BFC Daugavpils vs Liepāja: match statistics
BFC Daugavpils vs Liepāja: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
BFC Daugavpils played against Liepāja in Virsliga (Latvia). The game was played on April 3, 2026. Final score: 2:0.
Recent form
BFC Daugavpils has 0 wins, 0 draws and 3 losses over its last five games, averaging 0.00 points per game. Liepāja has 2 wins, 0 draws and 1 loss, with 2.00 points per game.
Scoring records
BFC Daugavpils scores 1.00 goals per game and allows 3.00. Liepāja scores 1.00 and allows 0.67. Games in this league average 2.56 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 67% of BFC Daugavpils's games and 33% of Liepāja's. The Over 2.5 rates are 67% and 33%, compared with league averages of 63% for BTTS and 50% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
Liepāja has the higher season xG average, 1.23 to 1.02 per game. BFC Daugavpils takes 8.3 shots per game, while Liepāja takes 10.0.
First-half and second-half trends
BFC Daugavpils leads at halftime in 0% of its games and scores 0.67 goals per game after halftime. Liepāja leads at halftime in 33% and scores 0.67 after halftime.
When the teams score
BFC Daugavpils's most productive scoring window is minutes 46-60 (2 goals). For Liepāja, it is minutes 76-90+ (2 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
Virsliga games average 2.56 goals. Both teams score in 63% of games, and 50% finish with at least three goals.
Head-to-head record
Before this game, 4 previous meetings were available. The record was 1 home win, 1 draw and 2 away wins. Those games averaged 3.50 goals, with both teams scoring in 100% 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
The favorites are the visitors — Liepāja — who have won 3 of their last 5 matches and possess a 100% win rate away with 100% clean sheets. BFC Daugavpils have lost 5 of their last 5 matches, failed to score in any home game (no-goal rate 100%) and average 0 goals per home game with xG 1.18. Liepāja average 14 shots per game, 4 on target, with 66% average possession and away xG 1.68 versus 0.89 xG against; the hosts average 9 shots, 2 on target, and have 63% possession. Defensively the gap is clear — the hosts conceded 14 goals in their last 5 matches (2.8 per game over that span), while Liepāja concede 0 goals on average away and have xG against 0.89. Considering the hosts' 0% conversion rate versus roughly 7% for the visitors, the higher shot volume and superior xG, I project an away win; probabilities: home 6%, draw 16%, away 78%.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
BFC Daugavpils has 3 goals scored and 9 conceded this season, and in the last 5 matches they have let in 14 goals (2.8 per game), which significantly increases the risk of conceding. Liepāja has an average xG of 1.68 and records 4.0 shots on target per game and has scored 5 goals in the last 5 matches (1.0 per game), so they possess realistic attacking potential. In the league 60% of matches end BTTS, and the home team had BTTS in 80% of their last 5 matches (home season BTTS 50% vs away 0%), which together with Daugavpils’s form speaks in favor of both teams scoring. Counter signals are the away side’s season clean sheet rate of 100% and season BTTS for the away team 0%, and their xG against 0.89 and an average of 1.2 goals conceded in the last 5 matches show they can also keep a clean sheet. Overall, however, the high number of goals conceded by the hosts (14 in 5 matches) and the visitors’ offensive numbers (xG 1.68, 4.0 shots on target) provide a stronger signal for BTTS - Yes (70%).
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Based on xG: Liepāja has xG for 1.68 and xG against 0.89, BFC Daugavpils has xG for 1.01 and xG against 1.42; these averages yield expected goals of 0.95 for the home side and 1.55 for the visitors, totaling 2.50. With this total (λ=2.50) the probability of Over 1.5 goals (≥2) is approximately 71% (1 − P(0 or 1) ≈ 0.7127), while Over 2.5 is close to 46%. Additionally, Liepāja averages 14 shots and 4 on target versus BFC’s 8 and 2, and BFC conceded 14 goals in the last 5 matches (2.8 per match), which increases the chance of at least two goals. Although seasonal data are partially contradictory (e.g. season clean sheets for the visitors 100% vs last 5 matches with more goals), offensive signals dominate (last 5: Over 2.5 for the home side 80% and for the visitors 60%). Therefore I recommend a bet on Over 1.5 as the strongest signal, based on a 71% probability and expected 2.50 goals.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Liepāja statistically dominates: they have 100% wins this season and higher average xG of 1.68 versus the home side's 1.01, with average shots 14.0 versus 8.0 and 4.0 shots on target versus the home side's 2.0. The visitors record an average of 0.0 goals conceded and 100% clean sheets this season, while their average xG against is 0.89, which suggests effective defense despite allowing chances. At Half-Time a draw prevails: the visitors are level at HT in 100% of cases, and the hosts average 0.5 goals scored and 0.5 conceded by the break and lead at the break in 50% of matches, which gives a high probability of a draw at the break. In the second half the visitors' advantage increases — in second halves they effectively earn 3.0 points and have 100% wins in the analyzed second halves, so they most often decide the match after the break; therefore the HT/FT X/2 scenario is the strongest.
View first-half and second-half statisticsStats by half
Game stats
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.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.
Shooting quality
| BFC Daugavpils | Liepāja | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 36% | 27% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.33 | 0.37 |
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.
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.
Liepāja is 348% better for: goals allowed per game.
3 goals / game - BFC Daugavpils · 0.67 goals / game - Liepāja
BFC Daugavpils scores in 67% of games (2 of 3 meczów), while Liepāja keeps a clean sheet in 33% (1 of 3 meczów).
Liepāja scores in 67% of games (2 of 3 meczów), while BFC Daugavpils keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 3 meczów).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* 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
BTTS and goal count
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)
Over / Under - BFC Daugavpils
Over / Under - Liepāja
1st half
2nd half
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.
Liepāja is 99% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
0.67 pts / game - BFC Daugavpils · 1.33 pts / game - Liepāja
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
BFC Daugavpils - second-half results
Allows 1.0 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.
Liepāja - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 33% of games and wins 67%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 0.67 | 0.33 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.3 | 0.7 |
| Goals allowed / game | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| Average goals per game | 1.3 | 2.7 |
| 1 goal | 67% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 67% | 67% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 67% |
| Clean sheet | 33% | 0% |
| No goal | 67% | 67% |
| Goal difference | -2 | -4 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.33 | 1.67 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.3 | 0.7 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| Average goals per game | 0.7 | 1.0 |
| 1 goal | 67% | 67% |
| 2 goals | 0% | 33% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 67% | 67% |
| No goal | 67% | 33% |
| Goal difference | 0 | +1 |
* 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.
Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (2 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (4). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (2 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (1). Late-goal balance (76-90): +1 - wins late phases.
* 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
BFC Daugavpils
Liepāja
* 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 (Virsliga).
Teams vs league
| BFC Daugavpils | Liga | Liepāja | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | ▲ 4.00 | 2.56 | ▼ 1.67 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 67% | 63% | ▼ 33% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 67% | 50% | ▼ 33% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 0% | 19% | ▲ 33% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 67% | 81% | ▼ 67% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 100% | 88% | ▼ 67% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Lineups and player events
Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.
Home team
Starting lineup
Away team
Starting lineup
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
Head-to-head
Record from BFC Daugavpils's perspective: 1 win, 1 draw and 2 losses against Liepāja. Games average 3.50 goals, and both teams scored in 100% of them.
FAQ
What was the result of BFC Daugavpils vs Liepāja?
The Virsliga match finished BFC Daugavpils 2:0 Liepāja. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between BFC Daugavpils and Liepāja?
In the last 4 head-to-head matches BFC Daugavpils won 1, Liepāja won 2 and 1 ended level. These games averaged 3.50 goals, with both teams scoring in 100% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before BFC Daugavpils vs Liepāja?
BFC Daugavpils score 1.00 goals per game on average and Liepāja 1.00. The Virsliga average is 2.56 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 50% of games. Both teams score in 67% of BFC Daugavpils's matches and 33% of Liepāja's.
What form are BFC Daugavpils and Liepāja in?
Over the last 5 games BFC Daugavpils have a 0-0-3 record (0.00 points per game) and Liepāja 2-0-1 (2.00 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for BFC Daugavpils vs Liepāja?
The statistical background for BFC Daugavpils vs Liepāja — 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.