Tanzania - Ligi kuu BaraData current as of 17 October 2026

Kitayosce vs Azam: match statistics

Kitayosce crest
Kitayosce
4 : 1half-time 3:1
Azam crest
Azam

Kitayosce vs Azam: form, goals and key statistics

Key match information

Kitayosce played Azam in Ligi kuu Bara (Tanzania). The match was played on 8 May 2026. Final score: 4:1.

Current form

Kitayosce: 3-1-1, 2.00 points/match. Azam: 3-2-0, 2.20 points/match.

Goal statistics

Kitayosce scores 1.10 and concedes 0.90 goals per match. Azam scores 1.40 and concedes 0.25. League average: 2.01 goals.

BTTS / Over / Under

BTTS: Kitayosce 24%, Azam 20%. Over 2.5: Kitayosce 38%, Azam 35%. League level: BTTS 33%, Over 2.5 36%.

xG, shots and style

Azam has higher xG: 1.53 vs 1.11. Kitayosce: 5.4 shots per match, Azam: 9.8.

Match halves

Kitayosce: half-time lead 19%, second-half goals 0.52. Azam: half-time lead 45%, second-half goals 0.70.

Goals by minute

Kitayosce: 0-15 (7 goals). Azam: 46-60 (8 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.

League context

Ligi kuu Bara: 2.01 goals per match, BTTS 33%, Over 2.5 36%.

Head-to-head

Before this fixture, 1 previous H2H matches were available: 0-0-1. 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

Azam is a narrow favorite based on superior season metrics – 28 goals scored versus Kitayosce’s 23 and only 5 conceded compared to the opponent’s 19, which clearly indicates the visitors’ stronger defense. In the last 5 matches Azam scored 7 goals and averages 2.2 points per game, while Kitayosce scored 6 goals and averages 2.0 points, so form is comparable, but Azam remains unbeaten away (0% losses). The visitors also have better attacking efficiency: conversion 16% versus 12%, on average 9 shots and 2.9 on target per match with 54% possession, versus 8.67 shots, 2.67 on target and 48% for the hosts. On the other hand the home side defends very well at home (on average 0.4 goals conceded and 80% of matches with a clean sheet) and win 50% of home matches, so a draw is still a realistic outcome. Considering the overall numbers (28–23 in goals, 5–19 in conceded and 0% away losses), I assign a higher probability to an Azam victory.

View the statistical overview
BTTS - will both teams score?

I back BTTS - No. Hosts have a season BTTS 0% and 100% clean sheets at home, while visitors have a season BTTS 40% and 60% clean sheets away, indicating at least one side often keeps a clean sheet. In the last 5 matches BTTS was 0% for both teams: hosts scored 6 and conceded 1, visitors scored 7 and conceded 0. Season averages are 1.4 goals per team for both sides, hosts xG 1.79 vs visitors 1.35, and xG against 0.73 vs 1.05, so hosts generate more xG and allow fewer expected goals. Considering league BTTS 33% and 82% clean sheets and the above figures, I assess probability at 80% for 'No' and 20% for 'Yes'.

View BTTS statistics
Over/Under - goals analysis

I calculate total expected goals at about 2.46 — 1.42 for the home side and 1.04 for the away side — derived by averaging Kitayosce’s attacking xG (1.79) with Azam’s conceded xG (1.05), and Azam’s attacking xG (1.35) with Kitayosce’s conceded xG (0.73). The hosts average 13 shots with 4.13 on target, while the visitors average 9 shots with 2.9 on target, indicating more chances created by the home team despite the visitors’ higher conversion rate (16% vs 13%). Season percentages for over 1.5 goals are 50% for Kitayosce and 70% for Azam, and a Poisson model with λ=2.46 gives P(≥2) ≈ 70.5%, hence a strong signal for Over 1.5. Lines for Over 2.5 (~45%) and Over 3.5 (~24%) are much weaker, so I recommend a bet on Over 1.5.

View Over/Under statistics
HT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario

Kitayosce led at the break in 5 of 10 matches (50%) and average 0.8 goals by halftime with 0.0 conceded, which strongly favors the home side leading after 45 minutes. They also have superior offensive metrics: xG 1.79 versus Azam's 1.35, on average 13 shots per game versus 9 and 4.13 shots on target versus 2.9, so they generate more high-quality chances. Defensively the hosts are exceptionally compact — averaging 0.0 goals conceded for the season and 100% clean sheets at home, and in second halves they also record 0.0 goals conceded and 100% clean sheets, indicating a strong ability to maintain a lead. Azam, however, averages 1.2 goals in the second half and score in 70% of matches after the break, so there is some risk of a turnaround; nonetheless the strongest scenario is the home team leading at half-time and winning at full-time (1/1) estimated at around 40%, the second strongest is halftime draw and home win (X/1) at ~27%.

View first-half and second-half statistics

Half-by-half

3 : 1
1st half
1 : 0
2nd half

Match statistics

57Possession (%)43
KitayosceAzam
14Shots8
KitayosceAzam
7Shots on target1
KitayosceAzam
2.11xG1.16
KitayosceAzam
2Corners4
KitayosceAzam
102Dangerous attacks80
KitayosceAzam
12Fouls18
KitayosceAzam
0Cards0
KitayosceAzam

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.

1.1Goals scored / match1.4
KitayosceAzam
0.9Goals conceded / match0.25
KitayosceAzam
38%Average possession50%
KitayosceAzam
1.67Shots on target / match3
KitayosceAzam

Team stats— who is more efficient?

Attack and defence comparison for both teams in the current season.

5.38Shots per match9.8
KitayosceAzam
1.67Shots on target3
KitayosceAzam
20.4%Shot conversion14.3%
KitayosceAzam
38%Possession50%
KitayosceAzam
1.11xG for1.53
KitayosceAzam
1.32xG against0.91
KitayosceAzam

Shooting quality

Kitayosce: Counter-attackingAzam: Efficient finishing
KitayosceAzam
Accuracy (shots on target)31%31%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.210.16
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.660.47

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.

Azam is 10% better for: last-5 form.

2 pts / match - Kitayosce · 2.2 pts / match - Azam

Kitayosce
WDWWL
Season result split
38% W29% D33% L
Season (W-D-L)
8-6-7
1.43 pts / match · goal difference +4
Last 5 (W-D-L)
3-1-1
2.00 pts / match
Record at home (W-D-L)
5-4-1
Last 5 at home
3-2-0
WDWDW
Last 5 matches - averages
Goals scored: 1.2Goals conceded: 0.2xG: 1.52Opponent xG: 1.42BTTS: 0%Over 2.5: 20%
Azam
DDWWW
Unbeaten in the last 5 matches
Season result split
50% W50% D0% L
Season (W-D-L)
10-10-0
2.00 pts / match · goal difference +23
Last 5 (W-D-L)
3-2-0
2.20 pts / match
Record away (W-D-L)
4-6-0
Last 5 away
3-2-0
WDWDW
Last 5 matches - averages
Goals scored: 1.4Goals conceded: 0.0xG: 1.87Opponent xG: 1.05BTTS: 0%Over 2.5: 40%

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.

Azam is 27% better for: goals scored per match.

1.1 goals / match - Kitayosce · 1.4 goals / match - Azam

Azam is 260% better for: goals conceded per match.

0.9 goals / match - Kitayosce · 0.25 goals / match - Azam

Kitayosce scoring profile: more difficult

Kitayosce scores in 52% of matches (11 of 21 matches), while Azam keeps a clean sheet in 80% (16 of 20 matches).

Azam scoring profile: mixed

Azam scores in 65% of matches (13 of 20 matches), while Kitayosce keeps a clean sheet in 48% (10 of 21 matches).

23Goals scored (season)28
KitayosceAzam
19Goals conceded (season)5
KitayosceAzam
2Average goals in match1.65
KitayosceAzam
6Goals scored (last 5)7
KitayosceAzam
1Goals conceded (last 5)0
KitayosceAzam

How often they score at least...

52%1 goal65%
KitayosceAzam
33%2 goals50%
KitayosceAzam
19%3 goals25%
KitayosceAzam
5%4 goals0%
KitayosceAzam

How often they concede at least...

52%1 goal20%
KitayosceAzam
29%2 goals5%
KitayosceAzam
10%3 goals0%
KitayosceAzam
0%4 goals0%
KitayosceAzam

* 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

5%BTTS at half-time0%
KitayosceAzam
0%BTTS in both halves0%
KitayosceAzam
10%Scored in both halves25%
KitayosceAzam

BTTS and goal count

19%Min. 3 goals and BTTS10%
KitayosceAzam
19%Min. 3 goals without BTTS25%
KitayosceAzam
0%BTTS - last 50%
KitayosceAzam

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.

1st half

52%Min. 1 goal before half-time50%
KitayosceAzam
24%Min. 2 goals before half-time20%
KitayosceAzam
5%Min. 3 goals before half-time5%
KitayosceAzam

2nd half

62%Min. 1 goal after half-time55%
KitayosceAzam
24%Min. 2 goals after half-time20%
KitayosceAzam
10%Min. 3 goals after half-time15%
KitayosceAzam

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.

Azam is 68% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

1.1 pts / match - Kitayosce · 1.85 pts / match - Azam

Kitayosce - half-time state
19% leading52% draw29% trailing
Azam - half-time state
45% leading50% draw5% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

1.1Points per match (1st half)1.85
KitayosceAzam
0.43Goals scored (1st half)0.7
KitayosceAzam
0.38Goals conceded (1st half)0.05
KitayosceAzam
0.81Average goals (1st half)0.75
KitayosceAzam
67%Clean sheet before half-time95%
KitayosceAzam
76%No goal before half-time55%
KitayosceAzam

After half-time (2nd half)

1.29Points per match (2nd half)1.8
KitayosceAzam
0.52Goals scored (2nd half)0.7
KitayosceAzam
0.48Goals conceded (2nd half)0.2
KitayosceAzam
1Average goals (2nd half)0.9
KitayosceAzam
62%Clean sheet after half-time80%
KitayosceAzam
67%No goal after half-time55%
KitayosceAzam

Kitayosce - second-half results

29% W43% D29% L
23
Half-time points
9
Half-time goals
+1
Goal difference (1st half)
27
Second-half points
+1
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.10
PPG before half-time
Lead holding200%

Leads at half-time in 19% of matches and wins 38%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.

Defence after half-time+0.1

Defence stays stable across the full match.

Azam - second-half results

45% W45% D10% L
37
Half-time points
14
Half-time goals
+13
Goal difference (1st half)
36
Second-half points
+10
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.85
PPG before half-time
Lead holding111%

Leads at half-time in 45% of matches and wins 50%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.

Defence after half-time+0.2

Concedes 0.2 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.

Kitayosce - last 5 matches by half
1st half2nd half
Points per match1.601.80
Goals scored / match0.60.6
Goals conceded / match0.20.0
Average goals in match0.80.6
1 goal60%40%
2 goals20%20%
3 goals0%0%
Clean sheet80%100%
No goal60%60%
Goal difference+2+3
Half-time: 40% leading - 40% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 40% won - 60% draw - 0% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 3
Azam - last 5 matches by half
1st half2nd half
Points per match1.801.80
Goals scored / match0.60.8
Goals conceded / match0.00.0
Average goals in match0.60.8
1 goal40%40%
2 goals20%20%
3 goals0%20%
Clean sheet100%100%
No goal60%60%
Goal difference+3+4
Half-time: 40% leading - 60% draw - 0% trailing
2nd half: 40% won - 60% draw - 0% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 0% - Half-time goals total: 3

* 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.

Kitayosce
ScoredConceded
7
2
0-15
0
2
16-30
5
5
31-45
5
2
46-60
3
3
61-75
3
5
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 0-15 (7 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (5). Late-goal balance (76-90): -2 - late phases are a weakness.

Azam
ScoredConceded
5
0
0-15
4
0
16-30
5
1
31-45
8
2
46-60
4
1
61-75
2
1
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (8 goals). Concedes most in 46-60 (2). 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 based on completed matches from the current season.

Match profile

1.82
Estimated goals
attack vs opponent defence
0.7 : 1.1
Estimated goal split
home : away
91%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
22%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
+10%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
34%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
17%
0:0 risk
about 1 in 6 matches
0-1
Most common goal range
attack vs defence on both sides

Kitayosce

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.21
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.41
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-7.4 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.01
Defensive efficiency
Does the defence or goalkeeper save the team? Positive means it concedes less than the chances allowed suggest.
+0.42
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
91%
Defence vs league
How much the team concedes compared with the league average. 80% means 20% fewer goals conceded.
113%
Form trend
Compares points from the last 5 matches with the whole-season average.
+0.57
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.1
Late goals
13% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 30% come in the first quarter-hour.
13%

Azam

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.62
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.53
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-18.1 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.13
Defensive efficiency
Does the defence or goalkeeper save the team? Positive means it concedes less than the chances allowed suggest.
+0.66
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
175%
Defence vs league
How much the team concedes compared with the league average. 80% means 20% fewer goals conceded.
21%
Form trend
Compares points from the last 5 matches with the whole-season average.
+0.20
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
0.0
Late goals
7% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 18% come in the first quarter-hour.
7%

* 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 (Ligi kuu Bara).

Teams vs league

KitayosceLigaAzam
Average goals in match• 2.002.01▼ 1.65
Both teams scored▼ 24%33%▼ 20%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)▲ 38%36%• 35%
Clean sheets▲ 48%41%▲ 80%
Goal before half-time▼ 52%55%▼ 50%
Goal after half-time▲ 62%60%▼ 55%

^ green = above league average, ˇ red = below league average. This shows direction of the gap, not a team rating.

2.01
Average goals per match
33%
Both teams scored
36%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
41%
Clean sheets
1.21
Home goals / match
0.80
Away goals / match
+51%
Home attack advantage
+34%
Home defence advantage
+22%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
55%
1 goal
27%
2 goals
5%
3 goals
1%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
60%
1 goal
24%
2 goals
12%
3 goals
2%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

Verified starters, substitutes and recorded player events for this match.

Home team

Away team

Other recorded players

—Jephté Kitambala Bola⚽ 1
—Sadio KanoutéA 1

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. AzamGoalJephté Kitambala BolaAssist: Sadio Kanouté

Referee and managers

Open their season profiles to compare match records, goals and disciplinary trends.

Head-to-head

Previous meeting: Kitayosce 0 - 0 - 1 Azam. Average goals 2.00, both teams scored in 0% matches.

Azam
2 : 0
Kitayosce

FAQ

What was the result of Kitayosce vs Azam?

The Ligi kuu Bara match finished Kitayosce 4:1 Azam. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What do the goal statistics show before Kitayosce vs Azam?

Kitayosce score 1.10 goals per game on average and Azam 1.40. The Ligi kuu Bara average is 2.01 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 36% of games. Both teams score in 24% of Kitayosce's matches and 20% of Azam's.

What form are Kitayosce and Azam in?

Over the last 5 games Kitayosce have a 3-1-1 record (2.00 points per game) and Azam 3-2-0 (2.20 points per game).

Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Kitayosce vs Azam?

The statistical background for Kitayosce vs Azam — 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.