Match statistics snapshot
- FC Cincinnati created the clearer chances on xG (2.00 vs 0.51, Δ 1.49).
- FC Cincinnati fired more attempts (19 vs 15 shots).
- FC Cincinnati was more accurate in front of goal (21% on target vs 7%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Fc Cincinnati | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 2.00Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.51 |
| 2 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 10Lead | Shots inside the box | 8 |
| 5 | Shots off target | 8Lead |
|---|
| 4Lead | Shots on target | 1 |
|---|
| 9Lead | Shots outside the box | 7 |
|---|
| 19Lead | Total shots | 15 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Fc Cincinnati | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 54%Lead | Ball possession | 46% |
| 85% | Pass accuracy | 86%Lead |
| 417Lead | Accurate passes | 348 |
| 488Lead | Total passes | 405 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Fc Cincinnati | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 7 | Corner kicks | 10Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Fc Cincinnati | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Blocked shots | 6 |
| 2 | Goalkeeper saves | 3Lead |
| 0.36 | Goals prevented | 0.36 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Fc Cincinnati | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |
Statistics is not available yet.