Match statistics snapshot
- Chicago Fire created the clearer chances on xG (1.59 vs 0.83, Δ 0.76).
- Chicago Fire was more accurate in front of goal (36% on target vs 7%).
- Charlotte held more of the ball (54% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 1.59Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.83 |
| 3 | Offsides | 3 |
| 8Lead | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4 |
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 1 |
|---|
| 6 | Shots outside the box | 7Lead |
|---|
| 14 | Total shots | 14 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 46% | Ball possession | 54%Lead |
| 88% | Pass accuracy | 90%Lead |
| 405 | Accurate passes | 478Lead |
| 462 | Total passes | 532Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 6 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Blocked shots | 9Lead |
| 0 | Goalkeeper saves | 3Lead |
| -0.44 | Goals prevented | -0.44 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Charlotte |
|---|---|---|
| 8 | Fouls | 7Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.