Match statistics snapshot
- CF Montreal created the clearer chances on xG (1.25 vs 0.68, Δ 0.57).
- CF Montreal held more of the ball (54% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 1.25Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.68 |
| 1 | Offsides | 1 |
| 7Lead | Shots inside the box | 6 |
| 6Lead |
| 5 |
| 2 | Shots on target | 3Lead |
|---|
| 6 | Shots outside the box | 7Lead |
|---|
| 13 | Total shots | 13 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 54%Lead | Ball possession | 46% |
| 88%Lead | Pass accuracy | 86% |
| 464Lead | Accurate passes | 376 |
| 528Lead | Total passes | 438 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Blocked shots | 5 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
| 0.33 | Goals prevented | 0.33 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Cf Montreal | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 13 | Fouls | 9Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.