New England Revolution claimed a 2-1 victory over Philadelphia Union in an MLS encounter where clinical finishing proved decisive despite the visitors dominating expected goals. Philadelphia's 4-4-2 shape generated a superior xG of 1.27 compared to New England's 1.05, and they also registered 11 shots to the Revolution's 10, yet both sides managed only two shots on target apiece. Carles Gil and Luca Langoni converted their chances for the hosts, who operated in a 4-3-3 formation that effectively contained Union's attacking threats. Philadelphia's goalkeeper struggled with a 50 per cent save percentage and finished 0.98 goals below expected performance, ultimately the difference in a match where New England's efficiency in front of goal outweighed their visitors' territorial advantage. The result underscores how MLS encounters remain decided by moments rather than dominance.
NNew England Revolution
2–1
Full Time
PPhiladelphia Union
C. Gil87'L. Langoni61'C. Gil61'
Starting Line-ups
New England Revolution · 4-3-3Philadelphia Union · 4-4-2
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.
New England Revolution GK
PSxG conceded0.02
Goals conceded1
Goals saved-0.98
Save %50.0%
Philadelphia Union GK
PSxG conceded0.69
Goals conceded2
Goals saved-1.31
Save %0.0%
New England Revolution's keeper let in roughly 1.0 goal more than an average keeper would, while Philadelphia Union's keeper let in roughly 1.3 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