Japan - J1 LeagueToyota StadiumData current as of 07 September 2026

Nagoya Grampus vs Machida Zelvia: match statistics

Nagoya Grampus vs Machida Zelvia: form, goals and key statistics

Key match information

Nagoya Grampus played Machida Zelvia in J1 League (Japan). The match was played on 6 September 2026. Venue: Toyota Stadium. Final score: 1:3.

Current form

Nagoya Grampus: 2-0-3, 1.20 points/match. Machida Zelvia: 4-1-0, 2.60 points/match.

Goal statistics

Nagoya Grampus scores 1.20 and concedes 1.60 goals per match. Machida Zelvia scores 3.00 and concedes 0.80. League average: 3.06 goals.

BTTS / Over / Under

BTTS: Nagoya Grampus 60%, Machida Zelvia 80%. Over 2.5: Nagoya Grampus 80%, Machida Zelvia 80%. League level: BTTS 63%, Over 2.5 59%.

xG, shots and style

Machida Zelvia has higher xG: 1.74 vs 1.64. Nagoya Grampus: 14.2 shots per match, Machida Zelvia: 15.8.

Match halves

Nagoya Grampus: half-time lead 0%, second-half goals 0.80. Machida Zelvia: half-time lead 40%, second-half goals 1.80.

Goals by minute

Nagoya Grampus: 76-90+ (3 goals). Machida Zelvia: 31-45+ (3 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.

League context

J1 League: 3.06 goals per match, BTTS 63%, Over 2.5 59%.

Head-to-head

Before this fixture, 2 previous H2H matches were available: 0-0-2. Average goals 3.50, BTTS 100%.

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

Machida Zelvia remain unbeaten after four matchweeks, having collected 10 points, and have recorded 4 wins and a draw in their last five matches, while Nagoya have won only 2 of their last 5 games. The visitors are highly efficient in front of goal: they have scored 13 goals this season and average 3.33 goals per away match with a 19% shot-conversion rate, compared with Nagoya’s 1.67 goals and 9% conversion rate at home. The hosts tend to dominate possession, averaging 64%, and create good-quality chances worth 2.10 xG, but they have yet to keep a clean sheet, while their average xG conceded stands at 1.39. Machida concede just 0.67 goals per away game, have 1.12 xG against, and have kept a clean sheet in 33% of such matches. Nagoya’s home advantage and a high average of 7.33 shots on target per game could help them find the net, but the current form and Machida’s clearly superior efficiency point to an away victory.

View the statistical overview
BTTS - will both teams score?

Nagoya has recorded BTTS in 100% of its matches this season, while Machida has done so in 67%, compared with a league average of 60%. The hosts have not kept a single clean sheet and concede an average of 1.0 goals, while their xG against is a high 2.03, clearly strengthening Machida’s chances of scoring. Machida averages 3.33 goals per match, including 3.2 across its last five fixtures, so it should be able to exploit its opponent’s defensive problems. Nagoya also has attacking arguments in its favor: it produces an average of 1.61 xG and records 7.0 shots on target per match, while Machida allows opponents 1.12 xG and keeps a clean sheet in only 33% of its appearances. BTTS has occurred in 80% of Nagoya’s and 60% of Machida’s last five matches, making a goal for both teams more likely than a scenario in which at least one of them fails to score.

View BTTS statistics
Over/Under - goals analysis

The strongest signal is Over 1.5, as both teams have surpassed this line in 100% of their league matches so far. Nagoya have yet to keep a clean sheet, while their average xG conceded stands at a high 2.03, which favors Machida’s attack, generating 1.84 xG per match. The visitors are in excellent scoring form: they have averaged 3.2 goals in their last five matches, while Nagoya have conceded 1.6 goals per game. Over 2.5 has also landed in 80% of each team’s last five appearances, but Machida’s stronger defense, conceding only 0.6 goals per match during this period, limits confidence in the higher lines. The projected total of 3.20 goals points to a clear likelihood of at least two goals in the match.

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

Machida Zelvia have been in clearly better form: over their last five matches, they averaged 3.2 goals scored and 0.6 conceded, winning 80% of their games, while Nagoya averaged 1.4 goals scored and 1.6 conceded, losing 60% of their matches. The visitors are already strong before the break, having led at half-time in 60% of their last five games and averaging 1.4 goals, whereas the hosts were trailing at half-time in 40% of their appearances during this period and scored just 0.6 goals. Machida’s advantage is also evident in their underlying performance: their average xG stands at 1.84, compared with opponents’ xG of 1.12, while Nagoya allow their opponents an xG of 2.03. After the break, the visitors averaged 1.8 goals in their last five matches and conceded none, reinforcing the scenario in which they maintain their lead until the final whistle. The most likely outcome is therefore an HT/FT 2/2 result, with Machida taking the lead before half-time and winning the match overall.

View first-half and second-half statistics

Half-by-half

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

Match statistics

61Possession (%)39
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
12Shots12
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1Shots on target5
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1.24xG1.32
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
6Corners2
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
58Dangerous attacks30
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
12Fouls14
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
2Cards1
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

Pre-match profilewhat 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.

Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1.2Goals scored / match3
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1.6Goals conceded / match0.8
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
58%Average possession50%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
4.8Shots on target / match5.6
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

Team statswho is more efficient?

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

14.2Shots per match15.8
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
4.8Shots on target5.6
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
8.5%Shot conversion19%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
58%Possession50%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1.64xG for1.74
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1.56xG against1.27
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

Shooting quality

Nagoya Grampus: DominantMachida Zelvia: Attacking
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
Accuracy (shots on target)34%35%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.120.11
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.250.54

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 formwho is in better shape?

Last five matches and season record, overall and split by home and away matches.

Machida Zelvia is 117% better for: last-5 form.

1.2 pts / match - Nagoya Grampus · 2.6 pts / match - Machida Zelvia

Nagoya Grampus
LLWWL
Season result split
40% W0% R60% P
Season (W-D-L)
2-0-3
1.20 pts / match · goal difference -2
Last 5 (W-D-L)
2-0-3
1.20 pts / match
Record at home (W-D-L)
2-0-1
Last 5 at home
2-0-1
LWW
Last 5 matches - averages
Goals scored: 1.2Goals conceded: 1.6xG: 1.64Opponent xG: 1.56BTTS: 60%Over 2.5: 80%
Machida Zelvia
WWWDW
Unbeaten in the last 5 matches
Season result split
80% W20% R0% P
Season (W-D-L)
4-1-0
2.60 pts / match · goal difference +11
Last 5 (W-D-L)
4-1-0
2.60 pts / match
Record away (W-D-L)
2-1-0
Last 5 away
2-1-0
WWD
Last 5 matches - averages
Goals scored: 3.0Goals conceded: 0.8xG: 1.74Opponent xG: 1.27BTTS: 80%Over 2.5: 80%

Goalshow 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.

Machida Zelvia is 150% better for: goals scored per match.

1.2 goals / match - Nagoya Grampus · 3 goals / match - Machida Zelvia

Machida Zelvia is 100% better for: goals conceded per match.

1.6 goals / match - Nagoya Grampus · 0.8 goals / match - Machida Zelvia

Nagoya Grampus scoring profile: strong

Nagoya Grampus scores in 60% of matches (3 of 5 matches), while Machida Zelvia keeps a clean sheet in 20% (1 of 5 matches).

Machida Zelvia scoring profile: very strong

Machida Zelvia scores in 100% of matches (5 of 5 matches), while Nagoya Grampus keeps a clean sheet in 0% (0 of 5 matches).

6Goals scored (season)15
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
8Goals conceded (season)4
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
2.8Average goals in match3.8
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
6Goals scored (last 5)15
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
8Goals conceded (last 5)4
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

How often they score at least...

60%1 goal100%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
40%2 goals80%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
20%3 goals60%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0%4 goals40%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

How often they concede at least...

100%1 goal80%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
40%2 goals0%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
20%3 goals0%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0%4 goals0%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

* 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.

63%
League average

Goal patterns

40%BTTS at half-time60%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0%BTTS in both halves0%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
40%Scored in both halves60%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

BTTS and goal count

60%Min. 3 goals and BTTS60%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
20%Min. 3 goals without BTTS20%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
60%BTTS - last 580%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

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

80%Min. 1 goal before half-time80%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
40%Min. 2 goals before half-time80%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0%Min. 3 goals before half-time20%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

2nd half

80%Min. 1 goal after half-time80%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
60%Min. 2 goals after half-time80%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
20%Min. 3 goals after half-time40%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

Match halveswhen do the teams score more often?

How teams split performance between first and second half: goals, points, clean sheets and half-time state.

Machida Zelvia is 200% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

0.6 pts / match - Nagoya Grampus · 1.8 pts / match - Machida Zelvia

Nagoya Grampus - half-time state
0% leading60% draw40% trailing
Machida Zelvia - half-time state
40% leading60% draw0% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

0.6Points per match (1st half)1.8
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0.4Goals scored (1st half)1.2
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0.8Goals conceded (1st half)0.6
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1.2Average goals (1st half)1.8
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
20%Clean sheet before half-time40%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
60%No goal before half-time20%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

After half-time (2nd half)

1.6Points per match (2nd half)2.6
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0.8Goals scored (2nd half)1.8
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
0.8Goals conceded (2nd half)0.2
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
1.6Average goals (2nd half)2
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
60%Clean sheet after half-time80%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia
40%No goal after half-time20%
Nagoya GrampusMachida Zelvia

Nagoya Grampus - second-half results

40% W40% R20% P
3
Half-time points
2
Half-time goals
-2
Goal difference (1st half)
8
Second-half points
0
Goal difference (2nd half)
0.60
PPG before half-time
Defence after half-time0.0

Defence stays stable across the full match.

Machida Zelvia - second-half results

80% W20% R0% P
9
Half-time points
6
Half-time goals
+3
Goal difference (1st half)
13
Second-half points
+8
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.80
PPG before half-time
Lead holding200%

Leads at half-time in 40% of matches and wins 80%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.

Defence after half-time-0.4

Defence stays stable across the full match.

Nagoya Grampus - last 5 matches by half
1st half2nd half
Points per match0.601.60
Goals scored / match0.40.8
Goals conceded / match0.80.8
Average goals in match1.21.6
1 goal80%80%
2 goals40%60%
3 goals0%20%
Clean sheet20%60%
No goal60%40%
Goal difference-20
Half-time: 0% leading - 60% draw - 40% trailing
2nd half: 40% won - 40% draw - 20% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 40% - Half-time goals total: 2
Machida Zelvia - last 5 matches by half
1st half2nd half
Points per match1.802.60
Goals scored / match1.21.8
Goals conceded / match0.60.2
Average goals in match1.82.0
1 goal80%80%
2 goals80%80%
3 goals20%40%
Clean sheet40%80%
No goal20%20%
Goal difference+3+8
Half-time: 40% leading - 60% draw - 0% trailing
2nd half: 80% won - 20% draw - 0% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 60% - Half-time goals total: 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 minutewhen do goals arrive?

Match phases in which both teams most often score and concede.

Nagoya Grampus
ScoredConceded
1
1
0-15
0
1
16-30
1
2
31-45
1
0
46-60
0
1
61-75
3
3
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 76-90 (3 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (3). Late-goal balance (76-90): 0.

Machida Zelvia
ScoredConceded
1
1
0-15
2
1
16-30
3
1
31-45
3
1
46-60
3
0
61-75
3
0
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (3 goals). Concedes most in 0-15 (1). Late-goal balance (76-90): +3 - wins late phases.

* Buckets 31-45 and 76-90 include added-time goals.

Additional team indicatorswhat do xG, efficiency and form show?

A comparison of chance quality, results and trends based on completed matches from the current season.

Match profile

3.30
Estimated goals
attack vs opponent defence
1.0 : 2.3
Estimated goal split
home : away
108%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
70%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
+6%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
60%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
0%
0:0 risk
practically zero
2-3
Most common goal range
attack vs defence on both sides

Nagoya Grampus

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.08
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
-0.48
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
+0.6 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.44
Defensive efficiency
Does the defence or goalkeeper save the team? Positive means it concedes less than the chances allowed suggest.
-0.04
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
75%
Defence vs league
How much the team concedes compared with the league average. 80% means 20% fewer goals conceded.
110%
Form trend
Compares points from the last 5 matches with the whole-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.4
Late goals
50% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 17% come in the first quarter-hour.
50%

Machida Zelvia

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
+0.47
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+1.73
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-1.0 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
+1.26
Defensive efficiency
Does the defence or goalkeeper save the team? Positive means it concedes less than the chances allowed suggest.
+0.47
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
207%
Defence vs league
How much the team concedes compared with the league average. 80% means 20% fewer goals conceded.
50%
Form trend
Compares points from the last 5 matches with the whole-season average.
0.00
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.6
Late goals
20% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 7% come in the first quarter-hour.
20%

* 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 contextis this a high-scoring league?

How both teams compare with league-wide averages (J1 League).

Teams vs league

Nagoya GrampusLigaMachida Zelvia
Average goals in match 2.803.06 3.80
Both teams scored 60%63% 80%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) 80%59% 80%
Clean sheets 0%21% 20%
Goal before half-time 80%71% 80%
Goal after half-time 80%84% 80%

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

3.06
Average goals per match
63%
Both teams scored
59%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
21%
Clean sheets
1.61
Home goals / match
1.45
Away goals / match
+11%
Home attack advantage
+10%
Home defence advantage
+18%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
71%
1 goal
45%
2 goals
14%
3 goals
2%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
84%
1 goal
53%
2 goals
22%
3 goals
10%
4 goals

Lineups and player events

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

Match timeline

Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.

  1. Nagoya GrampusSubstitutionOn: Yuya YamagishiOff: Yuya Asano
  2. Machida ZelviaSubstitutionOn: Henry Heroki MochizukiOff: Daihachi Okamura
  3. Nagoya GrampusYellow cardRyuji Izumi
  4. Machida ZelviaGoalRyōhei Shirasaki
  5. Machida ZelviaYellow cardTakahiro Akimoto
  6. Nagoya GrampusSubstitutionOn: Teruki HaraOff: Yuki Nogami
  7. Machida ZelviaGoalHenry Heroki Mochizuki
  8. Nagoya GrampusSubstitutionOn: Tomoya KoyamatsuOff: Kensuke Nagai
  9. Nagoya GrampusSubstitutionOn: Yota SatoOff: Ryuji Izumi
  10. Machida ZelviaAssistHenry Heroki MochizukiGoal: Alexandre Kouto Horio Pisano
  11. Nagoya GrampusYellow cardTomoki Takamine
  12. Machida ZelviaSubstitutionOn: Yusuke MatsuoOff: Yuki Soma
  13. Machida ZelviaSubstitutionOn: Mitchell DukeOff: Koki Ogawa
  14. Machida ZelviaGoalYusuke Matsuo

Referee and managers

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

Head-to-head

Recent meetings (2): Nagoya Grampus 0 - 0 - 2 Machida Zelvia. Average goals 3.50, both teams scored in 100% matches.

FC Machida Zelvia
3 : 1
Nagoya Grampus
Nagoya Grampus
1 : 2
FC Machida Zelvia

FAQ

What was the result of Nagoya Grampus vs Machida Zelvia?

The J1 League match finished Nagoya Grampus 1:3 Machida Zelvia. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What is the head-to-head record between Nagoya Grampus and Machida Zelvia?

In the last 2 head-to-head matches Nagoya Grampus won 0, Machida Zelvia won 2 and 0 ended level. These games averaged 3.50 goals, with both teams scoring in 100% of them.

What do the goal statistics show before Nagoya Grampus vs Machida Zelvia?

Nagoya Grampus score 1.20 goals per game on average and Machida Zelvia 3.00. The J1 League average is 3.06 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 59% of games. Both teams score in 60% of Nagoya Grampus's matches and 80% of Machida Zelvia's.

What form are Nagoya Grampus and Machida Zelvia in?

Over the last 5 games Nagoya Grampus have a 2-0-3 record (1.20 points per game) and Machida Zelvia 4-1-0 (2.60 points per game).

Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for Nagoya Grampus vs Machida Zelvia?

Here you can check the pre-match numbers for Nagoya Grampus vs Machida Zelvia: form, H2H, goals and Over/Under. The pick itself, value and reasoning are published in the NoFluffPicks app.