Metaloglobus vs Concordia Chiajna: match statistics
Metaloglobus vs Concordia Chiajna: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
Metaloglobus played against Concordia Chiajna in Liga II (Romania). The game was played on August 29, 2026. Venue: Stadionul Valentin Stănescu. Final score: 1:3.
Recent form
Metaloglobus has 2 wins, 1 draw and 1 loss over its last five games, averaging 1.75 points per game. Concordia Chiajna has 3 wins, 0 draws and 1 loss, with 2.25 points per game.
Scoring records
Metaloglobus scores 1.50 goals per game and allows 1.25. Concordia Chiajna scores 2.00 and allows 1.75. Games in this league average 2.68 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 75% of Metaloglobus's games and 75% of Concordia Chiajna's. The Over 2.5 rates are 75% and 75%, compared with league averages of 59% for BTTS and 52% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
Metaloglobus has the higher season xG average, 1.65 to 1.42 per game. Metaloglobus takes 13.3 shots per game, while Concordia Chiajna takes 11.3.
First-half and second-half trends
Metaloglobus leads at halftime in 25% of its games and scores 1.25 goals per game after halftime. Concordia Chiajna leads at halftime in 25% and scores 1.25 after halftime.
When the teams score
Metaloglobus's most productive scoring window is minutes 76-90+ (3 goals). For Concordia Chiajna, it is minutes 76-90+ (4 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
Liga II games average 2.68 goals. Both teams score in 59% of games, and 52% finish with at least three goals.
Head-to-head record
There is not enough head-to-head history for a meaningful comparison.
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
Concordia Chiajna sit 4th, while Metaloglobus are 13th, and the visitors have won 3 of their 4 league meetings so far. Their current form is clearly superior: they have won 4 of their last 5 matches and scored 14 goals in the process, compared with Metaloglobus’ 2 wins and 6 goals. Away from home, Concordia average 2.5 goals per match, have not lost any fixture and have scored in every game, whereas the hosts have failed to score in 50% of their home matches. Metaloglobus have a better defensive record at home, conceding an average of 0.5 goals, but allow opponents an xG of 1.68—higher than Concordia’s average away xG of 1.32. The hosts generate a slightly higher xG, 1.55 compared with 1.32, but the visitors’ 24% conversion rate versus Metaloglobus’ 13% supports an away win.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
The BTTS signal is clearly positive, as both teams scored in 100% of Concordia Chiajna’s matches this season and in 50% of Metaloglobus’ matches. Over the last five games, these figures stood at 80% for the visitors and 60% for the home side, both above the league average of 57%. Concordia averaged 2.8 goals scored during this period, while Metaloglobus allowed opponents 1.2 goals, with a high xG against of 2.09. The hosts also have a solid basis for finding the net: they have created an average of 1.66 xG across their last five matches, while Concordia’s defense has allowed opponents 1.45 xG and conceded an average of 1.6 goals. The BTTS - Yes pick is further strengthened by the fact that neither team has finished a league match without scoring, although Metaloglobus’ 50% clean-sheet rate slightly reduces confidence in the prediction. BTTS - No means that at least one team fails to score; it does not automatically mean a 0:0 draw or that neither team will score.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Concordia Chiajna averaged 2.8 goals over their last five matches, while Metaloglobus allowed opponents an xG of 2.09 over the same period. The hosts also have a strong basis for scoring: their average xG across the last five games stands at 1.66, while Concordia conceded an average of 1.6 goals per match. The 1.5 line has been surpassed in 100% of both teams’ matches so far, while Over 2.5 goals landed in 60% and 80% of their respective last five fixtures. In addition, both teams have scored in every match this season, while Concordia have kept no clean sheets. A projected total of 3.30 goals points to a clear edge for Over 1.5, which remains the safest choice despite the limited season sample size.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
Concordia Chiajna has very strong grounds to take the lead before half-time: they average 1.5 goals in the first halves, while Metaloglobus have yet to score in this period and concede an average of 1.5 goals. The visitors have won 100% of their league matches so far, scoring an average of 2.5 goals per game, while the hosts concede as many as 2.5 goals per match. Recent form also favors Concordia, who have won 4 of their last 5 matches and scored an average of 2.8 goals in them, compared with 1.2 for Metaloglobus. After the break, the visitors average 2.2 goals across their last five matches, and their second-half goal difference stands at +8, further supporting the scenario of maintaining the lead until the final whistle. Metaloglobus register more shots on target, 6.0 compared with 3.5, but their considerably lower conversion rate, 13% versus 24%, limits the significance of this factor.
View first-half and second-half statisticsStats 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
| Metaloglobus | Concordia Chiajna | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 47% | 42% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.13 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.24 | 0.42 |
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.
Concordia Chiajna is 29% better for: last-5 form.
1.75 pts / game - Metaloglobus · 2.25 pts / game - Concordia Chiajna
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.
Concordia Chiajna is 33% better for: goals scored per game.
1.5 goals / game - Metaloglobus · 2 goals / game - Concordia Chiajna
Metaloglobus is 40% better for: goals allowed per game.
1.25 goals / game - Metaloglobus · 1.75 goals / game - Concordia Chiajna
Metaloglobus scores in 75% of games (3 of 4 meczów), while Concordia Chiajna keeps a clean sheet in 25% (1 of 4 meczów).
Concordia Chiajna scores in 100% of games (4 of 4 meczów), while Metaloglobus keeps a clean sheet in 25% (1 of 4 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 - Metaloglobus
Over / Under - Concordia Chiajna
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.
Concordia Chiajna is 25% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1 pts / game - Metaloglobus · 1.25 pts / game - Concordia Chiajna
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Metaloglobus - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 25% of games and wins 50%. 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.
Concordia Chiajna - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 25% of games and wins 75%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.00 | 1.75 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.3 | 1.3 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.5 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 0.8 | 2.0 |
| 1 goal | 75% | 75% |
| 2 goals | 0% | 75% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 50% |
| Clean sheet | 50% | 50% |
| No goal | 75% | 25% |
| Goal difference | -1 | +2 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.25 | 1.75 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.8 | 1.3 |
| Goals allowed / game | 1.0 | 0.8 |
| Average goals per game | 1.8 | 2.0 |
| 1 goal | 75% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 75% | 75% |
| 3 goals | 25% | 25% |
| Clean sheet | 50% | 50% |
| No goal | 50% | 0% |
| Goal difference | -1 | +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 76-90 (3 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (1). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (4 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (2). Late-goal balance (76-90): +3 - 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 from completed games this season.
Game profile
Metaloglobus
Concordia Chiajna
* 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 (Liga II).
Teams vs league
| Metaloglobus | Liga | Concordia Chiajna | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | • 2.75 | 2.68 | ▲ 3.75 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 75% | 59% | ▲ 75% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 75% | 52% | ▲ 75% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 25% | 23% | ▲ 25% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 75% | 77% | ▼ 75% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 75% | 82% | ▲ 100% |
^ 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
Other recorded players
Away team
Other recorded players
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
- Concordia ChiajnaGoalDin Sula
- Concordia ChiajnaGoalSergio Carrasco González
- MetaloglobusGoalNicolas Constantinescu
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
FAQ
What was the result of Metaloglobus vs Concordia Chiajna?
The Liga II match finished Metaloglobus 1:3 Concordia Chiajna. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Metaloglobus vs Concordia Chiajna?
Metaloglobus score 1.50 goals per game on average and Concordia Chiajna 2.00. The Liga II average is 2.68 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 52% of games. Both teams score in 75% of Metaloglobus's matches and 75% of Concordia Chiajna's.
What form are Metaloglobus and Concordia Chiajna in?
Over the last 5 games Metaloglobus have a 2-1-1 record (1.75 points per game) and Concordia Chiajna 3-0-1 (2.25 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Metaloglobus vs Concordia Chiajna?
The statistical background for Metaloglobus vs Concordia Chiajna — 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.


