Belgium - First Division BData current as of September 06, 2026

AS Eupen vs RFC Seraing: match statistics

AS Eupen crest
AS Eupen
0 : 0half-time 0:0
RFC Seraing crest
RFC Seraing
155%(1.80)
X28%(3.30)
217%(3.70)
BTTSOver/UnderHT/FT
Pick: 1Lost
Pick score:Pick score — the strength of the NoFluffPicks model signal for this pick.54.27
Value:Value — how much the bookmaker price is above our estimated probability. Positive value is favorable long term.-1.00%

AS Eupen displays solid home form with a 43% win rate and an impressive +7 goal difference at their own stadium. The hosts score an average of 1.43 goals per home match and concede only 0.93, giving them an edge over the visitors. RFC Seraing, despite good recent overall form (4 wins in the last 5 matches), performs significantly worse away from home – with only a 21% away win rate, a negative -8 goal difference, and as many as 50% of matches without scoring. Additionally, the visitors concede an average of 1.43 goals on the road, which, given the hosts' solid attack, poses a significant problem. Considering Eupen's home advantage, their superior efficiency (13% shot conversion vs 7% for the visitors), and greater ball possession (52% vs 41%), I anticipate a home win, although Seraing's away form in recent weeks does not rule out an upset.

See full settlement in the app

AS Eupen vs RFC Seraing: form, goals and key statistics

Game details

AS Eupen played against RFC Seraing in First Division B (Belgium). The game was played on March 20, 2026. Final score: 0:0.

Recent form

AS Eupen has 2 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss over its last five games, averaging 1.60 points per game. RFC Seraing has 3 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss, with 2.00 points per game.

Scoring records

AS Eupen scores 1.39 goals per game and allows 1.11. RFC Seraing scores 1.18 and allows 1.46. Games in this league average 2.79 goals.

BTTS and goal totals

Both teams score in 54% of AS Eupen's games and 50% of RFC Seraing's. The Over 2.5 rates are 46% and 54%, compared with league averages of 54% for BTTS and 52% for Over 2.5.

xG and shots

RFC Seraing has the higher season xG average, 1.40 to 1.20 per game. AS Eupen takes 10.4 shots per game, while RFC Seraing takes 12.1.

First-half and second-half trends

AS Eupen leads at halftime in 36% of its games and scores 0.71 goals per game after halftime. RFC Seraing leads at halftime in 11% and scores 0.82 after halftime.

When the teams score

AS Eupen's most productive scoring window is minutes 31-45+ (9 goals). For RFC Seraing, it is minutes 76-90+ (9 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.

League scoring profile

First Division B games average 2.79 goals. Both teams score in 54% of games, and 52% finish with at least three goals.

Head-to-head record

Before this game, one previous meeting was available. The record was 1 home win, 0 draws and 0 away wins. Those games averaged 1.00 goals, with both teams scoring in 0% of them.

Archived pre-match analysis

This analysis was prepared before kick-off. The conclusions use only information available before the match and do not include the final result or post-match statistics.

General match analysis

AS Eupen displays solid home form with a 43% win rate and an impressive +7 goal difference at their own stadium. The hosts score an average of 1.43 goals per home match and concede only 0.93, giving them an edge over the visitors. RFC Seraing, despite good recent overall form (4 wins in the last 5 matches), performs significantly worse away from home – with only a 21% away win rate, a negative -8 goal difference, and as many as 50% of matches without scoring. Additionally, the visitors concede an average of 1.43 goals on the road, which, given the hosts' solid attack, poses a significant problem. Considering Eupen's home advantage, their superior efficiency (13% shot conversion vs 7% for the visitors), and greater ball possession (52% vs 41%), I anticipate a home win, although Seraing's away form in recent weeks does not rule out an upset.

View the statistical overview

Stats by half

0 : 0
First half
0 : 0
Second half

Game stats

50Possession (%)50
AS EupenRFC Seraing
3Shots13
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1Shots on target6
AS EupenRFC Seraing
0.5xG1.6
AS EupenRFC Seraing
3Corners7
AS EupenRFC Seraing
32Dangerous attacks50
AS EupenRFC Seraing
12Fouls6
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1Cards1
AS EupenRFC Seraing

Pre-game profile— what do the season numbers say?

This team profile combines season stats and recent form. In-game statistics appear after the final whistle.

1.5Points per gamePPG - points per game.1.07
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1.39Goals scored / game1.18
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1.11Goals allowed / game1.46
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1.2xG forxG - expected goals, the quality of scoring chances.1.4
AS EupenRFC Seraing
52%Average possession40%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
3.75Shots on target / game3.93
AS EupenRFC Seraing
36%Clean sheetsClean sheet - a match with no goal conceded.25%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
54%Both teams scoredBTTS - percentage of matches where both teams scored.50%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

Team stats— who is more efficient?

Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.

10.39Shots per game12.11
AS EupenRFC Seraing
3.75Shots on target3.93
AS EupenRFC Seraing
13.4%Shot conversion9.7%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
52%Possession40%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1.2xG for1.4
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1.63xG against1.5
AS EupenRFC Seraing

Shooting quality

AS Eupen: Efficient finishingRFC Seraing: Balanced
AS EupenRFC Seraing
Accuracy (shots on target)36%32%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.120.12
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.370.30

xG per shot around 0.08 usually means long-range attempts; 0.15+ usually means box chances. The style label comes from possession, shot volume and conversion.

* xG (expected goals) says how many goals a team should score from its chances. If actual goals are above xG, finishing is above average; if below xG, chances are being missed.

Team form— who is in better shape?

Last five games and season record, overall, at home and away.

RFC Seraing is 25% better for: last-5 form.

1.6 pts / game - AS Eupen · 2 pts / game - RFC Seraing

AS Eupen
DDWLW
Season result split
39% W32% R29% P
Season (W-D-L)
11-9-8
1.50 pts / game · goal difference +8
Last 5 (W-D-L)
2-2-1
1.60 pts / game
Record at home (W-D-L)
6-5-3
Last 5 at home
2-2-1
DWDWL
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.6Goals conceded: 0.8xG: 1.43Opponent xG: 1.40BTTS: 40%Over 2.5: 40%
RFC Seraing
LWWWD
Season result split
25% W32% R43% P
Season (W-D-L)
7-9-12
1.07 pts / game · goal difference -8
Last 5 (W-D-L)
3-1-1
2.00 pts / game
Record away (W-D-L)
3-5-6
Last 5 away
3-1-1
DLWWW
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 2.2Goals conceded: 1.4xG: 1.44Opponent xG: 1.58BTTS: 40%Over 2.5: 80%

Goals— how do both teams score and concede?

How many goals both teams score and concede, plus how often they keep a clean sheet or fail to score.

AS Eupen is 18% better for: goals scored per game.

1.39 goals / game - AS Eupen · 1.18 goals / game - RFC Seraing

AS Eupen is 32% better for: goals allowed per game.

1.11 goals / game - AS Eupen · 1.46 goals / game - RFC Seraing

AS Eupen scoring profile: very strong

AS Eupen scores in 86% of games (24 of 28 meczów), while RFC Seraing keeps a clean sheet in 25% (7 of 28 meczów).

RFC Seraing scoring profile: strong

RFC Seraing scores in 64% of games (18 of 28 meczów), while AS Eupen keeps a clean sheet in 36% (10 of 28 meczów).

39Goals scored (season)33
AS EupenRFC Seraing
31Goals conceded (season)41
AS EupenRFC Seraing
2.5Average goals per game2.64
AS EupenRFC Seraing
8Goals scored (last 5)11
AS EupenRFC Seraing
4Goals conceded (last 5)7
AS EupenRFC Seraing
AS Eupen
36%
Clean sheetsClean sheet - a match with no goal conceded.10 of 28 meczów
14%
No goalFailed to score - a match where the team did not score.4 of 28 meczów
RFC Seraing
25%
Clean sheetsClean sheet - a match with no goal conceded.7 of 28 meczów
36%
No goalFailed to score - a match where the team did not score.10 of 28 meczów

How often they score at least...

86%1 goal64%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
39%2 goals32%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
11%3 goals14%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
4%4 goals7%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

How often they concede at least...

64%1 goal75%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
36%2 goals50%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
11%3 goals14%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
0%4 goals4%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

* Statistics include both teams' home and away games this season.

Both teams scored (BTTS)— how often do both teams score?

How often games involving these teams produce goals at both ends, compared with the league average.

54%
AS Eupen - BTTSBTTS - percentage of matches where both teams scored.15 of 28 meczów
50%
RFC Seraing - BTTSBTTS - percentage of matches where both teams scored.14 of 28 meczów
54%
League average

Goal patterns

11%BTTS at half-time18%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
4%BTTS in both halves4%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
14%Scored in both halves18%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

BTTS and goal count

39%Min. 3 goals and BTTS43%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
7%Min. 3 goals without BTTS11%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
40%BTTS - last 540%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

Goal count (Over/Under)— how often do these games cross the goal lines?

See how often games involving these teams clear each goal line, for the full game and each half.

Full game - team comparison (Over)

96%Min. 1 goal (Over 0.5)Over 0.5 - at least one goal in the match.89%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
68%Min. 2 goals (Over 1.5)Over 1.5 - at least two goals in the match.68%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
46%Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)Over 2.5 - at least three goals in the match.54%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
25%Min. 4 goals (Over 3.5)Over 3.5 - at least four goals in the match.39%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
11%Min. 5 goals (Over 4.5)Over 4.5 - at least five goals in the match.11%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

Over / Under - AS Eupen

Line 0.5 (min. 1 goal)Over 0.5 - at least one goal in the match.
Over 96%Under 4%
Line 1.5 (min. 2 goals)Over 1.5 - at least two goals in the match.
Over 68%Under 32%
Line 2.5 (min. 3 goals)Over 2.5 - at least three goals in the match.
Over 46%Under 54%
Line 3.5 (min. 4 goals)Over 3.5 - at least four goals in the match.
Over 25%Under 75%
Line 4.5 (min. 5 goals)Over 4.5 - at least five goals in the match.
Over 11%Under 89%

Over / Under - RFC Seraing

Line 0.5 (min. 1 goal)Over 0.5 - at least one goal in the match.
Over 89%Under 11%
Line 1.5 (min. 2 goals)Over 1.5 - at least two goals in the match.
Over 68%Under 32%
Line 2.5 (min. 3 goals)Over 2.5 - at least three goals in the match.
Over 54%Under 46%
Line 3.5 (min. 4 goals)Over 3.5 - at least four goals in the match.
Over 39%Under 61%
Line 4.5 (min. 5 goals)Over 4.5 - at least five goals in the match.
Over 11%Under 89%

1st half

75%Min. 1 goal before half-time61%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
32%Min. 2 goals before half-time36%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
11%Min. 3 goals before half-time11%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

2nd half

75%Min. 1 goal after half-time75%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
39%Min. 2 goals after half-time39%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
11%Min. 3 goals after half-time21%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

Game halves— when do the teams score more often?

How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.

AS Eupen is 74% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

1.43 pts / game - AS Eupen · 0.82 pts / game - RFC Seraing

AS Eupen - half-time state
36% leading36% draw29% trailing
RFC Seraing - half-time state
11% leading50% draw39% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

1.43Points per game (1st half)0.82
AS EupenRFC Seraing
0.68Goals scored (1st half)0.36
AS EupenRFC Seraing
0.54Goals conceded (1st half)0.71
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1.21Average goals (1st half)1.07
AS EupenRFC Seraing
61%Clean sheet before half-time50%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
54%No goal before half-time71%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

After half-time (2nd half)

1.57Points per game (2nd half)1.43
AS EupenRFC Seraing
0.71Goals scored (2nd half)0.82
AS EupenRFC Seraing
0.57Goals conceded (2nd half)0.64
AS EupenRFC Seraing
1.29Average goals (2nd half)1.46
AS EupenRFC Seraing
61%Clean sheet after half-time57%
AS EupenRFC Seraing
46%No goal after half-time46%
AS EupenRFC Seraing

AS Eupen - second-half results

39% W39% R21% P
40
Half-time points
19
Half-time goals
+4
Goal difference (1st half)
44
Second-half points
+4
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.43
PPG before half-time
Lead holding108%

Leads at halftime in 36% of games and wins 39%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime+0.0

Defense stays consistent across the full game.

RFC Seraing - second-half results

36% W36% R29% P
23
Half-time points
10
Half-time goals
-10
Goal difference (1st half)
40
Second-half points
+5
Goal difference (2nd half)
0.82
PPG before half-time
Lead holding227%

Leads at halftime in 11% of games and wins 25%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime-0.1

Defense stays consistent across the full game.

AS Eupen - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.401.80
Goals scored / game0.61.0
Goals allowed / game0.40.4
Average goals per game1.01.4
1 goal80%60%
2 goals20%40%
3 goals0%20%
Clean sheet60%80%
No goal60%40%
Goal difference+1+3
Half-time: 40% leading - 20% draw - 40% trailing
2nd half: 40% won - 60% draw - 0% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 3
RFC Seraing - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.602.60
Goals scored / game0.81.4
Goals allowed / game0.40.4
Average goals per game1.21.8
1 goal60%80%
2 goals40%40%
3 goals20%20%
Clean sheet80%80%
No goal60%20%
Goal difference+2+5
Half-time: 40% leading - 40% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 80% won - 20% draw - 0% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 4

* Table colors show frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate and red is rare. They are not team ratings.

Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?

The parts of a game in which both teams score and allow the most goals.

AS Eupen
ScoredConceded
3
2
0-15
7
7
16-30
9
6
31-45
8
2
46-60
6
6
61-75
6
8
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (9 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (8). Late-goal balance (76-90): -2 - late phases are a weakness.

RFC Seraing
ScoredConceded
6
8
0-15
2
6
16-30
2
9
31-45
7
5
46-60
7
4
61-75
9
9
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (9 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (9). Late-goal balance (76-90): 0.

* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.

Additional team indicators— what do xG, efficiency and form show?

A comparison of chance quality, results and trends from completed games this season.

Game profile

2.57
Estimated goals
attack vs. opponent defense
1.4 : 1.1
Estimated goal split
home : away
92%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
52%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
-61%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
55%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
5%
0:0 risk
about 1 in 20 matches
0-1
Most common goal range
attack vs. defense for both teams

AS Eupen

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.43
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.71
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-9.5 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
+0.19
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.52
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
99%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
80%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
+0.10
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.0
Late goals
15% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 8% come in the first quarter-hour.
15%

RFC Seraing

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.10
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
-0.18
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-3.0 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.22
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.04
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
86%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
104%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
+0.93
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.5
Late goals
27% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 18% come in the first quarter-hour.
27%

* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range use public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical game profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed games from the season.

League context— is this a high-scoring league?

How both teams compare with league-wide averages (First Division B).

Teams vs league

AS EupenLigaRFC Seraing
Average goals per game▼ 2.502.79▼ 2.64
Both teams scored• 54%54%▼ 50%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)▼ 46%52%▲ 54%
Clean sheets▲ 36%26%• 25%
Goal before half-time▲ 75%72%▼ 61%
Goal after half-time▼ 75%78%▼ 75%

^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.

2.79
Average goals per game
54%
Both teams scored
52%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
26%
Clean sheets
1.41
Home goals / game
1.38
Away goals / game
+2%
Home attack advantage
+2%
Home defensive advantage
+3%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
72%
1 goal
33%
2 goals
12%
3 goals
4%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
78%
1 goal
49%
2 goals
21%
3 goals
7%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.

Home team

Away team

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. AS EupenSubstitutionOn: Scott Fitzgerald KennedyOff: Ihor Plastun
  2. RFC SeraingYellow cardAkpa Chukwu Hemsley
  3. AS EupenSubstitutionOn: Gabriel BaresOff: Oriol Busquets Mas
  4. RFC SeraingSubstitutionOn: Thiago Paulo da SilvaOff: Fostave Mabani
  5. AS EupenSubstitutionOn: Zakaria AtteriOff: Bertan Çalışkan
  6. AS EupenYellow cardYentl Van Genechten

Referee and managers

Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.

RefereeArne De Beuckelaer

Referee context

See how often this referee shows cards, awards penalties and how their matches tend to finish.

Arne De BeuckelaerMatches officiated: 15
4.53Cards per match
0Penalties per match
1 / X / 220%Home wins40%Draws40%Away wins

Head-to-head

Record from AS Eupen's perspective: 1 win, 0 draws and 0 losses against RFC Seraing. Games average 1.00 goals, and both teams scored in 0% of them.

RFC Seraing
0 : 1
KAS Eupen

FAQ

What was the result of AS Eupen vs RFC Seraing?

The First Division B match finished AS Eupen 0:0 RFC Seraing. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What do the goal statistics show before AS Eupen vs RFC Seraing?

AS Eupen score 1.39 goals per game on average and RFC Seraing 1.18. The First Division B average is 2.79 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 52% of games. Both teams score in 54% of AS Eupen's matches and 50% of RFC Seraing's.

What form are AS Eupen and RFC Seraing in?

Over the last 5 games AS Eupen have a 2-2-1 record (1.60 points per game) and RFC Seraing 3-1-1 (2.00 points per game).

Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for AS Eupen vs RFC Seraing?

Here you can check the pre-match numbers for AS Eupen vs RFC Seraing: form, H2H, goals and Over/Under. The pick itself, value and reasoning are published in the NoFluffPicks app.