Match statistics snapshot
- Chicago Fire created the clearer chances on xG (1.21 vs 2.22, Δ 1.01).
- Vancouver Whitecaps fired more attempts (13 vs 9 shots).
- Chicago Fire was more accurate in front of goal (56% on target vs 15%).
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Vancouver Whitecaps | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 1.21 | Expected goals (xG) | 2.22Lead |
| 1Lead | Offsides | 2 |
| 9Lead | Shots inside the box | 7 |
| 8Lead | Shots off target | 1 |
|---|
| 2 | Shots on target | 5Lead |
|---|
| 4Lead | Shots outside the box | 2 |
|---|
| 13Lead | Total shots | 9 |
|---|
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Vancouver Whitecaps | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 57%Lead | Ball possession | 43% |
| 89%Lead | Pass accuracy | 87% |
| 476Lead | Accurate passes | 346 |
| 533Lead | Total passes | 400 |
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Vancouver Whitecaps | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Vancouver Whitecaps | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | Blocked shots | 3 |
| 2Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 1 |
| -0.53 | Goals prevented | -0.53 |
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Vancouver Whitecaps | Statistic | Chicago Fire |
|---|---|---|
| 10 | Fouls | 9Lead |
| Red cards | ||
| 1Lead | Yellow cards | 2 |
Statistics is not available yet.