Real Madrid’s 1–0 win at Estádio da Luz was built on territorial and possession control rather than pure counter-attacking. With 58% of the ball and 624 total passes at 88% accuracy, they dictated tempo and circulated play with patience. Benfica, in a 4-2-3-1, accepted a more reactive role, finishing with 42% possession and 444 passes at 80% accuracy, looking to spring forward through Rafa Silva and the lone striker Vangelis Pavlidis. Madrid controlled the ball and most of the space, while Benfica tried to compress central zones and survive long phases without possession.
Offensive Efficiency
The shot profile underlines Madrid’s more coherent attacking plan. They produced 16 total shots to Benfica’s 10, and crucially 11 of those Madrid attempts came from inside the box, compared to just 4 for the hosts. That reflects a game plan to progress methodically through midfield—via Aurélien Tchouameni, Eduardo Camavinga and Arda Guler—and then find Kylian Mbappé and Vinicius Junior in high-value central or half-space positions.
Madrid’s 7 shots on goal versus Benfica’s 3 show they consistently turned possession into efforts that tested Anatoliy Trubin. An expected goals figure of 0.89, while not huge, still comfortably exceeded Benfica’s 0.47, matching the visual of Madrid creating the clearer chances. Six corners for Madrid against three for Benfica further illustrate sustained pressure and repeated territorial gains in the final third.
Benfica’s 10 shots were more dispersed and less threatening. With 6 attempts from outside the box and only 4 inside, their attacks often ended in hopeful efforts rather than penetrative combinations. The three shots on target suggest that, despite some promising transitions and wide play, they lacked a cutting edge to consistently trouble Thibaut Courtois.
Defensive Discipline & Intensity
The match was relatively controlled rather than overtly physical. Benfica committed just 6 fouls, Madrid 9, with both sides receiving 2 yellow cards. That points more to tactical fouls and isolated duels than a disruptive, foul-heavy game plan.
Goalkeeper involvement reveals where the defensive burden lay. Trubin made 6 saves, double Courtois’s 3, confirming that Benfica spent longer under real defensive stress. Madrid’s 5 blocked shots also underline an aggressive defending of their box, with centre-backs stepping out to prevent Benfica’s efforts from reaching goal. Benfica’s lower foul count suggests a compact mid-block rather than high pressing, trying to stay organized and limit gaps rather than break up play constantly.
Madrid’s controlled possession, superior shot quality (16 shots, 11 in the box, 7 on target) and territorial pressure outweighed Benfica’s more sporadic, low-xG attacks. Real Madrid’s efficiency in turning structured dominance into decisive moments trumped Benfica’s reactive, lower-volume approach.
