Match statistics snapshot
- FC Cincinnati created the clearer chances on xG (0.39 vs 1.58, Δ 1.19).
- FC Cincinnati fired more attempts (16 vs 5 shots).
- Inter Miami was more accurate in front of goal (60% on target vs 50%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 0.39 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.58Lead |
| 4 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 4 | Shots inside the box | 11Lead |
| 2 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4Lead |
| 3 | Shots on target | 8Lead |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 5Lead |
|---|
| 5 | Total shots | 16Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 43% | Ball possession | 57%Lead |
| 82% | Pass accuracy | 88%Lead |
| 319 | Accurate passes | 451Lead |
| 390 | Total passes | 514Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corner kicks | 7Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Blocked shots | 4Lead |
| 7Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| -0.95 | Goals prevented | -0.95 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 12Lead | Fouls | 19 |
| 1 | Red cards | 0Lead |
| 4 | Yellow cards | 4 |
Statistics is not available yet.