Match statistics snapshot
- Columbus Crew created the clearer chances on xG (0.93 vs 1.08, Δ 0.15).
- Toronto FC fired more attempts (12 vs 7 shots).
- Columbus Crew was more accurate in front of goal (57% on target vs 33%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Columbus Crew |
|---|---|---|
| 0.93 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.08Lead |
| 3Lead | Offsides | 4 |
| 9Lead | Shots inside the box | 4 |
| 4Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 2 |
| 4 | Shots on target | 4 |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 12Lead | Total shots | 7 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Columbus Crew |
|---|---|---|
| 50% | Ball possession | 50% |
| 86%Lead | Pass accuracy | 85% |
| 423 | Accurate passes | 423 |
| 492 | Total passes | 497Lead |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Columbus Crew |
|---|---|---|
| 5Lead | Corner kicks | 2 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Columbus Crew |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 3 | Goalkeeper saves | 4Lead |
| 0.84 | Goals prevented | 0.84 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Toronto Fc | Statistic | Columbus Crew |
|---|---|---|
| 8Lead | Fouls | 14 |
| Red cards | ||
| 2 | Yellow cards | 2 |
Statistics is not available yet.