RFS vs Tukums 2000
RFS and Tukums 2000 Comparison: Goals Analysis
A detailed performance comparison between RFS and Tukums 2000: Overall performance, match results, and handicap statistics have been analyzed based on all encounters, first-half and second-half performances, as well as matches played at home and away.
When we evaluate the overall performances of RFS and Tukums 2000, RFS's overall team strength is rated at 201, while Tukums 2000's is 78. In home matches, RFS's team strength drops to 217, whereas Tukums 2000 displays a team strength of 37 in away games.
| All | Home | Away | All | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.86 | 2.67 | AVG goals | 2.40 | 2.63 |
| 88% | 100% | Goals Scored | 20% | 44% |
| 67% | 33% | Goals Conceded | 80% | 74% |
| 54% | 33% | Both teams to score | 20% | 27% |
| 54% | 33% | Over 2.5 Goals | 40% | 54% |
| 34% | 67% | Clean Sheet | 20% | 27% |
| 13% | 0% | Failed To Score | 80% | 57% |
| Points | Home | Away | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. RFS | 18 | - | - |
| 2. Auda | 16 | - | - |
| 3. Riga | 15 | - | - |
| 4. BFC Daugavpils | 13 | - | - |
| 5. METTA | 11 | - | - |
| 6. Liepāja | 10 | - | - |
| 7. Jelgava | 9 | - | - |
| 8. SK Super Nova | 6 | - | - |
| 9. Tukums 2000 | 5 | - | - |
| 10. Grobiņas | 5 | - | - |
| Points | Home | Away | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. BFC Daugavpils | 16 | - | - |
| 2. Auda | 14 | - | - |
| 3. RFS | 14 | - | - |
| 4. Riga | 14 | - | - |
| 5. Liepāja | 13 | - | - |
| 6. Jelgava | 12 | - | - |
| 7. Tukums 2000 | 10 | - | - |
| 8. SK Super Nova | 5 | - | - |
| 9. METTA | 4 | - | - |
| 10. Grobiņas | 3 | - | - |
| Points | Home | Away | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Auda | 18 | - | - |
| 2. Riga | 15 | - | - |
| 3. BFC Daugavpils | 13 | - | - |
| 4. METTA | 12 | - | - |
| 5. SK Super Nova | 11 | - | - |
| 6. RFS | 10 | - | - |
| 7. Liepāja | 8 | - | - |
| 8. Grobiņas | 8 | - | - |
| 9. Jelgava | 7 | - | - |
| 10. Tukums 2000 | 3 | - | - |
| Points | Home | Away | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. RFS | 18 | - | - |
| 2. Auda | 16 | - | - |
| 3. Riga | 15 | - | - |
| 4. BFC Daugavpils | 13 | - | - |
| 5. METTA | 11 | - | - |
| 6. Liepāja | 10 | - | - |
| 7. Jelgava | 9 | - | - |
| 8. SK Super Nova | 6 | - | - |
| 9. Tukums 2000 | 5 | - | - |
| 10. Grobiņas | 5 | - | - |
| Points | Home | Away | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. BFC Daugavpils | 16 | - | - |
| 2. Auda | 14 | - | - |
| 3. RFS | 14 | - | - |
| 4. Riga | 14 | - | - |
| 5. Liepāja | 13 | - | - |
| 6. Jelgava | 12 | - | - |
| 7. Tukums 2000 | 10 | - | - |
| 8. SK Super Nova | 5 | - | - |
| 9. METTA | 4 | - | - |
| 10. Grobiņas | 3 | - | - |
| Points | Home | Away | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Auda | 18 | - | - |
| 2. Riga | 15 | - | - |
| 3. BFC Daugavpils | 13 | - | - |
| 4. METTA | 12 | - | - |
| 5. SK Super Nova | 11 | - | - |
| 6. RFS | 10 | - | - |
| 7. Liepāja | 8 | - | - |
| 8. Grobiņas | 8 | - | - |
| 9. Jelgava | 7 | - | - |
| 10. Tukums 2000 | 3 | - | - |
Liverpool
Chelsea
Arsenal
Man City
Brighton
Forest
Aston Villa
Tottenham
Brentford
Newcastle
Man Utd
Fulham
Bournemouth
West Ham
Everton
Leicester
Crystal Palace
Ipswich
Wolves
Southampton
Notes slip is empty.
To add an option to your notes slip, choose a percentage and make your selection.