Match statistics snapshot
- FC Cincinnati created the clearer chances on xG (1.01 vs 1.40, Δ 0.39).
- FC Cincinnati fired more attempts (15 vs 10 shots).
- FC Cincinnati was more accurate in front of goal (73% on target vs 40%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 1.01 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.40Lead |
| 2 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 6 | Shots inside the box | 10Lead |
| 5Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 2 |
| 4 | Shots on target | 11Lead |
|---|
| 4 | Shots outside the box | 5Lead |
|---|
| 10 | Total shots | 15Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 53%Lead | Ball possession | 47% |
| 82% | Pass accuracy | 84%Lead |
| 371Lead | Accurate passes | 342 |
| 450Lead | Total passes | 405 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 3Lead | Corner kicks | 0 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 2Lead |
| 8Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| -0.10 | Goals prevented | -0.10 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 12 | Fouls | 8Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.