Match statistics snapshot
- Chicago Fire created the clearer chances on xG (1.18 vs 0.79, Δ 0.39).
- Nashville SC was more accurate in front of goal (40% on target vs 30%).
- Nashville SC held more of the ball (61% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 1.18Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.79 |
| 2Lead | Offsides | 3 |
| 4 | Shots inside the box | 7Lead |
| 2 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4Lead |
| 3 | Shots on target | 4Lead |
|---|
| 6Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 10 | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 39% | Ball possession | 61%Lead |
| 80% | Pass accuracy | 83%Lead |
| 297 | Accurate passes | 469Lead |
| 370 | Total passes | 568Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corner kicks | 3Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Blocked shots | 2 |
| 4Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
| 0.05 | Goals prevented | 0.05 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Chicago Fire | Statistic | Nashville Sc |
|---|---|---|
| 19 | Fouls | 13Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |