KMC vs Pamba Jiji: match statistics
KMC vs Pamba Jiji: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
KMC play Pamba Jiji in Ligi kuu Bara (Tanzania). The match date is 20 May 2026 at 17:30. Final score: 0:1.
Current form
KMC: 0-0-5, 0.00 points/match. Pamba Jiji: 1-0-4, 0.60 points/match.
Goal statistics
KMC scores 0.57 and concedes 1.75 goals per match. Pamba Jiji scores 1.07 and concedes 1.17. League average: 2.17 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: KMC 32%, Pamba Jiji 40%. Over 2.5: KMC 39%, Pamba Jiji 50%. League level: BTTS 35%, Over 2.5 39%.
xG, shots and style
Pamba Jiji has higher xG: 1.28 vs 1.21. KMC: 6.6 shots per match, Pamba Jiji: 5.3.
Match halves
KMC: half-time lead 11%, second-half goals 0.29. Pamba Jiji: half-time lead 17%, second-half goals 0.47.
Goals by minute
KMC: 31-45+ (5 goals). Pamba Jiji: 0-15 (7 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Ligi kuu Bara: 2.17 goals per match, BTTS 35%, Over 2.5 39%.
Head-to-head
1 H2H matches: 0-0-1. Average goals 3.00, BTTS 0%.
Match description
Pamba Jiji holds a clear advantage in the standings and seasonal metrics: they sit 8th versus KMC in 16th, have 7 wins this season compared to KMC’s 2, and have scored 22 goals versus the hosts’ 13. In their last 5 matches KMC have scored 6 goals but conceded 10 and failed to win any game (0-1-4), yielding only 0.2 points per match, while Pamba over the same period have 1 win, 1 draw, 3 losses, 3 goals and 0.8 points per match. Although the hosts generate higher home xG (average 1.50 xG at home vs 1.25 xG for the visitors on the road) and produce more shots (9.11 vs 7.33), their finishing is poor — on average 0.56 goals per home match and a 6% conversion rate, whereas Pamba convert at 8% and average 0.67 goals away. KMC’s defence is also more exposed to high-quality chances (average xG against 1.82 at home vs 1.36 against Pamba away) and conceded 10 goals in the last 5 matches, so I favor the away win. Suggested probabilities: 55% Pamba Jiji, 25% draw, 20% KMC upset.
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
| KMC | Pamba Jiji | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 37% | 41% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.18 | 0.24 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.23 | 0.49 |
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.
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.
Pamba Jiji is 88% better for: goals scored per match.
0.57 goals / match - KMC · 1.07 goals / match - Pamba Jiji
Pamba Jiji is 50% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.75 goals / match - KMC · 1.17 goals / match - Pamba Jiji
KMC scores in 39% of matches (11 of 28 matches), while Pamba Jiji keeps a clean sheet in 37% (11 of 30 matches).
Pamba Jiji scores in 63% of matches (19 of 30 matches), while KMC keeps a clean sheet in 11% (3 of 28 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 — KMC
Over / Under — Pamba Jiji
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.
Pamba Jiji is 47% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
0.75 pts / match - KMC · 1.1 pts / match - Pamba Jiji
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
KMC - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 11% of matches and wins 7%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
Pamba Jiji - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 17% of matches and wins 30%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.2 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.20 | 0.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.4 | 0.6 |
| Average goals in match | 1.8 | 0.8 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 20% |
| 3 goals | 40% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 20% | 40% |
| No goal | 60% | 80% |
| Goal difference | -5 | -2 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.00 | 0.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Average goals in match | 1.6 | 1.4 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 20% | 20% |
| No goal | 40% | 60% |
| Goal difference | 0 | -1 |
* 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 31-45 (5 goli). Concedes most in 31-45 (10). Late-goal balance (76-90): -3 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 0-15 (7 goli). Concedes most in 76-90 (9). Late-goal balance (76-90): -5 - 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 based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
KMC
Pamba Jiji
* 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 (Ligi kuu Bara).
Teams vs league
| KMC | Liga | Pamba Jiji | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 2.32 | 2.17 | • 2.23 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 32% | 35% | ▲ 40% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | • 39% | 39% | ▲ 50% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 11% | 39% | ▼ 37% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 68% | 60% | ▼ 57% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 61% | 63% | ▲ 67% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Head-to-head
Previous meeting: KMC 0 - 0 - 1 Pamba Jiji. Average goals 3.00, both teams scored in 0% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of KMC vs Pamba Jiji?
The Ligi kuu Bara match finished KMC 0:1 Pamba Jiji. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before KMC vs Pamba Jiji?
KMC score 0.57 goals per game on average and Pamba Jiji 1.07. The Ligi kuu Bara average is 2.17 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 39% of games. Both teams score in 32% of KMC's matches and 40% of Pamba Jiji's.
What form are KMC and Pamba Jiji in?
Over the last 5 games KMC have a 0-0-5 record (0.00 points per game) and Pamba Jiji 1-0-4 (0.60 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for KMC vs Pamba Jiji?
The statistical background for KMC vs Pamba Jiji — 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.


