Match statistics snapshot
- Coquimbo Unido fired more attempts (15 vs 12 shots).
- Everton de Vina was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 33%).
- Coquimbo Unido held more of the ball (53% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Everton De Vina | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| Expected goals (xG) | ||
| 1 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 9 | Shots inside the box | 9 |
| 5 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 8Lead |
| 6Lead | Shots on target | 5 |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 6Lead |
|---|
| 12 | Total shots | 15Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Everton De Vina | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 47% | Ball possession | 53%Lead |
| 73% | Pass accuracy | 77%Lead |
| 307 | Accurate passes | 363Lead |
| 419 | Total passes | 470Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Everton De Vina | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Corner kicks | 8Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Everton De Vina | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blocked shots | 2Lead |
| 4 | Goalkeeper saves | 4 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Everton De Vina | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 12 | Fouls | 6Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 1 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |