Match statistics snapshot
- CF Montreal created the clearer chances on xG (1.14 vs 1.02, Δ 0.12).
- CF Montreal fired more attempts (17 vs 8 shots).
- FC Cincinnati was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 24%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 1.14Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.02 |
| 3Lead | Offsides | 7 |
| 10Lead | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| 5Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 1 |
| 4 | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 7Lead | Shots outside the box | 4 |
|---|
| 17Lead | Total shots | 8 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 50% | Ball possession | 50% |
| 85%Lead | Pass accuracy | 83% |
| 432Lead | Accurate passes | 413 |
| 511Lead | Total passes | 498 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Corner kicks | 4 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 3Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 14 | Fouls | 11Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 3 |
Statistics is not available yet.