfielder46'
6.82
14
Håkon Helland Hoseth
Håkon Helland Hoseth Midfielder
6.63
21
S. Sjøkvist
S. Sjøkvist
Defender64'
6.51
17
Teodor Berg Haltvik
Teodor Berg Haltvik Midfielder
7.05
8
Simen Hestnes
Simen Hestnes
Midfielder64'
7
42
David Hickson
David Hickson Midfielder
6.65
9
Martin Tangen Vinjor
Martin Tangen Vinjor Attacker
6.75
22
Bjørn Martin Kristensen
Bjørn Martin Kristensen
Attacker84'
6.48
10
Bilal Njie
Bilal Njie Attacker
6.51
28
Magnus Grødem
Magnus Grødem Attacker
6.83
23
Magnus Wolff Eikrem
Magnus Wolff Eikrem
Midfielder78'
6.82
Referee : Sigurd Smehus Kringstad

Starting XI ▼

1
Jakob Haugaard
Jakob Haugaard Goalkeeper
6.93
2
Leo Cornic
Leo Cornic Defender
6.93
4
Vetle Skjærvik
Vetle Skjærvik Defender
7.04
30
Isak Vådebu
Isak Vådebu
Defender74'
6.86
21
Tobias Guddal
Tobias Guddal Defender
7.1
25
Abubacarr Sedi Kinteh
Abubacarr Sedi Kinteh Defender
7.32
37
Sander Innvær
Sander Innvær Defender
6.5
5
David Edvardsson
David Edvardsson Midfielder
7.05
6
Jens Hjertø-Dahl
Jens Hjertø-Dahl Midfielder
7.05
14
Sigurd Prestmo
Sigurd Prestmo
Attacker84'
6.71
11
Ruben Yttergård Jenssen
Ruben Yttergård Jenssen (C) Midfielder
7.11
9
Daniel Braut
Daniel Braut Attacker
6.76
7
Lars Olden Larsen
Lars Olden Larsen
Attacker68'
6.99
22
Heine Åsen Larsen
Heine Åsen Larsen Attacker
6.89

Events

2ND-HALF
Event
Bjørn Martin Kristensen → Martin Tangen Vinjor
7th Substitution
84'
84'
Event
Sigurd Prestmo → Jens Hjertø-Dahl
8th Substitution
83'
Event
Tobias Guddal
2nd Yellowcard
Event
Magnus Wolff Eikrem → Magnus Grødem
6th Substitution
78'
74'
Event
Isak Vådebu → Vetle Skjærvik
5th Substitution
68'
Event
Lars Olden Larsen → Daniel Braut
4th Substitution
Event
Simen Hestnes → Teodor Berg Haltvik
3rd Substitution
64'
Event
S. Sjøkvist → Håkon Helland Hoseth
2nd Substitution
64'
Event
T. Sørås → Robin Rasch
1st Substitution
46'
1ST-HALF
Event
Magnus Grødem
1st Yellowcard
44'

CONCLUSION

KFUM and Tromsø shared the points in a tightly contested match that produced no goals from either side. Tromsø dominated possession statistics yet could not translate territorial advantage into a breakthrough. KFUM focused on defensive organization and successfully restricted clear scoring chances. The halftime score of 0-0 accurately reflected the first-half balance. Overall efficiency aligned with the level of play displayed by both teams. The significant deviation associated with Tromsø highlights how the stronger side failed to secure the expected result. Absence of xG metrics limits further insight into chance creation quality. The match remained free of red cards and proceeded without major disciplinary incidents. This draw represents a factual outcome consistent with the data provided.