Hun overdriver nogle gange, men i dag havde hun åbenbart ret i, at toget ville blive forsinket.

Because Danish main clauses follow the V2 rule: the finite verb normally comes in the second position.

So when i dag is moved to the front, the verb must come next:

• I dag havde hun ...
• not I dag hun havde ...

This is very common in Danish:

• Nu kommer han.
• I går kom han.
• Måske har du ret.

The subject often comes after the verb when something else is placed first.

Åbenbart is a sentence adverb. It means something like apparently, evidently, or it seems.

In this sentence, it shows the speaker’s attitude toward the statement: the speaker is saying that it turned out she was right.

Its position is also typical. In a main clause, sentence adverbs often come after the finite verb and before the subject complement or other elements:

• havde hun åbenbart ret

So the structure is very natural Danish.

Because have ret i is the normal expression for to be right about something.

So:

• have ret i noget = be right about something
• have ret i, at ... = be right that ...

Examples:

• Du har ret i det. = You are right about that.
• Hun havde ret i, at det ville ske. = She was right that it would happen.

The i belongs to the fixed expression have ret i. It is not optional here in standard Danish.

Because at toget ville blive forsinket is a subordinate clause.

In Danish, subordinate clauses are normally separated by a comma:

• Hun sagde, at han kom.
• Jeg tror, at det regner.

So in your sentence:

• ... havde hun åbenbart ret i, at toget ville blive forsinket.

That comma is completely standard.

Because ville blive forsinket means would be delayed or was going to be delayed.

This shows a future event viewed from a past point in time.

The sentence says that on that day, she was right about what was going to happen to the train.

Compare:

• Toget blev forsinket. = The train was delayed.
  This states the event directly.

• Toget ville blive forsinket. = The train would be delayed / was going to be delayed.
  This presents it as something expected at that time.

So ville is the past form used for a future-from-the-past meaning.

This is the passive construction.

• forsinke = to delay
• forsinket = delayed
• blive forsinket = to get/be delayed

Danish often uses blive + past participle to form a passive with a sense of an event happening:

• Døren blev åbnet. = The door was opened.
• Toget ville blive forsinket. = The train would be delayed.

If you said var forsinket, that would describe a state more directly:

• Toget var forsinket. = The train was delayed/late.

Both can work in Danish, but blive forsinket focuses more on the event of becoming delayed.

Because toget is the definite form: the train.

Danish usually marks definiteness with an ending attached to the noun:

• et tog = a train
• toget = the train

Here the train is treated as a specific one, so Danish uses the definite form.

Nogle gange is an adverbial expression meaning sometimes.

Literally, it is made up of:

• nogle = some
• gange = times

So it is similar to English some times, though in English we usually just say sometimes.

It often goes after the verb in a simple main clause:

• Hun overdriver nogle gange.

That placement is very natural.

Because the sentence combines:

1. a general habit or tendency
2. a specific past situation

So:

• Hun overdriver nogle gange = a general statement about her
• men i dag havde hun ... ret = a statement about one particular day in the past

This mix is very normal. English does the same thing:

• She exaggerates sometimes, but today she was apparently right ...

Yes.

• at overdrive = to exaggerate
• overdriver = exaggerates / is exaggerating

In this sentence it is used as a simple present with a habitual meaning:

• Hun overdriver nogle gange. = She exaggerates sometimes.

So even though English often uses exaggerate, Danish uses overdrive here.

Because men joins two clauses, and Danish normally puts a comma between clauses.

Here the two parts are:

• Hun overdriver nogle gange
• men i dag havde hun åbenbart ret i, at toget ville blive forsinket

So the comma helps mark the boundary between them.

Yes, but the meaning or emphasis can shift slightly.

The version in your sentence:

• ... havde hun åbenbart ret ...

is very natural and neutral.

You may also see other placements in Danish, depending on style and emphasis. But sentence adverbs like åbenbart often appear in the middle field of the clause, after the finite verb in a main clause.

So for learners, the safest pattern is to notice:

• fronted element
• finite verb
• subject
• sentence adverb

Here that gives:

• i dag
  • havde
    • hun
      • åbenbart
        • ret ...

It is a subordinate clause introduced by at.

Inside that clause:

• toget = subject
• ville = finite verb
• blive forsinket = infinitive + participle, forming the passive

So the clause structure is:

• at
  • subject + finite verb + rest

That is typical Danish subordinate clause word order.

Unlike a main clause, a subordinate clause does not follow the V2 pattern in the same way. So you get:

• at toget ville blive forsinket

not something like:

• at ville toget blive forsinket

That would be wrong here.