Match statistics snapshot
- Inter Miami created the clearer chances on xG (3.05 vs 0.82, Δ 2.23).
- Inter Miami fired more attempts (22 vs 16 shots).
- Inter Miami was more accurate in front of goal (41% on target vs 25%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Portland Timbers |
|---|---|---|
| 3.05Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.82 |
| 2 | Offsides | 2 |
| 14Lead | Shots inside the box | 10 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 6 |
| 9Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 8Lead | Shots outside the box | 6 |
|---|
| 22Lead | Total shots | 16 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Portland Timbers |
|---|---|---|
| 45% | Ball possession | 55%Lead |
| 82% | Pass accuracy | 89%Lead |
| 344 | Accurate passes | 447Lead |
| 417 | Total passes | 504Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Portland Timbers |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 5 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Portland Timbers |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Blocked shots | 6 |
| 4 | Goalkeeper saves | 7Lead |
| 1.31 | Goals prevented | 1.31 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Inter Miami | Statistic | Portland Timbers |
|---|---|---|
| 15 | Fouls | 10Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |