Pars Jam Bushehr vs Saipa: match statistics
Pars Jam Bushehr vs Saipa: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
Pars Jam Bushehr played against Saipa in Azadegan League (Iran). The game was played on June 15, 2026. Venue: Shahid Dastgerdi Stadium. Final score: 0:0.
Recent form
Pars Jam Bushehr has 2 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss over its last five games, averaging 1.60 points per game. Saipa has 2 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss, with 1.60 points per game.
Scoring records
Pars Jam Bushehr scores 1.14 goals per game and allows 0.71. Saipa scores 0.86 and allows 0.57. Games in this league average 1.51 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 39% of Pars Jam Bushehr's games and 29% of Saipa's. The Over 2.5 rates are 29% and 29%, compared with league averages of 30% for BTTS and 21% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
Saipa has the higher season xG average, 1.21 to 0.90 per game. Pars Jam Bushehr takes 0.6 shots per game, while Saipa takes 4.5.
First-half and second-half trends
Pars Jam Bushehr leads at halftime in 39% of its games and scores 0.54 goals per game after halftime. Saipa leads at halftime in 29% and scores 0.43 after halftime.
When the teams score
Pars Jam Bushehr's most productive scoring window is minutes 16-30 (8 goals). For Saipa, it is minutes 0-15 (5 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
Azadegan League games average 1.51 goals. Both teams score in 30% of games, and 21% finish with at least three goals.
Head-to-head record
Before this game, one previous meeting was available. The record was 0 home wins, 1 draw and 0 away wins. 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
I back the home win because Pars Jam has a superior goal output this season: 32 goals scored versus Saipa’s 24, and at home they average 1.07 goals per game compared to Saipa’s 0.79 on the road. Pars Jam’s defense is also solid — they concede 0.64 goals on average at home and have kept a clean sheet in 57% of matches, while Saipa concede 0.71 on the road and likewise have 57% clean sheets, indicating comparable defensive stability. The last 5 fixtures confirm similar form: both teams scored 4 goals in their last 5 matches and have identical records of 2 wins, 2 draws and 1 loss, yielding 1.6 points per game in that period. Saipa, however, creates more chances away (average xG 1.30, 9.4 shots per game and 4.4 shots on target), but a low conversion rate around 6% means this only translates to 0.79 goals per game. Considering Pars Jam’s better season goal balance (32 vs 24) and their home efficiency advantage plus superior home goal difference (+6 vs Saipa’s +1 on the road), I give a slight edge to the hosts.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
Both teams have identical, low seasonal BTTS rates of 29% (Pars Jam 29% and Saipa 29%), while the league BTTS rate is only 28% with an average goals per game of 1.51, which provides a weak basis for expecting Goal/Goal. The home side has BTTS 0% in the last 5 matches and conceded a total of 1 goal in that period (0.2 goals per game), and seasonally they keep a clean sheet in 71% of appearances, significantly reducing the likelihood of them conceding. The away team generates an xG of 1.30 per game seasonally and have scored 24 goals, but in the last 5 matches their xG dropped to just 0.08 per game, indicating a sudden decline in chance creation despite 4 goals scored in that span. Additionally, seasonal goal averages are 0.93 scored and 0.43 conceded for the home team and 0.79 scored and 0.71 conceded for the visitors, and clean sheet rates of 71% and 57% support the scenario that at least one team will keep a clean sheet. Based on this I assess BTTS probability at around 15% versus 85% for No Goal, therefore I recommend selecting 'no'.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Seasonal stats and xG point to low goal potential: Pars Jam has an attacking xG of 1.17, Saipa’s defense concedes xG 1.04 — on average (1.17+1.04)/2 ≈ 1.11 expected goals for the home side; similarly Saipa has xG 1.30 while Pars Jam’s defense concedes 0.79, giving ≈1.05 for the away side, totaling ≈2.16 goals. Historical distributions confirm this low tempo: only 36% of each team’s matches finish over 1.5 goals, 29% over 2.5, and just 7% over 3.5. Additionally Pars Jam records 71% clean sheets this season, Saipa 57%, and Saipa’s shot conversion is only 6% with an average of 4.4 shots on target, which limits final goal tallies. As a result the strongest signal from the data is Under 3.5 (base Over 3.5 rate only 7%), while Under 2.5 also performs well (71% of matches below 2.5). I therefore recommend Under 3.5 as the safest option; expected goals ≈1.11 for the home side and ≈1.05 for the away (total ≈2.16) support this choice.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
The strongest signal is a high number of halftime draws for the home side: Pars Jam were level at the break in 71% of matches (10 of 14) and led at halftime in only 29% (4 of 14), which favors an HT draw. At halftime Pars Jam average 0.57 goals scored and 0.14 conceded, while Saipa average 0.29 scored and 0.21 conceded, so the first half is statistically low-scoring. Over full matches the hosts win 43% and draw 50%, and Pars Jam keep 71% clean sheets this season, therefore an HT draw often holds until full-time or occasionally turns into a home win in the second half. Based on these figures I assign the highest probability to the scenario draw at half and draw at full-time (X/X 43%), with the second option draw at half and home win (X/1 24%), and a smaller probability for the home leading at half and winning (1/1 17%).
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
| Pars Jam Bushehr | Saipa | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 28% | 32% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 1.41 | 0.27 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 6.33 | 0.59 |
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.
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.
Pars Jam Bushehr is 33% better for: goals scored per game.
1.14 goals / game - Pars Jam Bushehr · 0.86 goals / game - Saipa
Saipa is 25% better for: goals allowed per game.
0.71 goals / game - Pars Jam Bushehr · 0.57 goals / game - Saipa
Pars Jam Bushehr scores in 71% of games (20 of 28 meczów), while Saipa keeps a clean sheet in 64% (18 of 28 meczów).
Saipa scores in 64% of games (18 of 28 meczów), while Pars Jam Bushehr keeps a clean sheet in 46% (13 of 28 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 - Pars Jam Bushehr
Over / Under - Saipa
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.
Pars Jam Bushehr is 10% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.61 pts / game - Pars Jam Bushehr · 1.46 pts / game - Saipa
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Pars Jam Bushehr - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 39% of games and wins 43%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
Saipa - second-half results
Leads at halftime in 29% of games and wins 43%. Also wins some games without leading at halftime.
Allows 0.2 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.60 | 1.40 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.6 | 0.2 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.2 | 0.0 |
| Average goals per game | 0.8 | 0.2 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 20% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 0% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 100% |
| No goal | 60% | 80% |
| Goal difference | +2 | +1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 1.20 | 1.40 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.2 | 0.6 |
| Goals allowed / game | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Average goals per game | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| 1 goal | 40% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 0% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 60% |
| No goal | 80% | 40% |
| Goal difference | 0 | +1 |
* 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 16-30 (8 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (4). Late-goal balance (76-90): +1 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 0-15 (5 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - 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
Pars Jam Bushehr
Saipa
* 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 (Azadegan League).
Teams vs league
| Pars Jam Bushehr | Liga | Saipa | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | ▲ 1.86 | 1.51 | • 1.43 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 39% | 30% | • 29% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 29% | 21% | ▲ 29% |
| Clean sheets | • 46% | 47% | ▲ 64% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 64% | 45% | • 46% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 57% | 54% | ▲ 57% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
Head-to-head
Record from Pars Jam Bushehr's perspective: 0 wins, 1 draw and 0 losses against Saipa. Games average 4.00 goals, and both teams scored in 100% of them.
FAQ
What was the result of Pars Jam Bushehr vs Saipa?
The Azadegan League match finished Pars Jam Bushehr 0:0 Saipa. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before Pars Jam Bushehr vs Saipa?
Pars Jam Bushehr score 1.14 goals per game on average and Saipa 0.86. The Azadegan League average is 1.51 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 21% of games. Both teams score in 39% of Pars Jam Bushehr's matches and 29% of Saipa's.
What form are Pars Jam Bushehr and Saipa in?
Over the last 5 games Pars Jam Bushehr have a 2-2-1 record (1.60 points per game) and Saipa 2-2-1 (1.60 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Pars Jam Bushehr vs Saipa?
Here you can check the pre-match numbers for Pars Jam Bushehr vs Saipa: form, H2H, goals and Over/Under. The pick itself, value and reasoning are published in the NoFluffPicks app.