|
|
A. Christiansen (6)
|
1 - 0
|
|
|
I. Thelin (8)
|
2 - 0
|
|
|
A. Christiansen (29)
|
3 - 0
|
|
|
E. Larsson (34)
|
4 - 0
|
|
| FT: 4-0 |
|
| Lead durations in 90 minutes of regular time |
|
|
| Malmoe FF lead duration: |
84 min
|
| Teams level in goals: |
6 min
|
| Ostersunds lead duration: |
|
|
|
To calculate the above duration values based on a total of 90 minutes, goals scored on
the 45th minute and during added time of the first half are considered scored on the 45th minute,
and goals scored on the 90th minute and during added time of the second half are considered scored on the 90th minute.
Lead durations tables
|
|
|
|
|
|
Result analysis (post-match data) - How often has this happened for each team this season?
|
|
Malmoe FF after 30 league matches
|
Ostersunds after 30 league matches
|
| won |
17/30 |
|
57%
|
| won by a 2-goal margin or more |
10/30 |
|
33%
|
| scored |
28/30 |
|
93%
|
| scored 2 goals or more |
21/30 |
|
70%
|
| no goal conceded |
11/30 |
|
37%
|
| scored first |
21/30 |
|
70%
|
| scored first and won |
14/30 |
|
47%
|
| leading at halftime |
17/30 |
|
57%
|
| leading at halftime and won |
13/30 |
|
43%
|
| scored in 1st half |
21/30 |
|
70%
|
| no goal conceded in 1st half |
17/30 |
|
57%
|
| no goal conceded in 2nd half |
17/30 |
|
57%
|
|
| lost |
13/30 |
|
43%
|
| lost by a 2-goal margin or more |
8/30 |
|
27%
|
| did not score |
12/30 |
|
40%
|
| conceded at least 1 goal |
21/30 |
|
70%
|
| conceded 2 goals or more |
15/30 |
|
50%
|
| conceded the first goal |
17/30 |
|
57%
|
| conceded the first goal and lost |
12/30 |
|
40%
|
| trailing at halftime |
10/30 |
|
33%
|
| trailing at halftime and lost |
8/30 |
|
27%
|
| conceded at least once in 1st half |
12/30 |
|
40%
|
| no goal conceded in 2nd half |
12/30 |
|
40%
|
|
|
The table above features a summary of match outcome and events in the context of each team's seasonal stats in the league.
For example, this is Malmoe FF's 17th win of the season, and out of a total of 30 league matches played so far, their winning percentage is now 57%.
|
|
The table below shows some of the main league-level statistics
in relation with the match result, and how often each instance has been observed so far this season in the league.
For example, the match ended in a home win, and the total number of home wins all teams combined this season is now 89, representing 37% of the 240 league matches played so far.
|
|
All teams combined out of a total of 240 matches this season in the league
|
| Home team won |
89/240 |
|
37%
|
| Home team won by a 2-goal margin or more |
45/240 |
|
19%
|
| Home team scored |
182/240 |
|
76%
|
| Home team scored 2 goals or more |
108/240 |
|
45%
|
| Home team no goal conceded |
61/240 |
|
25%
|
| Home team scored first |
121/240 |
|
50%
|
| Home team scored first and won |
75/240 |
|
31%
|
| Home team leading at halftime |
77/240 |
|
32%
|
| Home team leading at halftime and won |
52/240 |
|
22%
|
|
Search league results |
| Outcome Surprise-Level relative to pre-match PPG |
| Points Per Game (before the match) |
| Malmoe FF at home |
Ostersunds away |
Total |
| 2.43 | 1.64 |
4.07 |
| Outcome |
Outcome Surprise-Level |
| (any scoreline) |
(Losing team PPG / Total) * 100 |
| Home win |
|
40.4 |
| Scale: from 0 (less surprising) to 100 (more surprising) |
|
Latest matches' outcome surprise-levels
| Outcome | Outcome Surprise-Level | |
| 6 Dec |
Djurgardens - Varbergs |
1 - 0 |
Home win |
|
37.1 |
analysis
|
| 6 Dec |
Elfsborg - AIK Stockholm |
2 - 2 |
Draw |
|
16.3 |
analysis
|
| 6 Dec |
Falkenberg - Mjällby AIF |
2 - 3 |
Away win |
|
44.8 |
analysis
|
| 6 Dec |
IFK Goteborg - Sirius |
2 - 0 |
Home win |
|
60.7 |
analysis
|
| 6 Dec |
Kalmar FF - BK Hacken |
0 - 0 |
Draw |
|
36.0 |
analysis
|
| 6 Dec |
Malmoe FF - Ostersunds |
4 - 0 |
Home win |
|
40.4 |
analysis
|
| 6 Dec |
Norrköping - Helsingborg |
3 - 4 |
Away win |
|
74.2 |
analysis
|
| 6 Dec |
Orebro - Hammarby |
2 - 1 |
Home win |
|
45.5 |
analysis
|
| Scale: from 0 (less surprising) to 100 (more surprising) |
Details on the calculation of the Outcome surprise-level are outlined in the following blog article:
Evaluating surprising results |
