Match statistics snapshot
- Inter Miami created the clearer chances on xG (1.40 vs 1.02, Δ 0.38).
- Inter Miami fired more attempts (13 vs 8 shots).
- FC Cincinnati was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 23%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 1.40Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.02 |
| 2 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 7Lead | Shots inside the box | 5 |
| 8Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 3 | Shots on target | 4Lead |
|---|
| 6Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 13Lead | Total shots | 8 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 56%Lead | Ball possession | 44% |
| 88%Lead | Pass accuracy | 85% |
| 487Lead | Accurate passes | 374 |
| 551Lead | Total passes | 441 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 2Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| 0.99 | Goals prevented | 0.99 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Fc Cincinnati |
|---|---|---|
| 14 | Fouls | 4Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 4 | Yellow cards | 0Lead |
Statistics is not available yet.