Match statistics snapshot
- Inter Miami created the clearer chances on xG (1.41 vs 2.18, Δ 0.77).
- Inter Miami fired more attempts (17 vs 16 shots).
- Inter Miami was more accurate in front of goal (41% on target vs 25%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 1.41 | Expected goals (xG) | 2.18Lead |
| 1 | Offsides | 1 |
| 10 | Shots inside the box | 12Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 6Lead |
| 4 | Shots on target | 7Lead |
|---|
| 6Lead | Shots outside the box | 5 |
|---|
| 16 | Total shots | 17Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 50% | Ball possession | 50% |
| 85%Lead | Pass accuracy | 83% |
| 401 | Accurate passes | 401 |
| 470 | Total passes | 485Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 7Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 7Lead | Blocked shots | 4 |
| 4Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| -0.16 | Goals prevented | -0.16 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Inter Miami |
|---|---|---|
| 14 | Fouls | 13Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 2Lead | Yellow cards | 5 |
Statistics is not available yet.