Tanzania - Ligi kuu BaraData current as of 17 October 2026

Namungo vs Kitayosce: match statistics

Namungo crest
Namungo
0 : 0half-time 0:0
Kitayosce crest
Kitayosce

Namungo vs Kitayosce: form, goals and key statistics

Key match information

Namungo played Kitayosce in Ligi kuu Bara (Tanzania). The match was played on 16 June 2026. Final score: 0:0.

Current form

Namungo: 0-3-2, 0.60 points/match. Kitayosce: 3-1-1, 2.00 points/match.

Goal statistics

Namungo scores 0.80 and concedes 1.12 goals per match. Kitayosce scores 1.23 and concedes 0.92. League average: 2.16 goals.

BTTS / Over / Under

BTTS: Namungo 48%, Kitayosce 35%. Over 2.5: Namungo 20%, Kitayosce 42%. League level: BTTS 36%, Over 2.5 39%.

xG, shots and style

Kitayosce has higher xG: 1.24 vs 1.20. Namungo: 7.3 shots per match, Kitayosce: 6.3.

Match halves

Namungo: half-time lead 16%, second-half goals 0.44. Kitayosce: half-time lead 23%, second-half goals 0.50.

Goals by minute

Namungo: 31-45+ (6 goals). Kitayosce: 0-15 (8 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.

League context

Ligi kuu Bara: 2.16 goals per match, BTTS 36%, Over 2.5 39%.

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

I predict a draw. Namungo concedes only 0.82 goals per home match on average and keeps a clean sheet in 45% of games, while Kitayosce concede 1.25 goals on average in away matches and have 25% clean sheets, giving the hosts a defensive edge. In attack the hosts generate 1.45 xG and average 3.9 shots on target with an 11% conversion rate at home, whereas the visitors have 1.03 xG, 2.33 shots on target and a 6% conversion as an away side, suggesting Namungo creates higher-quality chances. However, over the season Kitayosce have 11 wins and 32 goals scored versus Namungo’s 5 wins and 20 goals, and in the last 5 matches overall the visitors have scored 9 goals (record 3–1–1, 2.0 points per game), while Namungo have scored 3 goals and failed to win any (0–3–2, 0.6 points per game). Considering Namungo’s high home draw rate (55%), low percentage of scoreless home games (9%) and the fact that the visitors failed to score in 50% of their away matches, a point split appears most likely.

View the statistical overview
BTTS - will both teams score?

Season-long metrics point to a low incidence of both teams scoring (BTTS 36% Namungo, 33% Kitayosce; league BTTS 36%), which initially favors No Goal. However, the last 5 matches signal the opposite: Namungo BTTS 60%, Kitayosce 80%, with the visitors scoring 9 goals in the last 5 versus just 3 for the hosts. Last-5 xG also favors Kitayosce: visitors xG for 1.65 and xG against 1.03, while Namungo xG for 1.37 and xG against 1.88, indicating the visitors create more chances and the hosts have recently conceded more. Namungo’s seasonal defensive strengths (avg 0.64 goals conceded per match and 57% clean sheets) remain, but in the last 5 they concede an average of 1.2 goals and are less productive offensively. Considering Kitayosce’s offensive edge in the last 5 and the BTTS rise to 60–80% in that run, I assess BTTS - Yes at 65% versus No Goal 35%.

View BTTS statistics
Over/Under - goals analysis

I estimate total expected goals at 2.46 (Namungo 1.31, Kitayosce 1.15), calculated as the average of Namungo’s attacking xG (1.39) and xG against for the visitors (1.22), and analogously for the away side (xG 1.03 and xG against 1.27). Seasonally the home side has 64% of matches >1.5 goals, the away side 67% (average 65.5%), so I rate Over 1.5 highly at 75%. The 2.5 line is more balanced: season long >2.5 is 36% for Namungo and 50% for Kitayosce (average 43%), and the visitors’ last 5 matches show 60% >2.5 with an average of 1.8 goals, hence I give Over 2.5 a 48% probability. Meanwhile >3.5 is unlikely — only 14% of home matches and 17% of away matches exceeded that threshold, and the expected 2.46 is well below 3.5, so Under 3.5 (88%) is my strongest play signal.

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

At half-time I predict a draw — Namungo were level at the break in 9 matches (64%), while Kitayosce were trailing after 45% of their games (5 times), which gives a clear signal for a draw at the half. For full-time I expect a home win: Namungo average 1.36 goals per game this season versus 1.08 for the visitors and have higher xG (1.39 vs 1.03), suggesting an advantage in chance creation. Additionally, Namungo average 9.15 shots and 3.31 on target compared to Kitayosce’s 5.33 and 2.33, have a conversion rate of 14% vs 6%, and won 50% of home matches while the visitors won only 33% of away games — this supports a turnaround after the break in favor of the hosts. Form must be considered: in the last 5 matches the visitors have a 60% win rate (3 of 5) and the hosts have 0% wins in their last 5, so a lead at the break being a draw with a later Namungo victory is realistic. For that reason I select HT/FT X/1 as the most likely scenario, with alternatives being X/X and 1/1.

View first-half and second-half statistics

Half-by-half

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

Match statistics

56Possession (%)44
NamungoKitayosce
25Shots8
NamungoKitayosce
2Shots on target1
NamungoKitayosce
2.45xG1.26
NamungoKitayosce
7Corners0
NamungoKitayosce
103Dangerous attacks94
NamungoKitayosce
11Fouls18
NamungoKitayosce
0Cards0
NamungoKitayosce

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.

0.8Goals scored / match1.23
NamungoKitayosce
1.12Goals conceded / match0.92
NamungoKitayosce
46%Average possession41%
NamungoKitayosce
2.84Shots on target / match2.31
NamungoKitayosce

Team stats— who is more efficient?

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

7.32Shots per match6.27
NamungoKitayosce
2.84Shots on target2.31
NamungoKitayosce
10.9%Shot conversion19.6%
NamungoKitayosce
46%Possession41%
NamungoKitayosce
1.2xG for1.24
NamungoKitayosce
1.36xG against1.24
NamungoKitayosce

Shooting quality

Namungo: BalancedKitayosce: Counter-attacking
NamungoKitayosce
Accuracy (shots on target)39%37%
Chance quality (xG per shot)0.160.20
Finishing (goals per shot on target)0.280.53

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.

Kitayosce is 233% better for: last-5 form.

0.6 pts / match - Namungo · 2 pts / match - Kitayosce

Namungo
DLDLD
No win in the last 5 matches
Season result split
20% W44% D36% L
Season (W-D-L)
5-11-9
1.04 pts / match · goal difference -8
Last 5 (W-D-L)
0-3-2
0.60 pts / match
Record at home (W-D-L)
4-6-1
Last 5 at home
0-4-1
DDLDD
Last 5 matches - averages
Goals scored: 0.6Goals conceded: 1.2xG: 1.38Opponent xG: 1.89BTTS: 60%Over 2.5: 20%
Kitayosce
WDWLW
Season result split
42% W27% D31% L
Season (W-D-L)
11-7-8
1.54 pts / match · goal difference +8
Last 5 (W-D-L)
3-1-1
2.00 pts / match
Record away (W-D-L)
4-2-6
Last 5 away
3-0-2
WLWLW
Last 5 matches - averages
Goals scored: 1.8Goals conceded: 1.0xG: 1.65Opponent xG: 1.03BTTS: 80%Over 2.5: 60%

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.

Kitayosce is 54% better for: goals scored per match.

0.8 goals / match - Namungo · 1.23 goals / match - Kitayosce

Kitayosce is 22% better for: goals conceded per match.

1.12 goals / match - Namungo · 0.92 goals / match - Kitayosce

Namungo scoring profile: strong

Namungo scores in 68% of matches (17 of 25 matches), while Kitayosce keeps a clean sheet in 42% (11 of 26 matches).

Kitayosce scoring profile: strong

Kitayosce scores in 62% of matches (16 of 26 matches), while Namungo keeps a clean sheet in 28% (7 of 25 matches).

20Goals scored (season)32
NamungoKitayosce
28Goals conceded (season)24
NamungoKitayosce
1.92Average goals in match2.15
NamungoKitayosce
3Goals scored (last 5)9
NamungoKitayosce
6Goals conceded (last 5)5
NamungoKitayosce

How often they score at least...

68%1 goal62%
NamungoKitayosce
12%2 goals35%
NamungoKitayosce
0%3 goals19%
NamungoKitayosce
0%4 goals8%
NamungoKitayosce

How often they concede at least...

72%1 goal58%
NamungoKitayosce
24%2 goals27%
NamungoKitayosce
16%3 goals8%
NamungoKitayosce
0%4 goals0%
NamungoKitayosce

* 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.

36%
League average

Goal patterns

16%BTTS at half-time19%
NamungoKitayosce
0%BTTS in both halves0%
NamungoKitayosce
4%Scored in both halves15%
NamungoKitayosce

BTTS and goal count

16%Min. 3 goals and BTTS27%
NamungoKitayosce
4%Min. 3 goals without BTTS15%
NamungoKitayosce
60%BTTS - last 580%
NamungoKitayosce

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

60%Min. 1 goal before half-time62%
NamungoKitayosce
20%Min. 2 goals before half-time35%
NamungoKitayosce
4%Min. 3 goals before half-time12%
NamungoKitayosce

2nd half

72%Min. 1 goal after half-time58%
NamungoKitayosce
28%Min. 2 goals after half-time19%
NamungoKitayosce
8%Min. 3 goals after half-time8%
NamungoKitayosce

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.

Kitayosce is 19% better for: first-half form (half-time points).

1 pts / match - Namungo · 1.19 pts / match - Kitayosce

Namungo - half-time state
16% leading52% draw32% trailing
Kitayosce - half-time state
23% leading50% draw27% trailing

Before half-time (1st half)

1Points per match (1st half)1.19
NamungoKitayosce
0.36Goals scored (1st half)0.62
NamungoKitayosce
0.48Goals conceded (1st half)0.5
NamungoKitayosce
0.84Average goals (1st half)1.12
NamungoKitayosce
56%Clean sheet before half-time58%
NamungoKitayosce
68%No goal before half-time62%
NamungoKitayosce

After half-time (2nd half)

1.28Points per match (2nd half)1.38
NamungoKitayosce
0.44Goals scored (2nd half)0.5
NamungoKitayosce
0.64Goals conceded (2nd half)0.38
NamungoKitayosce
1.08Average goals (2nd half)0.88
NamungoKitayosce
60%Clean sheet after half-time69%
NamungoKitayosce
60%No goal after half-time65%
NamungoKitayosce

Namungo - second-half results

32% W32% D36% L
25
Half-time points
9
Half-time goals
-3
Goal difference (1st half)
32
Second-half points
-5
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.00
PPG before half-time
Lead holding125%

Leads at half-time in 16% of matches and wins 20%. 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 - second-half results

31% W46% D23% L
31
Half-time points
16
Half-time goals
+3
Goal difference (1st half)
36
Second-half points
+3
Goal difference (2nd half)
1.19
PPG before half-time
Lead holding183%

Leads at half-time in 23% of matches and wins 42%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.

Defence after half-time-0.1

Defence stays stable across the full match.

Namungo - last 5 matches by half
1st half2nd half
Points per match0.801.00
Goals scored / match0.40.2
Goals conceded / match0.60.6
Average goals in match1.00.8
1 goal60%60%
2 goals40%20%
3 goals0%0%
Clean sheet40%60%
No goal60%80%
Goal difference-1-2
Half-time: 0% leading - 80% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 20% won - 40% draw - 40% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 40% - Half-time goals total: 2
Kitayosce - last 5 matches by half
1st half2nd half
Points per match1.601.80
Goals scored / match1.40.4
Goals conceded / match1.00.0
Average goals in match2.40.4
1 goal100%40%
2 goals80%0%
3 goals40%0%
Clean sheet20%100%
No goal0%60%
Goal difference+2+2
Half-time: 40% leading - 40% draw - 20% trailing
2nd half: 40% won - 60% draw - 0% lost
BTTS at half-time (last 5): 80% - Half-time goals total: 7

* 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.

Namungo
ScoredConceded
1
3
0-15
2
4
16-30
6
5
31-45
2
4
46-60
6
6
61-75
3
6
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 31-45 (6 goals). Concedes most in 61-75 (6). Late-goal balance (76-90): -3 - late phases are a weakness.

Kitayosce
ScoredConceded
8
4
0-15
4
3
16-30
7
7
31-45
5
2
46-60
4
3
61-75
4
5
76-90

Most dangerous in minutes 0-15 (8 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (7). Late-goal balance (76-90): -1 - late phases are a weakness.

* 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

2.04
Estimated goals
attack vs opponent defence
0.9 : 1.2
Estimated goal split
home : away
94%
Pace vs league
100% = league average
42%
Both teams scored (BTTS)
average from both teams' seasons
-2%
Derby effect
H2H goals vs typical matches
42%
BTTS estimate
from both teams' scoring frequency
12%
0:0 risk
about 1 in 8 matches
0-1
Most common goal range
attack vs defence on both sides

Namungo

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
-0.16
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
-0.16
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
+0.7 pts
Finishing efficiency
Does the team convert chances? Positive means it scores more than the quality of chances suggests.
-0.40
Defensive efficiency
Does the defence or goalkeeper save the team? Positive means it concedes less than the chances allowed suggest.
+0.24
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
62%
Defence vs league
How much the team concedes compared with the league average. 80% means 20% fewer goals conceded.
130%
Form trend
Compares points from the last 5 matches with the whole-season average.
-0.44
Stronger second half?
How many more goals the team scores after half-time than before it.
+0.1
Late goals
15% of this team's goals come in minutes 76-90. For comparison, 5% come in the first quarter-hour.
15%

Kitayosce

Net xG balance
Difference between the quality of chances created and allowed per match.
0.00
Results compared with xG
Difference between the actual goal balance and the balance suggested by xG.
+0.31
Points compared with goal balance
Comparison between collected points and the points implied by the team's goal balance.
-9.9 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.
+0.32
Attack vs league
How much the team scores compared with the league average for this role. 120% means 20% above average.
143%
Defence vs league
How much the team concedes compared with the league average. 80% means 20% fewer goals conceded.
71%
Form trend
Compares points from the last 5 matches with the whole-season average.
+0.46
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, 25% come in the first quarter-hour.
13%

* 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

NamungoLigaKitayosce
Average goals in match▼ 1.922.16• 2.15
Both teams scored▲ 48%36%• 35%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)▼ 20%39%▲ 42%
Clean sheets▼ 28%39%▲ 42%
Goal before half-time• 60%60%▲ 62%
Goal after half-time▲ 72%63%▼ 58%

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

2.16
Average goals per match
36%
Both teams scored
39%
Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5)
39%
Clean sheets
1.30
Home goals / match
0.86
Away goals / match
+51%
Home attack advantage
+34%
Home defence advantage
+22%
Total home advantage
Goals in 1st half (whole league)
60%
1 goal
32%
2 goals
9%
3 goals
1%
4 goals
Goals in 2nd half (whole league)
63%
1 goal
25%
2 goals
11%
3 goals
2%
4 goals

Head-to-head

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

FAQ

What was the result of Namungo vs Kitayosce?

The Ligi kuu Bara match finished Namungo 0:0 Kitayosce. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.

What do the goal statistics show before Namungo vs Kitayosce?

Namungo score 0.80 goals per game on average and Kitayosce 1.23. The Ligi kuu Bara average is 2.16 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 39% of games. Both teams score in 48% of Namungo's matches and 35% of Kitayosce's.

What form are Namungo and Kitayosce in?

Over the last 5 games Namungo have a 0-3-2 record (0.60 points per game) and Kitayosce 3-1-1 (2.00 points per game).

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

The statistical background for Namungo vs Kitayosce — 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.