Match statistics snapshot
- Chicago Fire created the clearer chances on xG (1.81 vs 2.93, Δ 1.12).
- Chicago Fire fired more attempts (19 vs 8 shots).
- Orlando City SC was more accurate in front of goal (75% on target vs 63%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 1.81 | Expected goals (xG) | 2.93Lead |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 2 |
| 5 | Shots inside the box | 12Lead |
| 2 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 6Lead |
| 6 | Shots on target | 12Lead |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 7Lead |
|---|
| 8 | Total shots | 19Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 40% | Ball possession | 60%Lead |
| 82% | Pass accuracy | 90%Lead |
| 313 | Accurate passes | 504Lead |
| 381 | Total passes | 557Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Corner kicks | 3Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Blocked shots | 1Lead |
| 10Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
| -1.15 | Goals prevented | -1.15 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 11Lead | Fouls | 12 |
| Red cards | ||
| 1 | Yellow cards | 1 |
Statistics is not available yet.