FS Jelgava vs Riga: match statistics
FS Jelgava vs Riga: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
FS Jelgava play Riga in Virsliga (Latvia). The match date is 4 April 2026 at 15:00. Final score: 0:8.
Current form
FS Jelgava: 3-0-2, 1.80 points/match. Riga: 4-1-0, 2.60 points/match.
Goal statistics
FS Jelgava scores 1.04 and concedes 1.70 goals per match. Riga scores 2.96 and concedes 0.87. League average: 2.98 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: FS Jelgava 43%, Riga 57%. Over 2.5: FS Jelgava 39%, Riga 83%. League level: BTTS 56%, Over 2.5 55%.
xG, shots and style
Riga has higher xG: 2.03 vs 1.30. FS Jelgava: 10.6 shots per match, Riga: 17.1.
Match halves
FS Jelgava: half-time lead 39%, second-half goals 0.43. Riga: half-time lead 70%, second-half goals 1.43.
Goals by minute
FS Jelgava: 16-30 (5 goals). Riga: 31-45+ (16 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Virsliga: 2.98 goals per match, BTTS 56%, Over 2.5 55%.
Head-to-head
6 H2H matches: 0-2-4. Average goals 3.17, BTTS 50%.
Match description
Riga is the favorite in this fixture: the visitors average 1.5 goals away with xG of 1.64, while Jelgava score 1.0 goals at home with xG 1.45. The difference in chance creation is evident — Riga average 13.5 shots per game, 5.0 on target, with an 11% conversion rate, whereas the hosts average 11 shots with 3.5 on target and a 9% conversion. A key signal is that Riga have not yet had an away match without scoring (0% scoreless games), while Jelgava have failed to score in 50% of their home matches. Defensively the hosts concede 1.0 goals at home versus 1.5 conceded by Riga away, but neither side have clean sheets (0% clean sheets), indicating an open, goal-prone game. Considering Riga’s 11 goals in the last 5 matches compared to Jelgava’s 6, and the visitors’ slightly better points-per-game over the last 5 (1.4 vs 1.2), I predict an away win.
Half-by-half
Match statistics
Pre-match profile— what do the season numbers say?
This is a team profile based on season data and form. Match-flow statistics are shown only after the fixture is played.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Attack and defence comparison for both teams in the current season.
Shooting quality
| FS Jelgava | Riga | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 33% | 38% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.30 | 0.46 |
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 matches and season record, overall and split by home and away matches.
Riga is 44% better for: last-5 form.
1.8 pts / match - FS Jelgava · 2.6 pts / match - Riga
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.
Riga is 185% better for: goals scored per match.
1.04 goals / match - FS Jelgava · 2.96 goals / match - Riga
Riga is 95% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.7 goals / match - FS Jelgava · 0.87 goals / match - Riga
FS Jelgava scores in 57% of matches (13 of 23 matches), while Riga keeps a clean sheet in 43% (10 of 23 matches).
Riga scores in 96% of matches (22 of 23 matches), while FS Jelgava keeps a clean sheet in 17% (4 of 23 matches).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* Statistics include both teams' home and away matches in the current season.
Both teams scored (BTTS)— how often do both teams score?
How often both teams' matches have goals on both sides, compared with the league average.
Goal patterns
BTTS and goal count
Goal count (Over/Under)— how often do these matches cross the goal lines?
How often matches involving these teams clear goal thresholds, in the full match and in each half.
Full match - team comparison (Over)
Over / Under — FS Jelgava
Over / Under — Riga
1st half
2nd half
Match 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.
Riga is 55% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.43 pts / match - FS Jelgava · 2.22 pts / match - Riga
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
FS Jelgava - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 39% of matches and wins 26%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Concedes 0.5 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
Riga - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 70% of matches and wins 78%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.80 | 2.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.0 | 1.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| Average goals in match | 1.6 | 1.8 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 60% |
| No goal | 40% | 40% |
| Goal difference | +2 | +3 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.00 | 2.20 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.2 | 0.0 |
| Average goals in match | 1.4 | 1.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 100% |
| No goal | 40% | 40% |
| Goal difference | +5 | +6 |
* Colours in tables show event frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate, red is rare. It is frequency, not a team rating.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
Match phases in which both teams most often score and concede.
Most dangerous in minutes 16-30 (5 goli). Concedes most in 76-90 (13). Late-goal balance (76-90): -9 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (16 goli). Concedes most in 0-15 (4). Late-goal balance (76-90): +14 - 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 based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
FS Jelgava
Riga
* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range are calculated from public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical match profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed matches from the season.
League context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (Virsliga).
Teams vs league
| FS Jelgava | Liga | Riga | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▼ 2.74 | 2.98 | ▲ 3.83 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 43% | 56% | • 57% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 39% | 55% | ▲ 83% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 17% | 24% | ▲ 43% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 78% | 75% | ▲ 91% |
| Goal after half-time | • 83% | 84% | • 83% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Head-to-head
Recent meetings (6): FS Jelgava 0 - 2 - 4 Riga. Average goals 3.17, both teams scored in 50% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of FS Jelgava vs Riga?
The Virsliga match finished FS Jelgava 0:8 Riga. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between FS Jelgava and Riga?
In the last 6 head-to-head matches FS Jelgava won 0, Riga won 4 and 2 ended level. These games averaged 3.17 goals, with both teams scoring in 50% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before FS Jelgava vs Riga?
FS Jelgava score 1.04 goals per game on average and Riga 2.96. The Virsliga average is 2.98 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 55% of games. Both teams score in 43% of FS Jelgava's matches and 57% of Riga's.
What form are FS Jelgava and Riga in?
Over the last 5 games FS Jelgava have a 3-0-2 record (1.80 points per game) and Riga 4-1-0 (2.60 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for FS Jelgava vs Riga?
This page shows the full statistical context — form, head-to-head, goals, BTTS and Over/Under. The tip, value assessment and full reasoning are in the NoFluffPicks app.