Romania - Liga IIStadionul Valentin StănescuData current as of August 30, 2026

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 overview
BTTS - 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 statistics
Over/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 statistics
HT/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 statistics

Stats by half

0 : 1
First half
1 : 2
Second half

Game stats

51Possession (%)49
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
8Shots12
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
4Shots on target6
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
1.16xG1.54
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
1Corners2
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
51Dangerous attacks49
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
15Fouls25
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0Cards0
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

Pre-game profilewhat do the season numbers say?

This team profile combines season stats and recent form. In-game statistics appear after the final whistle.

MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
1.5Goals scored / game2
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
1.25Goals allowed / game1.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
50%Average possession50%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
6.25Shots on target / game4.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

Team statswho is more efficient?

Compare both teams' attacking and defensive records this season.

13.25Shots per game11.25
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
6.25Shots on target4.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
11.3%Shot conversion17.8%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
50%Possession50%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
1.65xG for1.42
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
2.05xG against1.66
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

Shooting quality

Metaloglobus: BalancedConcordia Chiajna: Efficient finishing
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
Accuracy (shots on target)47%42%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.120.13
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.240.42

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 formwho 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

Metaloglobus
DLWW
Season result split
50% W25% R25% P
Season (W-D-L)
2-1-1
1.75 pts / game · goal difference +1
Last 5 (W-D-L)
2-1-1
1.75 pts / game
Record at home (W-D-L)
1-1-0
Last 5 at home
1-1-0
DW
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 1.5Goals conceded: 1.3xG: 1.65Opponent xG: 2.05BTTS: 75%Over 2.5: 75%
Concordia Chiajna
WWWL
Season result split
75% W0% R25% P
Season (W-D-L)
3-0-1
2.25 pts / game · goal difference +1
Last 5 (W-D-L)
3-0-1
2.25 pts / game
Record away (W-D-L)
2-0-0
Last 5 away
2-0-0
WW
Last 5 games - averages
Goals scored: 2.0Goals conceded: 1.8xG: 1.42Opponent xG: 1.66BTTS: 75%Over 2.5: 75%

Goalshow 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 scoring profile: very strong

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 scoring profile: very strong

Concordia Chiajna scores in 100% of games (4 of 4 meczów), while Metaloglobus keeps a clean sheet in 25% (1 of 4 meczów).

6Goals scored (season)8
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
5Goals conceded (season)7
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
2.75Average goals per game3.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
6Goals scored (last 5)8
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
5Goals conceded (last 5)7
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

How often they score at least...

75%1 goal100%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
50%2 goals75%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
25%3 goals25%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0%4 goals0%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

How often they concede at least...

75%1 goal75%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
25%2 goals25%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
25%3 goals25%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0%4 goals25%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

* 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.

59%
League average

Goal patterns

0%BTTS at half-time25%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0%BTTS in both halves0%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
25%Scored in both halves50%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

BTTS and goal count

75%Min. 3 goals and BTTS75%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0%Min. 3 goals without BTTS0%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
75%BTTS - last 575%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

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.

1st half

75%Min. 1 goal before half-time75%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0%Min. 2 goals before half-time75%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0%Min. 3 goals before half-time25%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

2nd half

75%Min. 1 goal after half-time100%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
75%Min. 2 goals after half-time75%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
50%Min. 3 goals after half-time25%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

Game halveswhen 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

Metaloglobus - half-time state
25% leading25% draw50% trailing
Concordia Chiajna - half-time state
25% leading50% draw25% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

1Points per game (1st half)1.25
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0.25Goals scored (1st half)0.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0.5Goals conceded (1st half)1
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0.75Average goals (1st half)1.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
50%Clean sheet before half-time50%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
75%No goal before half-time50%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

After half-time (2nd half)

1.75Points per game (2nd half)1.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
1.25Goals scored (2nd half)1.25
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
0.75Goals conceded (2nd half)0.75
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
2Average goals (2nd half)2
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
50%Clean sheet after half-time50%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna
25%No goal after half-time0%
MetaloglobusConcordia Chiajna

Metaloglobus - second-half results

50% W25% R25% P
4
Half-time points
1
Half-time goals
-1
Goal difference (1st half)
7
Second-half points
+2
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.00
PPG before half-time
Lead holding200%

Leads at halftime in 25% of games and wins 50%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime+0.3

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

50% W25% R25% P
5
Half-time points
3
Half-time goals
-1
Goal difference (1st half)
7
Second-half points
+2
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.25
PPG before half-time
Lead holding300%

Leads at halftime in 25% of games and wins 75%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.

Defense after halftime-0.3

Defense stays consistent across the full game.

Metaloglobus - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.001.75
Goals scored / game0.31.3
Goals allowed / game0.50.8
Average goals per game0.82.0
1 goal75%75%
2 goals0%75%
3 goals0%50%
Clean sheet50%50%
No goal75%25%
Goal difference-1+2
Half-time: 25% leading - 25% draw - 50% trailing
2nd half: 50% won - 25% draw - 25% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 1
Concordia Chiajna - last 5 games by half
1st half2nd half
Points per game1.251.75
Goals scored / game0.81.3
Goals allowed / game1.00.8
Average goals per game1.82.0
1 goal75%100%
2 goals75%75%
3 goals25%25%
Clean sheet50%50%
No goal50%0%
Goal difference-1+2
Half-time: 25% leading - 50% draw - 25% trailing
2nd half: 50% won - 25% draw - 25% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 25% - Half-time goals total: 3

* Table colors show frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate and red is rare. They are not team ratings.

Goals by minutewhen do goals arrive?

The parts of a game in which both teams score and allow the most goals.

Metaloglobus
ScoredConceded
1
1
0-15
0
0
16-30
0
1
31-45
1
1
46-60
1
1
61-75
3
1
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (3 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (1). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - wins late phases.

Concordia Chiajna
ScoredConceded
1
2
0-15
1
2
16-30
1
0
31-45
1
2
46-60
0
0
61-75
4
1
76-90

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 indicatorswhat do xG, efficiency and form show?

A comparison of chance quality, results and trends from completed games this season.

Game profile

3.25
Estimated goals
attack vs. opponent defense
1.6 : 1.6
Estimated goal split
home : away
121%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
75%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
-100%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
75%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
0%
0:0 risk
practically zero
2-3
Most common goal range
attack vs. defense for both teams

Metaloglobus

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.40
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.65
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-0.1 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.15
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
+0.80
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
100%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
106%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+1.0
Late goals
50% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 17% come in the first quarter-hour.
50%

Concordia Chiajna

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.24
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.49
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
+2.2 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
+0.58
Defensive efficiency
Does the defense or goalkeeper outperform the chances allowed? A positive value means the team allows fewer goals than its xGA suggests.
-0.09
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
169%
Defense vs. league
Goals allowed compared with the league average. An 80% score means 20% fewer goals allowed.
117%
Form trend
Compares points from the last five games with the full-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.5
Late goals
50% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 13% come in the first quarter-hour.
50%

* 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 contextis this a high-scoring league?

How both teams compare with league-wide averages (Liga II).

Teams vs league

MetaloglobusLigaConcordia Chiajna
Average goals per game 2.752.68 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.

2.68
Average goals per game
59%
Both teams scored
52%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
23%
Clean sheets
1.50
Home goals / game
1.18
Away goals / game
+27%
Home attack advantage
+21%
Home defensive advantage
+15%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
77%
1 goal
34%
2 goals
11%
3 goals
0%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
82%
1 goal
43%
2 goals
20%
3 goals
0%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.

Home team

Other recorded players

Nicolas Constantinescu⚽ 1

Away team

Other recorded players

Din Sula⚽ 1
Sergio Carrasco González⚽ 1

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. Concordia ChiajnaGoalDin Sula
  2. Concordia ChiajnaGoalSergio Carrasco González
  3. 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.