Match statistics snapshot
- Universidad de Chile created the clearer chances on xG (1.21 vs 0.92, Δ 0.29).
- Coquimbo Unido was more accurate in front of goal (45% on target vs 27%).
- Universidad de Chile held more of the ball (61% possession).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 1.21Lead | Expected goals (xG) | 0.92 |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 2 |
| 8 | Shots inside the box | 8 |
| 4Lead |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 3 |
| 3 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 11 | Total shots | 11 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 61%Lead | Ball possession | 39% |
| 78%Lead | Pass accuracy | 67% |
| 359Lead | Accurate passes | 190 |
| 463Lead | Total passes | 282 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 6 | Corner kicks | 7Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 4Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 2 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | Coquimbo Unido |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Fouls | 15 |
| Red cards | ||
| 4 | Yellow cards | 4 |