Match statistics snapshot
- O'Higgins created the clearer chances on xG (1.48 vs 1.59, Δ 0.11).
- O'Higgins was more accurate in front of goal (50% on target vs 40%).
- 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 | O'higgins |
|---|---|---|
| 1.48 | Expected goals (xG) | 1.59Lead |
| Offsides | ||
| 7 | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| Shots off target |
|---|
| 4Lead |
| 4 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 3 | Shots outside the box | 3 |
|---|
| 10 | Total shots | 10 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | O'higgins |
|---|---|---|
| 61%Lead | Ball possession | 39% |
| 79%Lead | Pass accuracy | 72% |
| 351Lead | Accurate passes | 199 |
| 442Lead | Total passes | 278 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | O'higgins |
|---|---|---|
| 10Lead | Corner kicks | 4 |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | O'higgins |
|---|---|---|
| 4Lead | Blocked shots | 1 |
| 0 | Goalkeeper saves | 2Lead |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Universidad De Chile | Statistic | O'higgins |
|---|---|---|
| 13Lead | Fouls | 16 |
| 1 | Red cards | 0Lead |
| 5 | Yellow cards | 5 |
Statistics is not available yet.