Tanzania - Ligi kuu BaraChamazi StadiumData current as of September 01, 2026

Azam vs Kitayosce: match statistics

Azam crest
Azam
2 : 1half-time 2:0
Kitayosce crest
Kitayosce

Azam vs Kitayosce: form, goals and key statistics

Game details

Azam played against Kitayosce in Ligi kuu Bara (Tanzania). The game was played on August 20, 2026. Venue: Chamazi Stadium. Final score: 2:1.

Recent form

Azam has 0 wins, 1 draw and 0 losses over its last five games, averaging 1.00 points per game. Kitayosce has 0 wins, 1 draw and 0 losses, with 1.00 points per game.

Scoring records

Azam scores 1.00 goals per game and allows 1.00. Kitayosce scores 1.00 and allows 1.00. Games in this league average 2.20 goals.

BTTS and goal totals

Both teams score in 100% of Azam's games and 100% of Kitayosce's. The Over 2.5 rates are 0% and 0%, compared with league averages of 47% for BTTS and 27% for Over 2.5.

xG and shots

Kitayosce has the higher season xG average, 1.53 to 0.84 per game. Azam takes 3.0 shots per game, while Kitayosce takes 13.0.

First-half and second-half trends

Azam leads at halftime in 0% of its games and scores 1.00 goals per game after halftime. Kitayosce leads at halftime in 100% and scores 0.00 after halftime.

When the teams score

Azam's most productive scoring window is minutes 61-75 (1 goals). For Kitayosce, it is minutes 0-15 (1 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.

League scoring profile

Ligi kuu Bara games average 2.20 goals. Both teams score in 47% of games, and 27% finish with at least three goals.

Head-to-head record

Before this game, 2 previous meetings were available. The record was 1 home win, 0 draws and 1 away win. Those games averaged 3.50 goals, with both teams scoring in 50% 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

Azam are 5th, while Kitayosce sit 11th, and the difference in recent form also favors the home side. Azam have won 3 of their last 5 matches and scored 7 goals during that run, averaging 1.4 goals per game. Kitayosce have scored just 2 goals over the same period, with 3 of their last 5 matches ending in draws, highlighting their limited attacking efficiency. Both teams have conceded 4 goals in their last five appearances, so the outcome should be decided by Azam’s significantly greater scoring potential. A draw remains a realistic possibility given the visitors’ solid defensive organization and their run of stalemates, but the home side have more arguments in favor of securing the win.

View the statistical overview
BTTS - will both teams score?

The strongest signal is the low percentage of matches with both teams scoring in the last five fixtures: both Azam and Kitayosce recorded BTTS in only 20% of cases, compared with 50% for the league as a whole. Kitayosce scored just 0.4 goals per match during this period, while Azam conceded an average of only 0.8 goals, clearly limiting the visitors’ chances of scoring. Azam have shown significantly greater attacking efficiency, scoring 1.4 goals per match compared with Kitayosce’s mere 0.4, making a one-sided result more likely than a goal exchange. Although the visitors’ xG stands at 1.39, their actual return of 2 goals in five matches highlights poor finishing. The BTTS - No pick is more likely, as at least one team—primarily Kitayosce—could finish the match without scoring.

View BTTS statistics
Over/Under - goals analysis

In their last five matches, Azam scored 7 goals and conceded 4, while Kitayosce scored just 2 goals and conceded 4. Matches involving both teams surpassed the 2.5-goal line in only 20% of cases, clearly supporting a low-scoring scenario. Azam averaged 1.37 xG, while Kitayosce averaged 1.39 xG; however, the visitors converted this potential into just 0.4 goals per match, so their finishing remains poor. The league average is 2.17 goals, and only 33% of matches go over 2.5 goals, meaning the expected total of 2.05 goals does not point to an open game. The strongest selection is Under 3.5, as four or more goals would require a clear departure from the teams’ recent results and the profile of this league.

View Over/Under statistics
HT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario

Azam are in better form: over their last five matches, they have averaged 1.4 goals and won 60% of their games, while Kitayosce have scored just 0.4 goals on average and won 20%. The first half should nevertheless be cautious, as Kitayosce were level at the break in 60% of their recent matches, compared with 40% for Azam. The visitors averaged only 0.2 goals before half-time and failed to score in the first half in as many as 80% of those matches, which clearly limits the likelihood of them taking the lead at the break. After the interval, Azam have greater potential to turn the game in their favor, averaging 0.6 goals in second halves compared with Kitayosce’s 0.2. The most likely HT/FT outcome is therefore a draw at half-time followed by a home win, although the low-scoring profile also increases the risk of a draw at full-time.

View first-half and second-half statistics

Stats by half

2 : 0
First half
0 : 1
Second half

Game stats

52Possession (%)48
AzamKitayosce
9Shots10
AzamKitayosce
6Shots on target2
AzamKitayosce
2.03xG1.82
AzamKitayosce
5Corners7
AzamKitayosce
142Dangerous attacks144
AzamKitayosce
18Fouls15
AzamKitayosce
0Cards0
AzamKitayosce

Pre-game profilewhat do the season numbers say?

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

1Goals scored / game1
AzamKitayosce
1Goals allowed / game1
AzamKitayosce
47%Average possession52%
AzamKitayosce
3Shots on target / game6
AzamKitayosce

Team statswho is more efficient?

Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.

3Shots per game13
AzamKitayosce
3Shots on target6
AzamKitayosce
33.3%Shot conversion7.7%
AzamKitayosce
47%Possession52%
AzamKitayosce
0.84xG for1.53
AzamKitayosce
1.69xG against1.7
AzamKitayosce

Shooting quality

Azam: Counter-attackingKitayosce: Balanced
AzamKitayosce
Accuracy (shots on target)100%46%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.280.12
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.330.17

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 formwho is in better shape?

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

Azam
D
Unbeaten in the last 5 games
Season result split
0% W100% R0% P
Season (W-D-L)
0-1-0
1.00 pts / game · goal difference 0
Last 5 (W-D-L)
0-1-0
1.00 pts / game
Record at home (W-D-L)
0-0-0
Last 5 at home
0-0-0
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.0Goals conceded: 1.0xG: 0.84Opponent xG: 1.69BTTS: 100%Over 2.5: 0%
Kitayosce
D
Unbeaten in the last 5 games
Season result split
0% W100% R0% P
Season (W-D-L)
0-1-0
1.00 pts / game · goal difference 0
Last 5 (W-D-L)
0-1-0
1.00 pts / game
Record away (W-D-L)
0-1-0
Last 5 away
0-1-0
D
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.0Goals conceded: 1.0xG: 1.53Opponent xG: 1.70BTTS: 100%Over 2.5: 0%

Goalshow 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.

Azam scoring profile: very strong

Azam scores in 100% of games (1 of 1 meczów), while Kitayosce keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 1 meczów).

Kitayosce scoring profile: very strong

Kitayosce scores in 100% of games (1 of 1 meczów), while Azam keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 1 meczów).

1Goals scored (season)1
AzamKitayosce
1Goals conceded (season)1
AzamKitayosce
2Average goals per game2
AzamKitayosce
1Goals scored (last 5)1
AzamKitayosce
1Goals conceded (last 5)1
AzamKitayosce

How often they score at least...

100%1 goal100%
AzamKitayosce
0%2 goals0%
AzamKitayosce
0%3 goals0%
AzamKitayosce
0%4 goals0%
AzamKitayosce

How often they concede at least...

100%1 goal100%
AzamKitayosce
0%2 goals0%
AzamKitayosce
0%3 goals0%
AzamKitayosce
0%4 goals0%
AzamKitayosce

* 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.

Goal patterns

0%BTTS at half-time0%
AzamKitayosce
0%BTTS in both halves0%
AzamKitayosce
0%Scored in both halves0%
AzamKitayosce

BTTS and goal count

0%Min. 3 goals and BTTS0%
AzamKitayosce
0%Min. 3 goals without BTTS0%
AzamKitayosce
100%BTTS - last 5100%
AzamKitayosce

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.

1st half

0%Min. 1 goal before half-time100%
AzamKitayosce
0%Min. 2 goals before half-time0%
AzamKitayosce
0%Min. 3 goals before half-time0%
AzamKitayosce

2nd half

100%Min. 1 goal after half-time100%
AzamKitayosce
100%Min. 2 goals after half-time0%
AzamKitayosce
0%Min. 3 goals after half-time0%
AzamKitayosce

Game halveswhen do the teams score more often?

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

Kitayosce is 200% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

1 pts / game - Azam · 3 pts / game - Kitayosce

Azam - half-time state
0% leading100% draw0% trailing
Kitayosce - half-time state
100% leading0% draw0% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

1Points per game (1st half)3
AzamKitayosce
0Goals scored (1st half)1
AzamKitayosce
0Goals conceded (1st half)0
AzamKitayosce
0Average goals (1st half)1
AzamKitayosce
100%Clean sheet before half-time100%
AzamKitayosce
100%No goal before half-time0%
AzamKitayosce

After half-time (2nd half)

1Points per game (2nd half)0
AzamKitayosce
1Goals scored (2nd half)0
AzamKitayosce
1Goals conceded (2nd half)1
AzamKitayosce
2Average goals (2nd half)1
AzamKitayosce
0%Clean sheet after half-time0%
AzamKitayosce
0%No goal after half-time100%
AzamKitayosce

Azam - second-half results

0% W100% R0% P
1
Half-time points
0
Half-time goals
0
Goal difference (1st half)
1
Second-half points
0
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.00
PPG before half-time
Defense after halftime+1.0

Allows 1.0 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.

Kitayosce - second-half results

0% W0% R100% P
3
Half-time points
1
Half-time goals
+1
Goal difference (1st half)
0
Second-half points
-1
Goal difference (2nd half)
3.00
PPG before half-time
Lead holding0%

Leads at halftime in 100% of games and wins 0%. Sometimes gives up a halftime lead.

Defense after halftime+1.0

Allows 1.0 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.

Azam - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.001.00
Goals scored / game0.01.0
Goals allowed / game0.01.0
Average goals per game0.02.0
1 goal0%100%
2 goals0%100%
3 goals0%0%
Clean sheet100%0%
No goal100%0%
Goal difference00
Half-time: 0% leading - 100% draw - 0% trailing
2nd half: 0% won - 100% draw - 0% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 0
Kitayosce - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game3.000.00
Goals scored / game1.00.0
Goals allowed / game0.01.0
Average goals per game1.01.0
1 goal100%100%
2 goals0%0%
3 goals0%0%
Clean sheet100%0%
No goal0%100%
Goal difference+1-1
Half-time: 100% leading - 0% draw - 0% trailing
2nd half: 0% won - 0% draw - 100% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 1

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

Goals by minutewhen do goals arrive?

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

Azam
ScoredConceded
0
0
0-15
0
0
16-30
0
0
31-45
0
0
46-60
1
0
61-75
0
1
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 61-75 (1 goal). Concedes most in 76-90 (1). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - late phases are a weakness.

Kitayosce
ScoredConceded
1
0
0-15
0
0
16-30
0
0
31-45
0
1
46-60
0
0
61-75
0
0
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 0-15 (1 goal). Concedes most in 46-60 (1). Late-goal balance (76-90): 0.

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

Additional team indicatorswhat do xG, efficiency and form show?

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

Game profile

2.00
Estimated goals
attack vs. opponent defense
1.0 : 1.0
Estimated goal split
home : away
91%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
100%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
+75%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
100%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
0%
0:0 risk
practically zero
0-1
Most common goal range
attack vs. defense for both teams

Azam

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.85
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.85
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-0.5 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
+0.16
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.69
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
79%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
108%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+1.0
Late goals
0% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 0% come in the first quarter-hour.
0%

Kitayosce

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.17
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.17
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-0.5 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.53
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.70
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
108%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
79%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
-1.0
Late goals
0% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 100% come in the first quarter-hour.
0%

* 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 contextis this a high-scoring league?

How both teams compare with league-wide averages (Ligi kuu Bara).

Teams vs league

AzamLigaKitayosce
Average goals per game 2.002.20 2.00
Both teams scored 100%47% 100%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) 0%27% 0%
Clean sheets 0%27% 0%
Goal before half-time 0%80% 100%
Goal after half-time 100%73% 100%

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

2.20
Average goals per game
47%
Both teams scored
27%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
27%
Clean sheets
1.27
Home goals / game
0.93
Away goals / game
+37%
Home attack advantage
+27%
Home defensive advantage
+7%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
80%
1 goal
20%
2 goals
0%
3 goals
0%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
73%
1 goal
27%
2 goals
13%
3 goals
7%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

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

Home team

Other recorded players

Abdul Hamisi Suleiman⚽ 1
Iddy Seleman Nado⚽ 1

Away team

Other recorded players

Ousmane Kamissoko⚽ 1

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. AzamGoalIddy Seleman Nado
  2. AzamGoalAbdul Hamisi Suleiman
  3. KitayosceGoalOusmane Kamissoko

Referee and managers

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

Head-to-head

Record from Azam's perspective: 1 win, 0 draws and 1 loss against Kitayosce. Games average 3.50 goals, and both teams scored in 50% of them.

Kitayosce
4 : 1
Azam
Azam
2 : 0
Kitayosce

FAQ

What was the result of Azam vs Kitayosce?

The Ligi kuu Bara match finished Azam 2:1 Kitayosce. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What is the head-to-head record between Azam and Kitayosce?

In the last 2 head-to-head matches Azam won 1, Kitayosce won 1 and 0 ended level. These games averaged 3.50 goals, with both teams scoring in 50% of them.

What do the goal statistics show before Azam vs Kitayosce?

Azam score 1.00 goals per game on average and Kitayosce 1.00. The Ligi kuu Bara average is 2.20 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 27% of games. Both teams score in 100% of Azam's matches and 100% of Kitayosce's.

What form are Azam and Kitayosce in?

Over the last 5 games Azam have a 0-1-0 record (1.00 points per game) and Kitayosce 0-1-0 (1.00 points per game).

Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Azam vs Kitayosce?

The statistical background for Azam vs Kitayosce — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under — is on this page. The tip with full reasoning and a value assessment is in the NoFluffPicks app.