Match statistics snapshot
- Columbus Crew created the clearer chances on xG (2.18 vs 1.79, Δ 0.39).
- Columbus Crew fired more attempts (14 vs 13 shots).
- Chicago Fire was more accurate in front of goal (46% on target vs 29%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Columbus Crew | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 2.18Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.79 |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 3 |
| 14Lead | Shots inside the box | 10 |
| 3 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4Lead |
| 4 | Shots on target | 6Lead |
|---|
| 0 | Shots outside the box | 3Lead |
|---|
| 14Lead | Total shots | 13 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Columbus Crew | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 57%Lead | Ball possession | 43% |
| 88%Lead | Pass accuracy | 84% |
| 511Lead | Accurate passes | 378 |
| 581Lead | Total passes | 448 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Columbus Crew | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Columbus Crew | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 7Lead | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 4Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| -1.62 | Goals prevented | -1.62 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Columbus Crew | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 17 |
| Red cards | ||
| 0Lead | Yellow cards | 3 |
Statistics is not available yet.