Gillingham vs Cambridge United: match statistics
Gillingham vs Cambridge United: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
Gillingham played against Cambridge United in EFL League Two (England). The game was played on December 26, 2025. Final score: 1:1.
Recent form
Gillingham has 0 wins, 4 draws and 1 loss over its last five games, averaging 0.80 points per game. Cambridge United has 3 wins, 2 draws and 0 losses, with 2.20 points per game.
Scoring records
Gillingham scores 1.38 goals per game and allows 1.14. Cambridge United scores 1.14 and allows 0.86. Games in this league average 2.69 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 62% of Gillingham's games and 48% of Cambridge United's. The Over 2.5 rates are 43% and 29%, compared with league averages of 57% for BTTS and 49% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
Gillingham has the higher season xG average, 1.44 to 1.37 per game. Gillingham takes 12.6 shots per game, while Cambridge United takes 11.5.
First-half and second-half trends
Gillingham leads at halftime in 24% of its games and scores 0.86 goals per game after halftime. Cambridge United leads at halftime in 38% and scores 0.62 after halftime.
When the teams score
Gillingham's most productive scoring window is minutes 76-90+ (9 goals). For Cambridge United, it is minutes 31-45+ (6 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
League Two games average 2.69 goals. Both teams score in 57% of games, and 49% finish with at least three goals.
Head-to-head record
There is not enough head-to-head history for a meaningful comparison.
Stats 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
| Gillingham | Cambridge United | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 32% | 30% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.11 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.34 | 0.33 |
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.
Cambridge United is 175% better for: last-5 form.
0.8 pts / game - Gillingham · 2.2 pts / game - Cambridge United
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.
Gillingham is 21% better for: goals scored per game.
1.38 goals / game - Gillingham · 1.14 goals / game - Cambridge United
Cambridge United is 33% better for: goals allowed per game.
1.14 goals / game - Gillingham · 0.86 goals / game - Cambridge United
Gillingham scores in 86% of games (18 of 21 meczów), while Cambridge United keeps a clean sheet in 33% (7 of 21 meczów).
Cambridge United scores in 67% of games (14 of 21 meczów), while Gillingham keeps a clean sheet in 29% (6 of 21 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 - Gillingham
Over / Under - Cambridge United
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.
Cambridge United is 23% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.24 pts / game - Gillingham · 1.52 pts / game - Cambridge United
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Gillingham - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 24% of games and wins 33%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
Cambridge United - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 38% of games and wins 43%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.60 | 1.00 |
| Goals scored / game | 1.0 | 0.4 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 1.8 | 1.2 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 60% |
| No goal | 20% | 80% |
| Goal difference | +1 | -2 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.60 | 2.40 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.4 | 1.2 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Average goals per game | 0.6 | 1.6 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 0% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 60% |
| No goal | 60% | 20% |
| Goal difference | +1 | +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.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (9 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): +5 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (6 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (5). 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
Gillingham
Cambridge United
* 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 (League Two).
Teams vs league
| Gillingham | Liga | Cambridge United | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | ▼ 2.52 | 2.69 | ▼ 2.00 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 62% | 57% | ▼ 48% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 43% | 49% | ▼ 29% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 29% | 24% | ▲ 33% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 52% | 71% | ▼ 62% |
| Goal after half-time | • 76% | 77% | ▼ 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.
Referee context
See how often this referee shows cards, awards penalties and how their matches tend to finish.
FAQ
What was the result of Gillingham vs Cambridge United?
The EFL League Two match finished Gillingham 1:1 Cambridge United. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Gillingham vs Cambridge United?
Gillingham score 1.38 goals per game on average and Cambridge United 1.14. The EFL League Two average is 2.69 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 49% of games. Both teams score in 62% of Gillingham's matches and 48% of Cambridge United's.
What form are Gillingham and Cambridge United in?
Over the last 5 games Gillingham have a 0-4-1 record (0.80 points per game) and Cambridge United 3-2-0 (2.20 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Gillingham vs Cambridge United?
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.