Chelsea’s 2-0 win over Roma was more one-sided than the score suggests
Chelsea had 21 attempts to Roma’s three at Plough Lane. A historical study offers context for the disparity, but not an explanation of one match.
Tom McMillan
Chelsea’s 2-0 win over Roma at Plough Lane on 28 October was more one-sided than the score alone suggests. The Guardian’s match page lists 13 Chelsea attempts off target and eight on target, against three off target and none on target for Roma. Adding those figures, Notebook FC counts 21 attempts to three in this match. Chelsea also had 64 per cent possession; Roma had 36 per cent.
The goals came in the 51st and 89th minutes, after a scoreless first half. Ellie Carpenter scored first; Kadeisha Buchanan added the second. The final margin was two goals, but Roma never put a shot on target.
Roma had also lost 6-0 to Barcelona on 30 September. Notebook FC’s comparison of those two Women’s Champions League matches finds that Roma scored no goals against either opponent. That is a narrow snapshot, not a diagnosis of Roma’s season, but it shows how the 2-0 score can make the result look less stark than the match figures do.
There is historical context for that gap. In a 2024 article reporting a study compiled with Football Benchmark, FIFPRO described the Women’s Champions League as one of the most imbalanced of 10 women’s competitions over the preceding decade, reporting an average goal difference of 2.38. It named Barcelona and Olympique Lyonnais among clubs that had dominated smaller sides. FIFPRO policy director Alex Culvin described wider women’s football development as “two-speed.”
That historical finding does not explain Chelsea’s win or establish how balanced the 2026-27 competition is. It does give the match a useful frame: a two-goal score can sit alongside a much wider gap in attempts and threat. Roma’s defence kept the score level until halftime; its attack did not test Chelsea’s goalkeeper.
