Match statistics snapshot
- Orlando City SC created the clearer chances on xG (1.65 vs 1.14, Δ 0.51).
- Orlando City SC fired more attempts (26 vs 10 shots).
- Chicago Fire was more accurate in front of goal (40% on target vs 19%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 1.65Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 1.14 |
| 2 | Offsides | 0Lead |
| 16Lead | Shots inside the box | 3 |
| 12Lead | Shots off target | 6 |
|---|
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 10Lead | Shots outside the box | 7 |
|---|
| 26Lead | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 57%Lead | Ball possession | 43% |
| 89%Lead | Pass accuracy | 86% |
| 438Lead | Accurate passes | 347 |
| 491Lead | Total passes | 402 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 13Lead | Corner kicks | 1 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 9Lead | Blocked shots | 0 |
| 1 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
| 0.17 | Goals prevented | 0.17 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Orlando City Sc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 12Lead | Fouls | 13 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |
Statistics is not available yet.