Boeung Ket vs Cambodia Tiger: match statistics
Cambodia Tiger displays a much better offensive form, scoring an average of 2.4 goals per away match compared to Boeung Ket's 1.27 goals at home. The visitors have an impressive 60% win rate away from home and an excellent series of 4 wins and 1 draw in their last 5 matches, while the hosts have won 55% of their home matches, but their offense is significantly weaker (27 goals this season compared to the visitors' 52). Cambodia Tiger also has a better shot conversion rate (20% vs 11%) and more shots on target (4.8 vs 3.91). Despite Boeung Ket having a solid defense at home (conceding an average of 0.45 goals), Cambodia Tiger's offensive power and current form point towards an away win. The difference in goal difference (+8 for the visitors away vs +9 for the hosts at home) and the advantage in expected goals (xG) suggest that Cambodia Tiger has a real chance of winning on this difficult ground.
Boeung Ket vs Cambodia Tiger: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Boeung Ket played Cambodia Tiger in Cambodian League (Cambodia). The match was played on 8 March 2026. Final score: 1:1.
Current form
Boeung Ket: 2-1-2, 1.40 points/match. Cambodia Tiger: 3-1-1, 2.00 points/match.
Goal statistics
Boeung Ket scores 1.29 and concedes 0.81 goals per match. Cambodia Tiger scores 2.48 and concedes 1.38. League average: 3.21 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Boeung Ket 24%, Cambodia Tiger 52%. Over 2.5: Boeung Ket 33%, Cambodia Tiger 76%. League level: BTTS 54%, Over 2.5 60%.
xG, shots and style
Cambodia Tiger has higher xG: 1.78 vs 1.52. Boeung Ket: 12.1 shots per match, Cambodia Tiger: 14.6.
Match halves
Boeung Ket: half-time lead 33%, second-half goals 0.86. Cambodia Tiger: half-time lead 57%, second-half goals 1.29.
Goals by minute
Boeung Ket: 76-90+ (7 goals). Cambodia Tiger: 46-60 (11 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Cambodian League: 3.21 goals per match, BTTS 54%, Over 2.5 60%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 2 previous H2H matches were available: 0-0-2. Average goals 2.00, BTTS 0%.
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
Cambodia Tiger displays a much better offensive form, scoring an average of 2.4 goals per away match compared to Boeung Ket's 1.27 goals at home. The visitors have an impressive 60% win rate away from home and an excellent series of 4 wins and 1 draw in their last 5 matches, while the hosts have won 55% of their home matches, but their offense is significantly weaker (27 goals this season compared to the visitors' 52). Cambodia Tiger also has a better shot conversion rate (20% vs 11%) and more shots on target (4.8 vs 3.91). Despite Boeung Ket having a solid defense at home (conceding an average of 0.45 goals), Cambodia Tiger's offensive power and current form point towards an away win. The difference in goal difference (+8 for the visitors away vs +9 for the hosts at home) and the advantage in expected goals (xG) suggest that Cambodia Tiger has a real chance of winning on this difficult ground.
View the statistical overviewHalf-by-half
Match statistics
Pre-match profile— what do the season numbers say?
This is a team profile based on season data and form. Match-flow statistics are shown only after the fixture is played.
Team stats— who is more efficient?
Attack and defence comparison for both teams in the current season.
Shooting quality
| Boeung Ket | Cambodia Tiger | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 33% | 36% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.13 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.32 | 0.47 |
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 matches and season record, overall and split by home and away matches.
Cambodia Tiger is 43% better for: last-5 form.
1.4 pts / match - Boeung Ket · 2 pts / match - Cambodia Tiger
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.
Cambodia Tiger is 92% better for: goals scored per match.
1.29 goals / match - Boeung Ket · 2.48 goals / match - Cambodia Tiger
Boeung Ket is 70% better for: goals conceded per match.
0.81 goals / match - Boeung Ket · 1.38 goals / match - Cambodia Tiger
Boeung Ket scores in 62% of matches (13 of 21 matches), while Cambodia Tiger keeps a clean sheet in 33% (7 of 21 matches).
Cambodia Tiger scores in 76% of matches (16 of 21 matches), while Boeung Ket keeps a clean sheet in 48% (10 of 21 matches).
How often they score at least...
How often they concede at least...
* Statistics include both teams' home and away matches in the current season.
Both teams scored (BTTS)— how often do both teams score?
How often both teams' matches have goals on both sides, compared with the league average.
Goal patterns
BTTS and goal count
Goal count (Over/Under)— how often do these matches cross the goal lines?
How often matches involving these teams clear goal thresholds, in the full match and in each half.
Full match - team comparison (Over)
Over / Under - Boeung Ket
Over / Under - Cambodia Tiger
1st half
2nd half
Match 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.
Cambodia Tiger is 32% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.48 pts / match - Boeung Ket · 1.95 pts / match - Cambodia Tiger
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Boeung Ket - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 33% of matches and wins 48%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.3 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
Cambodia Tiger - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 57% of matches and wins 52%. Usually protects the lead until full-time.
Concedes 0.1 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.00 | 1.60 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| Average goals in match | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 0% | 0% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 80% |
| No goal | 80% | 60% |
| Goal difference | -1 | +1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.00 | 1.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.6 | 1.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 1.2 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 2.8 | 2.0 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 80% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 80% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 20% | 60% |
| No goal | 20% | 20% |
| Goal difference | +2 | +6 |
* Colours in tables show event frequency: green is common, yellow is moderate, red is rare. It is frequency, not a team rating.
Goals by minute— when do goals arrive?
Match phases in which both teams most often score and concede.
Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (7 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (5). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (11 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (8). 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 based on completed matches from the current season.
Match profile
Boeung Ket
Cambodia Tiger
* The estimated goal total and split, BTTS estimate, 0:0 risk and goal range are calculated from public season averages and frequencies for both teams. This is a statistical match profile, not a private model prediction or betting pick. The remaining indicators describe completed matches from the season.
League context— is this a high-scoring league?
How both teams compare with league-wide averages (Cambodian League).
Teams vs league
| Boeung Ket | Liga | Cambodia Tiger | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▼ 2.10 | 3.21 | ▲ 3.86 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 24% | 54% | ▼ 52% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 33% | 60% | ▲ 76% |
| Clean sheets | ▲ 48% | 26% | ▲ 33% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 52% | 70% | ▲ 86% |
| Goal after half-time | ▼ 81% | 83% | ▼ 81% |
^ 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.
Head-to-head
Recent meetings (2): Boeung Ket 0 - 0 - 2 Cambodia Tiger. Average goals 2.00, both teams scored in 0% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of Boeung Ket vs Cambodia Tiger?
The Cambodian League match finished Boeung Ket 1:1 Cambodia Tiger. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What is the head-to-head record between Boeung Ket and Cambodia Tiger?
In the last 2 head-to-head matches Boeung Ket won 0, Cambodia Tiger won 2 and 0 ended level. These games averaged 2.00 goals, with both teams scoring in 0% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Boeung Ket vs Cambodia Tiger?
Boeung Ket score 1.29 goals per game on average and Cambodia Tiger 2.48. The Cambodian League average is 3.21 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 60% of games. Both teams score in 24% of Boeung Ket's matches and 52% of Cambodia Tiger's.
What form are Boeung Ket and Cambodia Tiger in?
Over the last 5 games Boeung Ket have a 2-1-2 record (1.40 points per game) and Cambodia Tiger 3-1-1 (2.00 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Boeung Ket vs Cambodia Tiger?
The statistical background for Boeung Ket vs Cambodia Tiger — 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.