Real Madrid’s 1–0 win at Estádio da Luz was built on controlled possession and territorial dominance rather than sheer volume of chances. With 58% of the ball and 624 total passes at 88% accuracy, Madrid dictated the rhythm, circulating through their 4-4-2 midfield to keep Benfica pinned for long stretches. Benfica, in a 4-2-3-1, accepted a more reactive role, finishing with 42% possession and 444 passes at 80% accuracy. They looked to compress central spaces with the double pivot and spring Rafa Silva and the wide attackers in transition, but struggled to sustain attacks against Madrid’s structure.
Offensive Efficiency
The shot profile underlines Madrid’s more coherent attacking plan. They produced 16 total shots to Benfica’s 10, with a clear emphasis on penalty-box presence: 11 shots inside the box versus Benfica’s 4. That, plus 7 shots on goal to Benfica’s 3, shows Madrid consistently worked the ball into high-value zones, reflected in a higher xG (0.89 vs 0.47). Six corners to Benfica’s three also point to Madrid’s territorial pressure and repeated attacks down the flanks, especially with full-backs and wide forwards combining.
Benfica’s 10 shots were more dispersed and often from distance, as indicated by their 6 shots from outside the box. The low xG of 0.47 highlights the lack of truly clear chances despite some promising breaks. Their three shots on target forced Courtois into only three saves, suggesting that while they reached the final third, they rarely disrupted Madrid’s defensive line. Madrid, by contrast, forced 6 saves from Trubin, which, combined with 5 blocked shots, shows a steady stream of efforts and a game plan geared toward repeatedly testing the Benfica box rather than speculative shooting.
Defensive Discipline & Intensity
The match was relatively controlled in terms of aggression: Benfica committed 6 fouls and Madrid 9, with both sides receiving two yellow cards. This indicates neither an overtly disruptive pressing game nor a stop-start contest; instead, Madrid relied on positional control, while Benfica tried to stay compact without overcommitting to rash challenges.
Defensively, both goalkeepers were active but Trubin was busier, making 6 saves compared to Courtois’ 3, underlining Madrid’s greater attacking volume. Benfica’s 3 blocked shots to Madrid’s 5 show that both back lines were proactive in protecting the box, but Madrid’s higher block count fits with their willingness to defend higher and immediately counter-press after losing possession.
Real Madrid’s controlled possession, superior box occupation (16 shots, 11 inside the area) and territorial pressure (6 corners) outweighed Benfica’s more sporadic, lower-quality efforts. Efficiency in creating better chances, rather than sheer dominance on the ball, turned Madrid’s 58% possession into a narrow but deserved away win.
