Hungerford Town vs Uxbridge: match statistics
Statistical analysis indicates very even chances for both teams. Hungerford Town displays weaker form with a 9-9-15 record and a negative goal difference (-8) at home, where they win only 31% of matches. Uxbridge has better scoring efficiency in away matches (1.31 goals per game vs 1.19 for the hosts), but a high percentage of draws (44%) and a similar average xG result (1.06 vs 1.7 for the hosts) suggest difficulties in breaking down rival defenses. The visitors' recent form is better (2.4 PPG vs 1.4 for the hosts), but Uxbridge's away history shows a tendency to draw. Taking all factors into account, I expect a tight, competitive encounter with a slight advantage for the hosts due to playing in front of their home crowd, but a draw appears to be the most likely result.
Hungerford Town vs Uxbridge: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
Hungerford Town played against Uxbridge in Southern League Premier South (England). The game was played on March 7, 2026. Final score: 0:4.
Recent form
Hungerford Town has 2 wins, 1 draw and 2 losses over its last five games, averaging 1.40 points per game. Uxbridge has 4 wins, 0 draws and 1 loss, with 2.40 points per game.
Scoring records
Hungerford Town scores 1.33 goals per game and allows 1.97. Uxbridge scores 1.61 and allows 1.67. Games in this league average 3.18 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 73% of Hungerford Town's games and 67% of Uxbridge's. The Over 2.5 rates are 67% and 70%, compared with league averages of 61% for BTTS and 61% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
Hungerford Town has the higher season xG average, 1.44 to 1.35 per game. Hungerford Town takes 3.3 shots per game, while Uxbridge takes 3.8.
First-half and second-half trends
Hungerford Town leads at halftime in 12% of its games and scores 0.94 goals per game after halftime. Uxbridge leads at halftime in 42% and scores 0.85 after halftime.
When the teams score
Hungerford Town's most productive scoring window is minutes 46-60 (13 goals). For Uxbridge, it is minutes 61-75 (13 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
Southern League Premier South games average 3.18 goals. Both teams score in 61% of games, and 61% finish with at least three goals.
Head-to-head record
Before this game, one previous meeting was available. The record was 0 home wins, 0 draws and 1 away win. Those games averaged 4.00 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
Statistical analysis indicates very even chances for both teams. Hungerford Town displays weaker form with a 9-9-15 record and a negative goal difference (-8) at home, where they win only 31% of matches. Uxbridge has better scoring efficiency in away matches (1.31 goals per game vs 1.19 for the hosts), but a high percentage of draws (44%) and a similar average xG result (1.06 vs 1.7 for the hosts) suggest difficulties in breaking down rival defenses. The visitors' recent form is better (2.4 PPG vs 1.4 for the hosts), but Uxbridge's away history shows a tendency to draw. Taking all factors into account, I expect a tight, competitive encounter with a slight advantage for the hosts due to playing in front of their home crowd, but a draw appears to be the most likely result.
View the statistical overviewStats 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
| Hungerford Town | Uxbridge | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 37% | 43% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.44 | 0.35 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 1.10 | 0.98 |
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.
Uxbridge is 71% better for: last-5 form.
1.4 pts / game - Hungerford Town · 2.4 pts / game - Uxbridge
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.
Uxbridge is 21% better for: goals scored per game.
1.33 goals / game - Hungerford Town · 1.61 goals / game - Uxbridge
Uxbridge is 18% better for: goals allowed per game.
1.97 goals / game - Hungerford Town · 1.67 goals / game - Uxbridge
Hungerford Town scores in 79% of games (26 of 33 meczów), while Uxbridge keeps a clean sheet in 18% (6 of 33 meczów).
Uxbridge scores in 79% of games (26 of 33 meczów), while Hungerford Town keeps a clean sheet in 18% (6 of 33 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 - Hungerford Town
Over / Under - Uxbridge
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.
Uxbridge is 108% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
0.79 pts / game - Hungerford Town · 1.64 pts / game - Uxbridge
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Hungerford Town - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 12% of games and wins 27%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Allows 0.3 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.
Uxbridge - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 42% of games and wins 36%. Usually protects a halftime lead through the final whistle.
Allows 0.5 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.00 | 1.40 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 1.0 | 1.8 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 40% |
| No goal | 60% | 20% |
| Goal difference | -1 | +1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 2.40 | 1.60 |
| Goals scored / game | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.4 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 1.6 | 2.0 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 40% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 60% |
| No goal | 20% | 40% |
| Goal difference | +4 | +2 |
* 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 (13 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (19). Late-goal balance (76-90): -8 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 61-75 (13 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (18). Late-goal balance (76-90): -9 - late phases are a weakness.
* 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
Hungerford Town
Uxbridge
* 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 (Southern League Premier South).
Teams vs league
| Hungerford Town | Liga | Uxbridge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | ▲ 3.30 | 3.18 | • 3.27 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 73% | 61% | ▲ 67% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 67% | 61% | ▲ 70% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 18% | 21% | ▼ 18% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 70% | 76% | ▼ 73% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 85% | 83% | • 82% |
^ 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
Away team
Other recorded players
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
- UxbridgeGoalCJ Fearn
Head-to-head
Record from Hungerford Town's perspective: 0 wins, 0 draws and 1 loss against Uxbridge. Games average 4.00 goals, and both teams scored in 100% of them.
FAQ
What was the result of Hungerford Town vs Uxbridge?
The Southern League Premier South match finished Hungerford Town 0:4 Uxbridge. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Hungerford Town vs Uxbridge?
Hungerford Town score 1.33 goals per game on average and Uxbridge 1.61. The Southern League Premier South average is 3.18 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 61% of games. Both teams score in 73% of Hungerford Town's matches and 67% of Uxbridge's.
What form are Hungerford Town and Uxbridge in?
Over the last 5 games Hungerford Town have a 2-1-2 record (1.40 points per game) and Uxbridge 4-0-1 (2.40 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Hungerford Town vs Uxbridge?
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.