UTS Rabat vs CODM Meknès: match statistics
UTS Rabat vs CODM Meknès: form, goals and key statistics
Key match information
UTS Rabat played CODM Meknès in Botola Pro (Morocco). The match was played on 17 June 2026. Final score: 2:0.
Current form
UTS Rabat: 2-2-1, 1.60 points/match. CODM Meknès: 1-1-3, 0.80 points/match.
Goal statistics
UTS Rabat scores 1.00 and concedes 1.42 goals per match. CODM Meknès scores 0.71 and concedes 0.96. League average: 2.13 goals.
BTTS / Over / Under
BTTS: UTS Rabat 67%, CODM Meknès 33%. Over 2.5: UTS Rabat 29%, CODM Meknès 25%. League level: BTTS 51%, Over 2.5 38%.
xG, shots and style
UTS Rabat has higher xG: 1.26 vs 1.12. UTS Rabat: 9.2 shots per match, CODM Meknès: 9.3.
Match halves
UTS Rabat: half-time lead 17%, second-half goals 0.50. CODM Meknès: half-time lead 13%, second-half goals 0.50.
Goals by minute
UTS Rabat: 76-90+ (6 goals). CODM Meknès: 46-60 (5 goals). This is historical distribution, not a predicted goal minute.
League context
Botola Pro: 2.13 goals per match, BTTS 51%, Over 2.5 38%.
Head-to-head
Before this fixture, 1 previous H2H matches were available: 0-1-0. Average goals 2.00, 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
UTS Rabat holds a form advantage in recent matches: in their last five games the hosts scored 4 goals and averaged 1.6 points per match, while CODM Meknès scored 5 goals but only 0.8 points per match. In offensive metrics UTS shows higher efficiency at home — on average 0.92 goals per game, 3.17 shots on target and a 11% conversion rate, versus 0.45 goals, 2.18 shots on target and a 5% conversion rate for the away side. The quality of created chances is, however, similar: xG for UTS is 1.13 against 1.12 for CODM, which suggests a comparable number of opportunities but superior finishing by the hosts. Risks for UTS include no home wins this season (0% home wins) and a negative home goal difference (-7), while CODM have a high share of matches without scoring on the road (64%) and have conceded 8 goals in the last 5 matches. Considering the hosts’ better recent form and markedly greater home finishing efficiency, I forecast an UTS victory; estimated probabilities are 50% home, 30% draw and 20% away.
View the statistical overviewBTTS - will both teams score?
In my assessment the more likely scenario is 'No' (BTTS - No): UTS Rabat has a seasonal BTTS rate of only 31% and has kept a clean sheet in 54% of appearances, which significantly limits the likelihood of both teams scoring. CODM Meknès scores only 0.45 goals per game on the season and has a very low chance conversion rate of 5%, even though the visitors' xG is 1.12 — they create chances but rarely finish them. The hosts average 0.92 goals scored and concede 0.69 per match, while their xG against is 1.39 compared to an actual average of 0.69 goals conceded, which reinforces UTS’s frequent clean sheets. The counterargument is the visitors' recent form over the last 5 matches (80% BTTS, averaging 1.0 scored and 1.6 conceded), which raises the risk of them contributing goals, but this is a short-term signal against the seasonal data. Considering both teams' low seasonal BTTS figures (31% vs 36%), low Over 2.5 rates (23% and 27%) and the hosts' advantage in keeping clean sheets, I assign a 70% probability to the 'No' scenario and 30% to 'Yes' (BTTS - Yes).
View BTTS statisticsOver/Under - goals analysis
Combining both teams' xG yields 1.21 expected goals for UTS Rabat (home attack xG 1.13 and away defense xG 1.30) and 1.26 for CODM Meknès (attack xG 1.12 and home defense xG 1.39), totaling 2.47 expected goals. With λ=2.47 the Poisson model gives roughly a 71% probability of at least 2 goals (Over 1.5), which exceeds the home side's seasonal Over 1.5 rate (38%) and is close to the visitors' figure (64%). The chance of Over 2.5 is estimated moderately at ~45% (seasonally both teams record 23–27% each), while Over 3.5 is unlikely (~24%), consistent with seasonal 8–9%. Additionally, the hosts have 54% clean sheets versus 27% for the visitors, which limits the risk of a very open game, but the relatively high xG for both sides (1.13 and 1.12) supports an expectation of at least two goals; therefore I recommend betting Over 1.5 as the strongest signal.
View Over/Under statisticsHT/FT - half-time and full-time scenario
UTS Rabat draws at half-time in 62% of matches while winning 54% of their games this season, whereas CODM Meknès records only 9% victories. The home side is clearly stronger after the break: they average 0.62 goals in the second half versus 0.36 for the visitors and have collected 20 points in second halves compared to 9 for the away team. Halves tend to be low-scoring — UTS scores on average 0.31 goals before the break, CODM 0.09, and clean halves occur in 77% of the home team’s matches and 73% of the visitors’, hence a strong signal for a lead at the break. Given this, I assign the highest probability, 38%, to the scenario draw at half-time and home win at full-time (X/1), 18% to draw/draw (X/X), and 12% to home leading at the break and winning the match (1/1). The visitors’ low efficiency (0.45 goals per match and a 5% shot conversion rate versus the home’s 0.92 goals and 10% conversion) justifies the small likelihood of a turnaround by CODM, therefore only 9% in total is assigned to away wins.
View first-half and second-half statisticsHalf-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
| UTS Rabat | CODM Meknès | |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy (shots on target) | 42% | 28% |
| Chance quality (xG per shot) | 0.14 | 0.12 |
| Finishing (goals per shot on target) | 0.26 | 0.27 |
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.
UTS Rabat is 100% better for: last-5 form.
1.6 pts / match - UTS Rabat · 0.8 pts / match - CODM Meknès
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.
UTS Rabat is 41% better for: goals scored per match.
1 goals / match - UTS Rabat · 0.71 goals / match - CODM Meknès
CODM Meknès is 48% better for: goals conceded per match.
1.42 goals / match - UTS Rabat · 0.96 goals / match - CODM Meknès
UTS Rabat scores in 71% of matches (17 of 24 matches), while CODM Meknès keeps a clean sheet in 42% (10 of 24 matches).
CODM Meknès scores in 58% of matches (14 of 24 matches), while UTS Rabat keeps a clean sheet in 8% (2 of 24 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 - UTS Rabat
Over / Under - CODM Meknès
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.
Before half-time (1st half)
After half-time (2nd half)
UTS Rabat - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 17% of matches and wins 13%. Sometimes loses the lead after half-time.
Defence stays stable across the full match.
CODM Meknès - second-half results
Leads at half-time in 13% of matches and wins 33%. Also wins matches without a half-time lead.
Concedes 0.1 more goals per match after half-time - defensive level drops in the second half.
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 1.80 | 0.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.6 | 0.2 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.2 | 0.4 |
| Average goals in match | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| 1 goal | 40% | 40% |
| 2 goals | 20% | 20% |
| 3 goals | 20% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 80% | 60% |
| No goal | 60% | 80% |
| Goal difference | +2 | -1 |
| 1st half | 2nd half | |
|---|---|---|
| Points per match | 0.80 | 0.80 |
| Goals scored / match | 0.4 | 0.6 |
| Goals conceded / match | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Average goals in match | 1.2 | 1.4 |
| 1 goal | 80% | 80% |
| 2 goals | 40% | 60% |
| 3 goals | 0% | 0% |
| Clean sheet | 40% | 20% |
| No goal | 80% | 40% |
| Goal difference | -2 | -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 (6 goals). Concedes most in 31-45 (11). Late-goal balance (76-90): -4 - late phases are a weakness.
Most dangerous in minutes 46-60 (5 goals). Concedes most in 76-90 (9). Late-goal balance (76-90): -5 - 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
UTS Rabat
CODM Meknès
* 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 (Botola Pro).
Teams vs league
| UTS Rabat | Liga | CODM Meknès | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average goals in match | ▲ 2.42 | 2.13 | ▼ 1.67 |
| Both teams scored | ▲ 67% | 51% | ▼ 33% |
| Min. 3 goals (Over 2.5) | ▼ 29% | 38% | ▼ 25% |
| Clean sheets | ▼ 8% | 31% | ▲ 42% |
| Goal before half-time | ▼ 58% | 61% | ▼ 38% |
| Goal after half-time | ▲ 75% | 73% | ▼ 71% |
^ 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
Starting lineup
Away team
Starting lineup
Match timeline
Goals, cards and substitutions arranged in chronological order.
Head-to-head
Previous meeting: UTS Rabat 0 - 1 - 0 CODM Meknès. Average goals 2.00, both teams scored in 100% matches.
FAQ
What was the result of UTS Rabat vs CODM Meknès?
The Botola Pro match finished UTS Rabat 2:0 CODM Meknès. Full match statistics, the half-by-half breakdown and head-to-head are on this page.
What do the goal statistics show before UTS Rabat vs CODM Meknès?
UTS Rabat score 1.00 goals per game on average and CODM Meknès 0.71. The Botola Pro average is 2.13 goals, with Over 2.5 landing in 38% of games. Both teams score in 67% of UTS Rabat's matches and 33% of CODM Meknès's.
What form are UTS Rabat and CODM Meknès in?
Over the last 5 games UTS Rabat have a 2-2-1 record (1.60 points per game) and CODM Meknès 1-1-3 (0.80 points per game).
Where can I find a betting tip and analysis for UTS Rabat vs CODM Meknès?
Here you can check the pre-match numbers for UTS Rabat vs CODM Meknès: form, H2H, goals and Over/Under. The pick itself, value and reasoning are published in the NoFluffPicks app.


