The main finding is blunt: France were better in volume, quality, and territory, and the 3:0 score did not exaggerate a thing. Their xG reached 3.17 against Sweden’s 0.65, the gap stood at 2.52, and the anomaly label was plain enough — dominance, not deception.
On the evidence sheet, Japan authored the better chance volume: 1.98 xG to Sweden’s 1.62. That is not a landslide, but it is a real edge — a 0.36 xG advantage, or roughly 22% more expected scoring value than Sweden produced. Yet the scoreboard settled on 1:1, which is football’s favorite way of laundering inefficiency into “a fair result.”