Match statistics snapshot
- CF Montreal created the clearer chances on xG (1.18 vs 1.06, Δ 0.12).
- CF Montreal fired more attempts (15 vs 7 shots).
- Inter Miami was more accurate in front of goal (57% on target vs 40%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 1.18Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.06 |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 4 |
| 5Lead | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| 4Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 2 |
| 6Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 10Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 15Lead | Total shots | 7 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 53%Lead | Ball possession | 47% |
| 89%Lead | Pass accuracy | 85% |
| 537Lead | Accurate passes | 459 |
| 602Lead | Total passes | 539 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 1 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 15 | Fouls | 9Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 1Lead | Yellow cards | 2 |
Statistics is not available yet.