Predictions & Statistics
Full analysis and predictions for all markets
| Market | Option | Probability | Odds | Stats & Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1X2 | Draw |
100%
|
- | |
| BTTS | BTTS No |
96.4%
|
- | |
| Over / Under 2.5 | Under 2.5 |
97.6%
|
- |
Patro Eisden
Beerschot VA
Statistics are based on season averages
Season Statistics
Team averages and season trends before this fixture
Patro Eisden
0 matches
Beerschot VA
0 matches
| Patro Eisden | Statistic | Beerschot VA |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Wins | 0 |
| 0 | Draws | 0 |
| 0 | Losses | 0 |
| 0 | Goals For | 0 |
| 0 | Goals Against | 0 |
| 0 | Avg Goals Scored | 0 |
| 0 | Avg Goals Conceded | 0 |
| 0 | BTTS Yes | 0 |
| 0 | Over 1.5 | 0 |
| 0 | Over 2.5 | 0 |
| 0 | Over 3.5 | 0 |
| 0 | Clean Sheets | 0 |
| 0 | Failed To Score | 0 |
| 0 | Shots On Goal | 0 |
| 0 | Total Shots | 0 |
| 0 | Corners | 0 |
| 0% | Ball Possession | 0% |
Match Analysis
Model notes, team context and key prediction signals
In knockout conditions, this fixture pairs two sides with a fairly similar football identity, which should make the margins especially important. Squad availability does not appear severe enough to completely reshape the expected balance, although smaller absences can still influence specific duels. Because this is a knockout setting, momentum shifts, risk management, and late-game discipline could all carry more weight than in a standard league fixture. There is little separation in the broader season picture, with both sides operating from relatively comparable league positions and points returns. The defensive profile of this fixture suggests that clear openings may be harder to create.This profiles as a tighter contest, with fewer clear openings expected. Even if this develops into a close game, the analytical lean still edges toward Away Win, with a cautious clean-sheet angle toward Beerschot VA. Recent form does not point to a completely one-sided rhythm, which increases the chance of a more tactical and phase-based contest. From a tactical point of view, the game still points toward Beerschot VA having the stronger overall control.
Patro Eisden enter this tie with a season profile built on - points from - matches, placing them - in their league. The return of - wins, - draws, and - defeats, together with a -:- goal balance, points toward poor form . Their attacking influence is driven by their main attacking players, and at the back they have looked fairly stable. At home, their split of - wins, - draws, and - losses fits an unclear split record. Stylistically they continue to show a balanced approach.
Ahead of this knockout test, Beerschot VA arrive from a league campaign that has them - with - points after - matches. Their record of - wins, - draws, and - defeats with goals at -:- reflects poor form . Much of their attacking weight falls on their main attacking players, while defensively they have appeared fairly stable. Away from home, they have managed - wins, - draws, and - losses, which supports an unclear split record. In tactical terms they still look like a side built around a balanced approach.
Across those 7 head-to-head meetings, Patro Eisden won 2 times, Beerschot VA won 3 times, while 2 matches finished as draws. The aggregate score in this matchup is 7:11 from Patro Eisden's perspective. 2 of those games went over 2.5 goals, and both teams scored in 3 matches, with an average of 2.57 goals per game.
Patro Eisden
3
3
2
7
0
3
Lineups
Patro Eisden
Heist
Patro Eisden
St. Truiden
Patro Eisden
Rochefort
Patro Eisden
Schoonbeek-Beverst
Patro Eisden
Beerschot VA
Patro Eisden
Roeselare Daisel
Beerschot VA
MSV Duisburg
Beerschot VA
KVC Westerlo
Beerschot VA
Roda
Beerschot VA
Wilrijk
Beerschot VA
Lommel United
Beerschot VA
Lommel United
Beerschot VA
Patro Eisden
Patro Eisden
St. Truiden
Beerschot VA
MSV Duisburg
Beerschot VA
KVC Westerlo
Beerschot VA
Roda
Beerschot VA
Wilrijk
Beerschot VA
Lommel United
Standings
| # | Team | MP | W | D | L | G | GD | PTS | Form |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 40 | 28 | 4 | 8 | 91:45 | 46 | 57 |
W
D
W
W
W
|
|
| 2 | 40 | 25 | 11 | 4 | 66:27 | 39 | 53 |
W
D
L
W
L
|
|
| 3 | 40 | 22 | 5 | 13 | 61:46 | 15 | 43 |
W
L
D
L
W
|
|
| 4 | 40 | 15 | 10 | 15 | 59:62 | -3 | 33 |
L
W
D
D
L
|
|
| 5 | 40 | 13 | 12 | 15 | 53:57 | -4 | 29 |
W
L
D
D
D
|
|
| 6 | 40 | 13 | 12 | 15 | 48:61 | -13 | 29 |
L
D
D
L
W
|
| # | Team | MP | W | D | L | G | GD | PTS | Form |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 36 | 13 | 9 | 14 | 53:53 | 0 | 48 |
W
W
W
W
W
|
|
| 2 | 36 | 10 | 11 | 15 | 53:58 | -5 | 41 |
L
L
W
W
W
|
|
| 3 | 36 | 7 | 13 | 16 | 35:50 | -15 | 34 |
W
L
L
L
L
|
|
| 4 | 36 | 5 | 10 | 21 | 31:62 | -31 | 25 |
D
L
L
W
L
|
| # | Team | MP | W | D | L | G | GD | PTS | Form |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 30 | 19 | 9 | 2 | 50:17 | 33 | 66 |
W
D
L
W
L
|
|
| 2 | 30 | 20 | 3 | 7 | 59:36 | 23 | 63 |
W
D
W
W
W
|
|
| 3 | 30 | 18 | 3 | 9 | 47:35 | 12 | 57 |
W
L
D
L
W
|
|
| 4 | 30 | 13 | 6 | 11 | 49:43 | 6 | 45 |
W
L
D
D
D
|
|
| 5 | 30 | 12 | 9 | 9 | 39:37 | 2 | 45 |
L
D
D
L
W
|
|
| 6 | 30 | 12 | 8 | 10 | 43:39 | 4 | 44 |
L
W
D
D
L
|
|
| 7 | 30 | 11 | 9 | 10 | 46:47 | -1 | 42 |
L
W
D
D
W
|
|
| 8 | 30 | 11 | 7 | 12 | 27:35 | -8 | 40 |
L
W
D
W
W
|
|
| 9 | 30 | 10 | 9 | 11 | 36:40 | -4 | 39 |
L
L
W
L
D
|
|
| 10 | 30 | 9 | 8 | 13 | 31:32 | -1 | 35 |
W
D
L
L
L
|
|
| 11 | 30 | 9 | 7 | 14 | 38:42 | -4 | 34 |
W
D
L
W
W
|
|
| 12 | 30 | 9 | 7 | 14 | 32:43 | -11 | 34 |
L
D
W
L
D
|
|
| 13 | 30 | 8 | 8 | 14 | 38:47 | -9 | 32 |
W
W
W
W
W
|
|
| 14 | 30 | 7 | 10 | 13 | 39:47 | -8 | 31 |
L
L
W
W
W
|
|
| 15 | 30 | 6 | 13 | 11 | 30:37 | -7 | 31 |
W
L
L
L
L
|
|
| 16 | 30 | 3 | 10 | 17 | 24:51 | -27 | 19 |
D
L
L
W
L
|
| # | Team | MP | W | D | L | G | GD | PTS | Form |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 40 | 15 | 14 | 11 | 57:53 | 4 | 38 |
L
W
D
D
W
|
|
| 2 | 40 | 16 | 9 | 15 | 44:46 | -2 | 37 |
L
W
D
W
W
|
|
| 3 | 40 | 14 | 9 | 17 | 50:50 | 0 | 34 |
W
D
L
W
W
|
|
| 4 | 40 | 14 | 10 | 16 | 50:57 | -7 | 33 |
L
L
W
L
D
|
|
| 5 | 40 | 13 | 9 | 18 | 43:48 | -5 | 31 |
W
D
L
L
L
|
|
| 6 | 40 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 41:60 | -19 | 23 |
L
D
W
L
D
|