Match statistics snapshot
- Chicago Fire created the clearer chances on xG (0.55 vs 1.35, Δ 0.80).
- Charlotte held more of the ball (64% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 0.55 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.35Lead |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 5 |
| 4Lead | Shots inside the box | 3 |
| 1 |
| 1 |
| 3 | Shots on target | 3 |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 2Lead |
|---|
| 5 | Total shots | 5 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 64%Lead | Ball possession | 36% |
| 85%Lead | Pass accuracy | 76% |
| 479Lead | Accurate passes | 248 |
| 562Lead | Total passes | 326 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 2Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Fouls | 14 |
| Red cards | ||
| 5 | Yellow cards | 4Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.