Match statistics snapshot
- Charlotte created the clearer chances on xG (1.01 vs 1.18, Δ 0.17).
- Chicago Fire fired more attempts (11 vs 7 shots).
- Charlotte was more accurate in front of goal (71% on target vs 27%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 1.01 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.18Lead |
| 4Lead | Offsides | 5 |
| 8Lead | Shots inside the box | 5 |
| 4Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 1 |
| 3 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 3Lead | Shots outside the box | 2 |
|---|
| 11Lead | Total shots | 7 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 45% | Ball possession | 55%Lead |
| 74% | Pass accuracy | 79%Lead |
| 260 | Accurate passes | 356Lead |
| 350 | Total passes | 451Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 7Lead | Corner kicks | 6 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 13Lead | Fouls | 15 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |