Santos have the fourth-worst shooting accuracy in the Brasileirão | OneFootball

Santos have the fourth-worst shooting accuracy in the Brasileirão | OneFootball

In partnership with

Yahoo sports
Icon: Gazeta Esportiva.com

Gazeta Esportiva.com

·31 March 2026

Santos have the fourth-worst shooting accuracy in the Brasileirão

Article image:Santos have the fourth-worst shooting accuracy in the Brasileirão

With seven points in eight matches, Santos have been struggling at the start of the Brazilian Championship. The team has been hampered by a lack of efficiency in the competition and has the fourth-worst shooting accuracy among the 20 teams.

According to Sofascore data, Santos average 12.3 shots per match. However, the team misses 9.2 of those attempts, posting a rate of only 25.2% of shots on target.


OneFootball Videos


The Alvinegro Praiano have better accuracy than the three teams with the fewest shots on target in the competition (Corinthians, Coritiba and Chapecoense). Despite hitting the target less often, those teams attempt fewer shots and therefore have a better conversion rate than Santos.

The only three teams with worse accuracy than Santos are actually the ones that take the most shots: Vasco, Fluminense and Mirassol. With such a high volume of attempts, missing the target is “normal” for those teams.

The poor finishing rate does not reflect Santos’ attack as a whole. With 10 goals scored, the team has the eighth-best scoring record in the Brasileirão. However, Peixe have conceded 13 times and, without a win in four matches, are battling relegation at the start of the competition.

Santos’ situation in the Brasileirão

After drawing with Cruzeiro, Santos reached seven points and moved out of the relegation zone. The Alvinegro Praiano are in 16th place, one point ahead of Botafogo, who are 17th.

Santos’ next match

  1. Santos vs Remo
  2. Competition: Brazilian Championship (9th round)
  3. Date and time: 04/02 (Thursday), 7 p.m. (Brasília time)
  4. Venue: Vila Belmiro, in Santos (SP).

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇧🇷 here.

View publisher imprint