El Geish vs Pharco: match statistics

El Geish holds a clear statistical edge at home: they average 0.86 goals per match with 3.36 shots on target and 52% possession, while Pharco away posts 0.47 goals, 2.47 shots on target and 41% possession. The difference in chance quality is confirmed by xG — hosts have 1.35 xG at home versus 1.05 xG for visitors on the road, and shot conversion rate is 7% compared to 5% for Pharco. Defensively El Geish concedes 0.86 goals at home on average and records clean sheets in 43% of matches, whereas Pharco concedes 1.27 goals away and has only 20% clean sheets. In form over the last 5 matches the hosts have 1.0 point per match (1 win, 2 draws, 2 losses) and have scored 2 goals, while Pharco has 0.4 points per match (0 wins, 2 draws, 3 losses) and scored 1 goal. Considering Pharco’s poor away efficiency (60% of away matches without a goal) and El Geish’s superior offensive and defensive metrics, I back the home win with a 60% probability.

Seasonal BTTS rates are low: 27% for El Geish and 33% for Pharco, and in the last 5 matches both teams have only 20% BTTS, which strongly argues against a both-teams-to-score scenario. Both sides score very little — averaging 0.4 (El Geish) and 0.47 (Pharco) goals per game; on the season El Geish scored 19 goals, Pharco 13, conceding 30 and 32 respectively. xG shows moderate potential (1.22 for El Geish vs 1.05 for Pharco), but low conversion rates of 4% and 5% and average shots on target of 3.27 and 2.47 mean these xG rarely translate into goals; additionally xG against is 1.4 and 1.52. Seasonal clean sheet percentages are 33% and 20%, and the league average goals is 1.99 per match, so the environment is low-scoring and favors No BTTS. Based on this I assign 80% to No BTTS and 20% to BTTS, marking the "no" selection as the strongest signal from the data.

El Geish scores on average 0.40 goals per match this season and Pharco 0.47, while their xG are 1.22 and 1.05 respectively — this indicates both teams create chances but finish poorly. Shot conversion is only 4% for El Geish and 5% for Pharco, which explains the gap between xG and actual goals; I assume partial regression to xG and project 0.80 goals for the home side and 0.60 for the visitors (total 1.40). Season percentages of matches over 2.5 goals are low: 7% for the home team and 13% for the away team, and over 3.5 practically do not occur (0% vs 13%). Based on the expected 1.40 goals and very low historical probability of over 2.5, the best and strongest signal is the under at the 2.5 line. I assess the probability of over 1.5 at about 45% and over 2.5 at about 13%, therefore I recommend under 2.5 as the most likely choice.

First-half statistics strongly indicate a draw at the break: both teams have a drawingAtHTPercentage of 53%, and first-half goal averages are only 0.2 for El Geish and 0.13 for Pharco with seasonCSPercentageHT_home at 73%, which favors 0-0/a draw in the first half. At full-time a draw is also most likely — the average draw percentage FT is (47% for the home side + 40% for the away)/2 = 43.5%, therefore I assess the X/X scenario at 32% (0.53*~60% probability of maintaining the draw). The second most probable outcome is 1/1 (21%): hosts led at half-time in 20% of matches, and I assumed averaged chances of holding such a lead at ~70% (0.30*0.70≈21%). Options converting an HT draw into a win (X/1 11%, X/2 10%) stem from the assumed conversion of an HT draw into a home win of ~21% and into an away win of ~19%, and from the fact that in the second half they score on average 0.8 (home) and 1.0 (away) goals, which gives moderate chances of a turnaround; the quickest leader reversals are least likely (1/2=2%, 2/1=1%).