🎯

Fixture360 only lists fixtures from a curated set of leagues, chosen specifically to keep our prediction model accurate.

📰

Waterford and Shelbourne share the spoils in a 2-2 draw.

📝 Match Report

How It Unfolded

The points were shared at Regional Sports Centre, Regular Season - 21, as Waterford and Shelbourne drew 2-2 in the Premier Division. With the result on the board, the sections below measure it against everything the model and the numbers projected in advance.

The Model vs The Result

The Poisson model went into this projecting Waterford 1.09 xG and Shelbourne 1.34 xG, a combined 2.43. The scoreboard read 2-2 for 4 actual goals. Waterford beat their projection by 0.9 — clinical relative to the chances the model priced in. Those figures were built on strength ratings of Waterford attack 1.00 / defence 1.31 against Shelbourne attack 0.93 / defence 0.84, drawn from 56/58 games (CurrentSeason).

On the result, the model split it Waterford 30% | Draw 27% | Shelbourne 42%, with Shelbourne to win its most likely call at 42%. The actual draw had been the model's second-ranked read at 27%, so the result diverged from the top call without being a shock.

Goals & Markets

The model rated Over 2.5 goals at 44%. The game delivered 4, so it went over — the opposite of the projected direction. Over 1.5 had been 70% and landed. Over 3.5 was 23% and came in. On both teams to score, the model sat at 49% and the match saw both sides score — a miss on BTTS. Historically the two sides average 42% Over 2.5 across their same-competition games (Waterford 51%, Shelbourne 32%), a base rate that pointed the other way from today's over. Their combined BTTS history runs at 50%, which matched the both-scored outcome.

Trading Patterns vs Reality

Waterford's trading profile (37 games, 19 home) set some clear expectations: BTTS lands in 51% of their matches — today it did.

Shelbourne's trading profile (37 games, 19 away) set some clear expectations: BTTS lands in 49% of their matches — today it did; they keep a clean sheet 43% of the time, and conceded here.

Form vs Result

On form, Shelbourne arrived the stronger side — 1.78 PPG against 1.30. The form guide was only half-right: the stronger side did not lose, but could not convert the edge into a win. Waterford (home/away splits) shipped 2 against a 1.11 concession average — a leakier day than usual. Shelbourne (home/away splits) shipped 2 against a 0.84 concession average — a leakier day than usual.

Verdict

Grading the result against the stored data, 0 of 4 pre-match signals came in: result (miss), Over 2.5 (miss), BTTS (miss), form (miss). The data was on the wrong side of this result more often than not — a reminder that a single match sits well inside the model's variance.

💡 Key Insights