Charleston Battery vs Rhode Island: match statistics
Full analysis and pick in the app
Check the betting analysis, pick, value bet and full reasoning for this match.
Charleston Battery vs Rhode Island: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
Charleston Battery play Rhode Island in USL Championship (United States). The match date is 26 September 2026.
Current form
Charleston Battery: 3-1-1, 2.00 points/match. Rhode Island: 2-1-2, 1.40 points/match.
Goal statistics
Charleston Battery scores 1.94 and concedes 1.38 goals per match. Rhode Island scores 1.71 and concedes 1.29. League average: 2.79 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: Charleston Battery 50%, Rhode Island 71%. Over 2.5: Charleston Battery 56%, Rhode Island 57%. League level: BTTS 58%, Over 2.5 52%.
xG, shots and style
Rhode Island has higher xG: 1.88 vs 1.61. Charleston Battery: 13.1 shots per match, Rhode Island: 16.5.
Match halves
Charleston Battery: half-time lead 44%, second-half goals 1.00. Rhode Island: half-time lead 29%, second-half goals 1.14.
Goals by minute
Charleston Battery: 76-90+ (8 goals). Rhode Island: 16-30 (7 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
USL Championship: 2.79 goals per match, BTTS 58%, Over 2.5 52%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 7 previous H2H matches were available: 1-3-3. Average goals 1.71, BTTS 29%.
Before the match
1X2 odds
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
| Charleston Battery | Rhode Island | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 42% | 36% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.12 | 0.11 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.36 | 0.28 |
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.
Charleston Battery is 43% better for: last-5 form.
2 pts / match - Charleston Battery · 1.4 pts / match - Rhode Island
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.
Charleston Battery is 13% better for: goals scored per match.
1.94 goals / match - Charleston Battery · 1.71 goals / match - Rhode Island
Rhode Island is 7% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.38 goals / match - Charleston Battery · 1.29 goals / match - Rhode Island
Charleston Battery scores in 69% of matches (11 of 16 matches), while Rhode Island keeps a clean sheet in 21% (3 of 14 matches).
Rhode Island scores in 86% of matches (12 of 14 matches), while Charleston Battery keeps a clean sheet in 19% (3 of 16 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 - Charleston Battery
Over / Under - Rhode Island
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.
Charleston Battery is 24% better for: first-half form (half-time points).
1.69 pts / match - Charleston Battery · 1.36 pts / match - Rhode Island
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
Charleston Battery - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 44% of matches and wins 50%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.5 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
Rhode Island - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 29% of matches and wins 36%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.4 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 2.20 | 2.00 |
| Goals scored / match | 1.6 | 1.4 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.4 | 1.0 |
| Average goals in match | 2.0 | 2.4 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 100% |
| 2 goals | 60% | 100% |
| 3 goals | 40% | 40% |
| Clean sheet | 60% | 20% |
| No goal | 40% | 20% |
| Goal difference | +6 | +2 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.60 | 1.20 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.6 | 0.8 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| Average goals in match | 1.0 | 1.4 |
| 1 goal | 60% | 60% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 40% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 20% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 40% |
| No goal | 40% | 60% |
| Goal difference | +1 | +1 |
* 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 (8 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): +1 - wins late phases.
Most dangerous in minutes 16-30 (7 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): +2 - 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
Charleston Battery
Rhode Island
* 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 (USL Championship).
Teams vs league
| Charleston Battery | Liga | Rhode Island | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 3.31 | 2.79 | ▲ 3.00 |
| Both teams scored | ▼ 50% | 58% | ▲ 71% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▲ 56% | 52% | ▲ 57% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 19% | 26% | ▼ 21% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 63% | 67% | ▼ 64% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 94% | 80% | • 79% |
^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.
Head-to-head
Recent meetings (7): Charleston Battery 1 - 3 - 3 Rhode Island. Average goals 1.71, both teams scored in 29% matches.
FAQ
When do Charleston Battery and Rhode Island play?
Charleston Battery face Rhode Island on 26 September 2026 in USL Championship. The exact kick-off time in your timezone is shown at the top of the match page.
What is the head-to-head record between Charleston Battery and Rhode Island?
In the last 7 head-to-head matches Charleston Battery won 1, Rhode Island won 3 and 3 ended level. These games averaged 1.71 goals, with both teams scoring in 29% of them.
What do the goal statistics show before Charleston Battery vs Rhode Island?
Charleston Battery score 1.94 goals per game on average and Rhode Island 1.71. The USL Championship average is 2.79 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 52% of games. Both teams score in 50% of Charleston Battery's matches and 71% of Rhode Island's.
What form are Charleston Battery and Rhode Island in?
Over the last 5 games Charleston Battery have a 3-1-1 record (2.00 points per game) and Rhode Island 2-1-2 (1.40 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Charleston Battery vs Rhode Island?
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.