Porto turn control into a 4-1 win after the break

FC Porto beat Napoli 4-1, but the scoreline only tells part of the story. The teams went in level after Scott McTominay’s equaliser, then Porto found a second gear: their highest shot count and expected goals total in their four matches so far, with three goals after the break.

Porto began with purpose and took the lead in the 11th minute. Gabri Veiga assisted Jan Bednarek, and Porto’s greater share of the ball helped them keep Napoli under pressure. Napoli had already picked up three yellow cards before McTominay made it 1-1 in the 43rd minute. That equaliser left the match finely poised at half-time, despite Porto’s stronger start.

Porto’s response was not immediate: the sides remained level until Gabri Veiga scored in the 71st minute. Santiago Giménez supplied the assist, and the goal changed the balance of the contest. Jakub Kiwior added another three minutes after Porto made two changes, then Samu scored from the penalty spot in the 90th minute. Napoli’s task became harder when Rafa Marín was sent off in the 88th. Porto had made its best attacking showing of the season count well when the game opened up.

Porto’s opener came from Bednarek in the 11th minute, with Veiga credited with the assist. It gave Porto an early reward for a start in which they would finish with 19 shots. Napoli did not fold after falling behind. McTominay’s goal in the 43rd minute drew the visitors level before the interval and kept the match open.

The second half’s first goal was also a turning point. Veiga scored in the 71st minute, assisted by Santiago Giménez, to put Porto back in front. Kiwior then made it 3-1 in the 80th minute, with Hwang In-Beom providing the assist. Samu completed the scoring from the penalty spot in the 90th minute. Porto’s goals came from three different scorers, while Napoli’s only goal came from McTominay. The late red card for Rafa Marín followed Porto’s third goal and came before Samu’s penalty.

FC Porto had 52 per cent possession, nine points above their 43 per cent average and their highest share in their four matches so far. More important, the ball led to chances: Porto had 19 shots, against an average of 12.25, and eight on target, against 4.25. Both totals were also their best of the four. Twelve attempts came from inside the box, compared with an average of 8.25, while their 2.75 expected goals was almost double their 1.39 average.

The 4-1 result was therefore built on more than a high conversion rate. Porto’s expected goals and shots on target both reached season highs, and the six corners were also their best return across the four matches. They did not need a high foul count to disrupt Napoli: their eight fouls were below their average of 10. Diogo Costa made five saves, a reminder that Porto still had to deal with Napoli’s threat. The win came from making chances while surviving the moments when Napoli got through.

Napoli did enough in the first half to make this a contest. They held 48 per cent possession, above their 45.25 per cent average and their highest share in their four matches so far. Their 11 shots were slightly above their average of 10.5, and six were on target, also above their 4.75 average. McTominay’s equaliser showed Napoli could punish Porto, and Alex Meret made four saves to keep the score close for much of the game.

The concern is that Napoli’s volume did not translate into their usual level of chance quality. Their 1.27 expected goals sat below their 1.59 average, while six shots came from inside the box against an average of 7.75. The expected-goals figure ranked third across the three matches compared for that measure. Five corners were a season high across their four matches, but they did not turn that pressure into a second goal. Napoli’s first substitution came in the 78th minute, after they had been behind since Veiga’s goal. The late red card added to a difficult finish.

Gabri Veiga was the standout Porto performer. His rating of 8.89 was 2.04 above his season average of 6.85, and he scored once and assisted Bednarek’s opener. He also had four shots, two on target and three key passes. Kiwior scored and rated 7.94, which was 0.99 above his own average of 6.95. Baio was slightly above his average, while Pepê Aquino and Pablo Rosario were below theirs.

Diogo Costa’s rating of 7.01 was 0.5 below his season average of 7.51, despite making five saves. That contrast captures the work Porto still had to do without changing the overall verdict on their attack. Samu scored after coming on for André Silva and won all four of his duels. Santiago Giménez assisted Veiga, while Hwang In-Beom assisted Kiwior. Napoli’s McTominay scored and put two of his three shots on target. The available performance figures describe what Napoli’s players did, but do not give a season-average comparison for them.

The expected-goals comparison points clearly towards Porto. Their 2.75 expected goals exceeded Napoli’s 1.27, a difference of 1.48. Porto also had more shots, more attempts from inside the box and more shots on target. These measures suggest the home side created the better chances, rather than relying only on an unusually clinical finish.

The final margin was three goals, larger than the expected-goals margin, with a supplied finishing gap of 1.25. So Porto’s win was deserved on chance creation, even if the scoreline made the gap look wider than the expected-goals figures alone. The supplied pre-match probabilities also favoured Porto: 0.685 for a home win, against 0.162 for a draw and 0.153 for a Napoli win. Both measures point the same way, though the actual result was more emphatic than the chance totals suggest.

For Porto, this was a marked step up from their season averages in possession, shots, shots on target and expected goals. The key test is whether that attacking output can be repeated: one match does not change the fact that the comparisons cover only four games. Their five saves conceded also show that the performance was not free of danger at the other end.

Napoli can take some encouragement from their possession and shots on target, both above their averages. But their expected goals and inside-box attempts were below their usual figures, while Porto took control after the break. The result gives both teams a clear set of numbers to measure against next time they play: Porto’s chance creation was convincing, and Napoli’s pressure needs to produce more threat.

• Whether Porto can sustain a season-high 19 shots and 2.75 expected goals.
• Whether Napoli can lift expected goals above the 1.27 recorded here.
• Whether Porto’s five saves conceded become less necessary when their attack clicks.