Match statistics snapshot
- Charlotte created the clearer chances on xG (2.35 vs 1.65, Δ 0.70).
- FC Cincinnati fired more attempts (17 vs 16 shots).
- FC Cincinnati was more accurate in front of goal (29% on target vs 19%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 2.35Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.65 |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 3 |
| 13Lead | Shots inside the box | 9 |
| 9Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 8 |
| 3 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 8Lead |
|---|
| 16 | Total shots | 17Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 38% | Ball possession | 62%Lead |
| 78% | Pass accuracy | 86%Lead |
| 264 | Accurate passes | 485Lead |
| 337 | Total passes | 566Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Blocked shots | 4 |
| 4Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 6Lead | Fouls | 14 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 3 |
Statistics is not available yet.