Match statistics snapshot
- Charlotte created the clearer chances on xG (2.59 vs 1.95, Δ 0.64).
- Inter Miami was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 40%).
- Inter Miami held more of the ball (59% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 2.59Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.95 |
| 3 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 9Lead | Shots inside the box | 8 |
| 3Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 2 |
| 4 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 2Lead |
|---|
| 10 | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 41% | Ball possession | 59%Lead |
| 84% | Pass accuracy | 88%Lead |
| 329 | Accurate passes | 491Lead |
| 391 | Total passes | 555Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 5Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 5Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| -0.53 | Goals prevented | -0.53 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Charlotte | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Fouls | 18 |
| 0Lead | Red cards | 1 |
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 5 |
Statistics is not available yet.