Match statistics snapshot
- Minnesota United FC created the clearer chances on xG (2.02 vs 0.74, Δ 1.28).
- Minnesota United FC was more accurate in front of goal (42% on target vs 33%).
- Houston Dynamo held more of the ball (54% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Minnesota United Fc | Statistic | Houston Dynamo |
|---|---|---|
| 2.02Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.74 |
| 3 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 9Lead | Shots inside the box | 8 |
| 4 | Shots off target | 4 |
|---|
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 4Lead |
|---|
| 12 | Total shots | 12 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Minnesota United Fc | Statistic | Houston Dynamo |
|---|---|---|
| 46% | Ball possession | 54%Lead |
| 79% | Pass accuracy | 82%Lead |
| 291 | Accurate passes | 354Lead |
| 367 | Total passes | 430Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Minnesota United Fc | Statistic | Houston Dynamo |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 8Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Minnesota United Fc | Statistic | Houston Dynamo |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Blocked shots | 4Lead |
| 4 | Goalkeeper saves | 4 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Minnesota United Fc | Statistic | Houston Dynamo |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | Fouls | 10 |
| Red cards | ||
| 3 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |