Match statistics snapshot
- New England Revolution created the clearer chances on xG (0.99 vs 1.61, Δ 0.62).
- Portland Timbers fired more attempts (14 vs 13 shots).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 0.99 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.61Lead |
| 0Lead | Offsides | 4 |
| 9 | Shots inside the box | 10Lead |
| 5 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 9Lead |
| 5Lead | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 5Lead | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 14Lead | Total shots | 13 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 51%Lead | Ball possession | 49% |
| 86% | Pass accuracy | 86% |
| 435Lead | Accurate passes | 414 |
| 507Lead | Total passes | 483 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Corner kicks | 8Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 0 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
| -0.93 | Goals prevented | -0.93 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Portland Timbers | Statistic | New England Revolution |
|---|---|---|
| 6Lead | Fouls | 9 |
| Red cards | ||
| Yellow cards |