SEO Match Summary
Columbus Crew and Chicago Fire played out a goalless draw in MLS on 8 March, with the hosts dominating proceedings but unable to break down a resolute visiting defence. The Crew controlled the match from their 3-4-2-1 setup, registering 13 shots and 5 on target, generating 1.51 expected goals, yet found Chicago's goalkeeper impenetrable. The Fire, operating in a 3-4-3 formation, offered limited attacking threat with just 8 shots and 0.87 xG, but their goalkeeper delivered an outstanding performance, recording a perfect 100% save percentage and gaining 0.77 goals above expected. Referee Tori Penso managed a tightly contested encounter without significant controversy. Despite the Crew's territorial superiority and superior shot volume, their inability to convert chances proved costly in a stalemate that leaves both sides with a point apiece. The result extends Columbus's recent run without victory.
C
Columbus Crew
C
Chicago Fire
Expected Goals (xG)
1.51
0.87
Shots
13
8
Shots on Target
5
3
Possession
51%
49%
Post-Shot xG Faced
0.77
1.71
Goals Saved Above xG
+0.77
+1.71
Yellow Cards
2
4
Corners
7
3
Total Goals0
Formation3-4-2-1vs3-4-3
Goalkeeper Performance
Read it this way: PSxG conceded is how dangerous the shots on target were, Goals conceded is how many actually went in, Goals saved is the gap between the two (higher is better, a minus means he should have saved more), and Save % is the share of on-target shots kept out.
Columbus Crew GK
PSxG conceded0.77
Goals conceded0
Goals saved0.77
Save %100.0%
Chicago Fire GK
PSxG conceded1.71
Goals conceded0
Goals saved1.71
Save %100.0%
Chicago Fire's keeper stopped about 1.7 goals more than an average keeper would, while Columbus Crew's keeper stopped about 0.8 goal more than an average keeper would.
Game finished. Sign up to access full-season histograms, opponent-pulse modules, and referee-tendency analytics.
Inside the dashboards
Attack vs DefensexG, shots & goals — Home/Away per competition
Form Index & ReboundL5 momentum bar with rebound state per team
Goal Geolocation MapWhere the team scores & concedes — pitch heat
Cards IntelligenceYellow/Red filtered by referee & formation
Corner MasteryDistribution per opponent & tactical context
Top Scorers Cross-RefSquad ranked vs opponent & double-scorer combos
Referee TendencyTeam output under each referee they played for
Goalkeeper WeaknessWhere the keeper concedes — by zone & foot