Riga FC II vs JDFS Alberts: match statistics
Riga FC II vs JDFS Alberts: form, goals and key statistics
Game details
Riga FC II played against JDFS Alberts in 1. Liga (Latvia). The game was played on April 10, 2026. Final score: 2:1.
Recent form
Riga FC II has 0 wins, 0 draws and 2 losses over its last five games, averaging 0.00 points per game. JDFS Alberts has 0 wins, 0 draws and 1 loss, with 0.00 points per game.
Scoring records
Riga FC II scores 0.50 goals per game and allows 2.50. JDFS Alberts scores 1.00 and allows 2.00. Games in this league average 3.64 goals.
BTTS and goal totals
Both teams score in 50% of Riga FC II's games and 100% of JDFS Alberts's. The Over 2.5 rates are 50% and 100%, compared with league averages of 64% for BTTS and 71% for Over 2.5.
xG and shots
The teams have nearly identical season xG averages at 1.63 per game. Riga FC II takes 12.0 shots per game, while JDFS Alberts takes 10.0.
First-half and second-half trends
Riga FC II leads at halftime in 0% of its games and scores 0.00 goals per game after halftime. JDFS Alberts leads at halftime in 0% and scores 1.00 after halftime.
When the teams score
Riga FC II's most productive scoring window is minutes 0-15 (1 goals). For JDFS Alberts, it is minutes 76-90+ (1 goals). These are past scoring patterns, not predicted goal times.
League scoring profile
1. Liga games average 3.64 goals. Both teams score in 64% of games, and 71% finish with at least three goals.
Head-to-head record
Before this game, 2 previous meetings were available. The record was 0 home wins, 0 draws and 2 away wins. Those games averaged 4.00 goals, with both teams scoring in 50% 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
Riga FC II holds a clear advantage in chance creation: averaging 21 shots and 14 on target per home match versus JDFS’s 10 shots and 6 on target, with average xG of 2.72 for the hosts and 1.62 for the visitors. At the same time the hosts’ defense looks weaker — they concede on average 3 goals per home match with xG against of 2.25, while JDFS allows on average 2 goals and xG against of 0.84. The visitors are more efficient with fewer chances: shot conversion 10% for JDFS versus 5% for Riga, which results in both teams averaging about 1 goal per match despite the xG gap. In the last 5 matches the hosts scored 8 goals with a record of 2 wins and 3 losses (1.2 points per match), and JDFS scored 5 goals with a 2-1-2 record (1.4 points per match). Considering Riga’s superiority in volume and quality of opportunities (21 shots/14 on target, xG 2.72), but also their weaker defense and low efficiency, I predict a narrow home win.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
I back BTTS - Yes (75%) — majority of indicators point to both teams scoring. League-wide BTTS rate is 64%, and the away side has a season BTTS of 100% and a season with over 2.5 goals at 100%, strongly favoring goals at both ends. In the last 5 matches the home team scored 8 and conceded 8 (avg 1.6 scored and 1.6 conceded per match), while the away team scored 5 and conceded 3 (avg 1.0 scored and 0.6 conceded); since seasonal home xG and shots data are 0.0 and may be incomplete, I give greater weight to these last five games. Recent xG values are 2.41 for the home side and 3.41 for the away side (approx 5.82 xG combined), and the away team averages 6.0 shots on target and 10.0 shots per match, confirming offensive potential. The only counter-signal is the away side’s low recent BTTS (20% in the last 5 matches), but combining xG, goals scored and conceded, and the league average of 3.64 goals per match, the stronger signal favors 'yes'.
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
The league average is 3.64 goals per match. In the last 5 games Riga averaged 1.6 goals scored and 1.6 conceded, while JDFS averaged 1.0 scored and 0.6 conceded; this yields a baseline of about 2.6 goals combined. Recent 5-game xG shows high attacking activity: Riga 2.41 xG and JDFS 3.41 xG (total 5.82 xG), despite actual goal averages being lower. JDFS away produce on average 10 shots (6 on target) and have seasonally 100% of matches over 1.5 goals and 100% BTTS, which supports an expectation of at least two goals in the match. Based on this I forecast 1.10 goals for the home team and 1.90 for the visitors (total 3.00) and consider the strongest signal to be Over 1.5 (92% probability), with 70% probability for Over 2.5 and 38% for Over 3.5.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
In the last 5 matches the home team scored 8 first-half goals (an average of 1.6 per match), while the away team scored only 2 (0.4 per match), suggesting a home advantage in the first half. At the same time the away side shows clearer offensive potential: xG 1.62 and on average 10 shots per match of which 6 are on target, whereas the available seasonal data for the hosts show 0.0 xG and 0 shots. The away teams’ second halves generate an average of 2.0 goals (AVG_2hg_away = 2.0) and the away side themselves score on average 1.0 goal after the break (scored_2hg_avg_away = 1.0); seasonally they were trailing at half-time in 100% of matches (trailingAtHTPercentage_away = 100.0), indicating frequent turnarounds after the break. Therefore the strongest signal is a home lead at the break and an away win at full-time (HT/FT = 1/2); the variants with a draw at half-time and an away win (X/2 = 20%) and with the home side retaining the lead (1/1 = 15%) were assigned moderate probabilities.
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
| Riga FC II | JDFS Alberts | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 67% | 60% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.14 | 0.16 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.06 | 0.17 |
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.
JDFS Alberts is 100% better for: goals scored per game.
0.5 goals / game - Riga FC II · 1 goals / game - JDFS Alberts
JDFS Alberts is 25% better for: goals allowed per game.
2.5 goals / game - Riga FC II · 2 goals / game - JDFS Alberts
Riga FC II scores in 50% of games (1 of 2 games), while JDFS Alberts keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 1 games).
JDFS Alberts scores in 100% of games (1 of 1 games), while Riga FC II keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 2 games).
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 - Riga FC II
Over / Under - JDFS Alberts
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.
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Riga FC II - second-half results
Allows 0.5 more goals per game after halftime, a sign that the defense becomes less effective later in games.
JDFS Alberts - second-half results
Defense stays consistent across the full game.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 0.50 | 0.00 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.5 | 0.0 |
| Goals allowed / game | 1.0 | 1.5 |
| Average goals per game | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 50% | 50% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 0% | 0% |
| No goal | 50% | 100% |
| Goal difference | -1 | -3 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 0.00 | 1.00 |
| Goals scored / game | 0.0 | 1.0 |
| Goals allowed / game | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Average goals per game | 1.0 | 2.0 |
| 1 goal | 100% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 0% | 100% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 0% | 0% |
| No goal | 100% | 0% |
| Goal difference | -1 | 0 |
* 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 0-15 (1 goal). Concedes most in 16-30 (2). Late-goal balance (76-90): -2 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (1 goal). Concedes most in 16-30 (1). Late-goal balance (76-90): +1 - 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
Riga FC II
JDFS Alberts
* 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 (1. Liga).
Teams vs league
| Riga FC II | Liga | JDFS Alberts | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals per game | ▼ 3.00 | 3.64 | ▼ 3.00 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 50% | 64% | ▲ 100% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 50% | 71% | ▲ 100% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 0% | 18% | ▼ 0% |
| Goal before half-time | ▲ 100% | 86% | ▲ 100% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 100% | 93% | ▲ 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.
- Riga FC IIGoalDeniss NazarovsAssist: Nazar Prudchenko
- JDFS AlbertsGoalMarkus ProhorenkovsAssist: Renards Krišjānis
- Riga FC IIGoalNazar Prudchenko
Referee and managers
Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.
Head-to-head
Record from Riga FC II's perspective: 0 wins, 0 draws and 2 losses against JDFS Alberts. Games average 4.00 goals, and both teams scored in 50% of them.
FAQ
What was the result of Riga FC II vs JDFS Alberts?
The 1. Liga match finished Riga FC II 2:1 JDFS Alberts. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between Riga FC II and JDFS Alberts?
In the last 2 head-to-head matches Riga FC II won 0, JDFS Alberts won 2 and 0 ended level. These games averaged 4.00 goals, with both teams scoring in 50% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Riga FC II vs JDFS Alberts?
Riga FC II score 0.50 goals per game on average and JDFS Alberts 1.00. The 1. Liga average is 3.64 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 71% of games. Both teams score in 50% of Riga FC II's matches and 100% of JDFS Alberts's.
What form are Riga FC II and JDFS Alberts in?
Over the last 5 games Riga FC II have a 0-0-2 record (0.00 points per game) and JDFS Alberts 0-0-1 (0.00 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Riga FC II vs JDFS Alberts?
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.