Match statistics snapshot
- Chicago Fire created the clearer chances on xG (0.88 vs 3.99, Δ 3.11).
- Chicago Fire fired more attempts (23 vs 12 shots).
- Chicago Fire was more accurate in front of goal (43% on target vs 33%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 0.88 | Expected goals (xG) | 3.99Lead |
| 2Lead | Offsides | 3 |
| 6 | Shots inside the box | 17Lead |
| 4 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 6Lead |
| 4 | Shots on target | 10Lead |
|---|
| 6 | Shots outside the box | 6 |
|---|
| 12 | Total shots | 23Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 53%Lead | Ball possession | 47% |
| 91% | Pass accuracy | 92%Lead |
| 475Lead | Accurate passes | 431 |
| 522Lead | Total passes | 470 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 6 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Blocked shots | 7Lead |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| -0.08 | Goals prevented | -0.08 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 12 | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |
Statistics is not available yet.