Match statistics snapshot
- Chicago Fire created the clearer chances on xG (0.61 vs 1.08, Δ 0.47).
- Chicago Fire fired more attempts (11 vs 5 shots).
- Chicago Fire was more accurate in front of goal (36% on target vs 20%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 0.61 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.08Lead |
| 4 | Offsides | 2Lead |
| 4 | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4Lead |
| 1 | Shots on target | 4Lead |
|---|
| 1 | Shots outside the box | 7Lead |
|---|
| 5 | Total shots | 11Lead |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 48% | Ball possession | 52%Lead |
| 84% | Pass accuracy | 87%Lead |
| 395 | Accurate passes | 455Lead |
| 470 | Total passes | 526Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Corner kicks | 3 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 2 | Blocked shots | 3Lead |
| 2Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 0 |
| -0.06 | Goals prevented | -0.06 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 7Lead | Fouls | 11 |
| Red cards | ||
| Yellow cards |
Statistics is not available yet.