SEO Match Summary
DC United drew 0-0 with Los Angeles FC in MLS, as LAFC’s greater control of possession met a disciplined home defensive performance. The visitors held 61.0% of the ball and attempted 17 shots, but placed only one on target, allowing DC United’s goalkeeper to maintain a 100.0% save rate from one shot faced. DC United, operating in a 4-3-3, had less possession at 39.0% yet produced four shots on target from 14 attempts, testing the LAFC goalkeeper more regularly. LAFC’s 1.28 xG narrowly exceeded DC’s 1.05, reflecting a marginal edge in chance quality, but neither side found the decisive final action. DC’s goalkeeper saved 0.23 goals above expected, while LAFC’s keeper recorded 1.05 goals saved above expected after facing four on-target efforts. The tactical balance was clear: LAFC circulated possession, while DC carried a more direct threat when opportunities arrived. Both sides add a point in MLS.
D
DC United
L
Los Angeles FC
Expected Goals (xG)
1.05
1.28
Shots
14
17
Shots on Target
4
1
Possession
39%
61%
Post-Shot xG Faced
0.23
1.05
Goals Saved Above xG
+0.23
+1.05
Total Goals0
Formation4-3-3vs4-3-3
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.
DC United GK
PSxG conceded0.23
Goals conceded0
Goals saved0.23
Save %100.0%
Los Angeles FC GK
PSxG conceded1.05
Goals conceded0
Goals saved1.05
Save %100.0%
Los Angeles FC's keeper stopped about 1.1 goal more than an average keeper would, while DC United's keeper performed right in line with expectations.
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