Shelbourne vs Waterford: match statistics

Shelbourne (5th) are favorites, primarily because they score 1.38 goals per home match versus Waterford's 0.88 goals per away game. The hosts generate 1.71 xG at home compared to the visitors' 1.29 xG on the road, and average 15.5 shots with 4.75 on target versus Waterford's 12.63 shots and 3.13 on target. Defensively the gap is clear: Shelbourne concede 1.88 goals per home match while Waterford concede 2.88 away, with average xG against of 1.40 vs 2.28 respectively. In the last 5 matches both teams scored 8 goals, but Shelbourne conceded 7 and Waterford 11, and the hosts averaged 1.6 points per match in that period versus 1.0 for the visitors. Additionally Shelbourne have a lower share of matches without scoring (25% vs 50%) and 25% clean sheets versus 0% for Waterford, therefore I assess the chances as 65% for the hosts, 20% for a draw and 15% for the away side.

Data indicate a higher probability of BTTS - Yes: seasonal BTTS is 67% for Shelbourne and 50% for Waterford, and in the last 5 matches 60% and 80% respectively. Waterford have major defensive issues — conceding 2.88 goals per game on the season and 2.2 in the last 5, while Shelbourne concede 1.33 on the season and 1.4 in the last 5. Offensively both teams create chances: recent xG is 1.8 for Shelbourne and 1.38 for Waterford, with season xG 1.26 vs 1.29, and xG against 1.98 vs 2.28 suggesting opponents also have scoring opportunities. Shelbourne produce slightly more on-target shots (3.67 vs 3.13) and have higher conversion (10% vs 7%), and BTTS occurs in 57% of their league matches; additionally Waterford have 0% clean sheets versus 11% for Shelbourne. Based on this I assess BTTS as more likely and recommend 'Yes' with a probability 75% vs 25%, because the combination of 2.88 conceded goals, 80% BTTS in Waterford's last 5 and 57% league BTTS provides a strong signal for both teams to score.

Shelbourne averages 1.11 goals per game (xG 1.26) and concedes 1.33, while Waterford scores 0.88 (xG 1.29) and concedes as many as 2.88 per match. In the last 5 fixtures Shelbourne averages 1.6 goals with xG 1.80, and Waterford also averages 1.6 goals with xG 1.38, but the visitors have conceded 2.2 goals across those five games. Season-long indicators show Shelbourne matches have exceeded 1.5 goals in 78% of cases and Waterford in 88%; Over 2.5 occurred in Shelbourne’s last 5 matches in 60% and in Waterford’s in 80%. Based on average shots on target (3.67 for hosts vs 3.13 for visitors) and conversion rates (10% vs 7%), I model expected goals of 1.82 for the hosts and 1.52 for the visitors, a total of 3.34 goals. This translates to roughly 85% probability for Over 1.5, 65% for Over 2.5 and 43% for Over 3.5, so the strongest signal from the data is Over 1.5.

In the last five matches Shelbourne led at the break in 40% of games, while Waterford never led (40% vs 0%), giving the home side the advantage at Half-Time. Shelbourne is clearly stronger after the break — they average 2.0 points in second halves and win that period in 56% of matches, whereas Waterford have only 0.25 points and 0% second-half wins (2.0 vs 0.25 and 56% vs 0%). Waterford concede on average 2.88 goals per match with expected goals against around 2.28, while Shelbourne generate 1.26 xG and have a better shot conversion of 10%, suggesting the visitors are more susceptible to conceding. Additionally, Shelbourne have scored 4 goals in minutes 76–90 while Waterford have conceded 7 in that period (4 vs 7), increasing the chance of maintaining or extending a lead after the break. On this basis the strongest signal is Shelbourne leading at Half-Time and ultimately winning the match, hence the HT/FT pick 1/1.