Match statistics snapshot
- Portland Timbers fired more attempts (15 vs 13 shots).
- Chicago Fire was more accurate in front of goal (23% on target vs 13%).
- Chicago Fire held more of the ball (55% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Offsides | 1Lead |
| 10Lead | Shots inside the box | 5 |
| 8Lead | Shots off target | 7 |
| 2 |
| Shots on target |
|---|
| 3Lead |
| 5 | Shots outside the box | 8Lead |
|---|
| 15Lead | Total shots | 13 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 45% | Ball possession | 55%Lead |
| 79%Lead | Pass accuracy | 77% |
| 287 | Accurate passes | 337Lead |
| 365 | Total passes | 440Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 3Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Fouls | 0 |
| 0 | Red cards | 0 |
| 1 | Yellow cards | 1 |
Statistics is not available yet.