← Match Finder
Premier League
Referee: T Robinson
Chelsea
T S S U T
2–4
Full-time
Wolves
U S U S T

Retrospective analysis — the model is trained only on matches played before this one.

🔒 Who wins? Pro

The model's probabilities for a home win, draw and away win — with reasoning and recommended markets.

Unlock with Pro

Already have an account? Log in

Team trends

Chelsea Wolves
Last 6 — all competitions · 6/6 matches
Win Ø 50%
50%
50%
Points per game
1,7
1,8
Over 2.5 Ø 50%
50%
50%
Both score Ø 42%
33%
50%
Average goals
3,0
3,2
Scored
2,0
2,0
Conceded
1,0
1,2
Goal diff per game
+1,0
+0,8
xG created Pro
xG conceded Pro
xG diff Pro
This season — Premier League · 22/22 matches
Win Ø 39%
41%
36%
Points per game
1,4
1,3
Over 2.5 Ø 64%
59%
68%
Both score Ø 66%
59%
73%
Average goals
3,2
3,1
Scored
1,6
1,5
Conceded
1,6
1,6
Goal diff per game
+0,0
-0,1
xG created Pro
xG conceded Pro
xG diff Pro
🔒 Goal markets Pro

Expected goals, over/under and both teams to score — priced by the model before kick-off.

Unlock with Pro

Already have an account? Log in

🔒 Most likely result Pro

The model's top final scores with the best bookmaker odds.

Unlock with Pro

Already have an account? Log in

Match stats

Half-time score: 1–2

1,74 xG 2,00
64% Possession 36%
15 Shots 14
6 Shots on target 7
2 Blocked shots 3
4 Goalkeeper saves 2
10 Corners 1
3 Offside 0
15 Free kicks against 11
3 Yellow cards 2
0 Red cards 0
The table before the match Chelsea 10. · Wolves 11.
# Team K V U T +/− xG +/− P
1 Liverpool 22 15 6 1 +32 +24.6 51
2 Man City 21 14 4 3 +27 +21.5 46
3 Arsenal 22 14 4 4 +23 +24.2 46
4 Aston Villa 23 14 4 5 +19 +10.4 46
5 Tottenham 23 13 5 5 +14 +0.1 44
6 West Ham 22 10 6 6 +3 -7.8 36
7 Brighton 23 9 8 6 +4 +4.3 35
8 Man United 22 11 2 9 -4 -3.0 35
9 Newcastle 23 10 3 10 +11 +5.3 33
10 Chelsea 22 9 4 9 +1 +9.6 31
11 Wolves 22 8 5 9 -2 -7.3 29
12 Everton 23 8 5 10 -4 +4.3 29
13 Fulham 23 7 5 11 -8 -12.4 26
14 Bournemouth 21 7 5 9 -11 -4.6 26
15 Crystal Palace 23 6 6 11 -14 -7.6 24
16 Brentford 21 6 4 11 -5 +6.8 22
17 Luton 22 5 5 12 -10 -17.9 20
18 Nott'm Forest 22 5 5 12 -13 -7.8 20
19 Burnley 23 3 4 16 -23 -17.9 13
20 Sheffield United 23 2 4 17 -40 -24.8 10

Calculated from our results data. “xG +/−” is expected goal difference — a positive number with a low league position suggests an undervalued team. Ties on points are sorted by goal difference; some leagues use other rules.

Match report

Chelsea Wolves
1–0 C. Palmer
M. Caicedo
19′
22′
Matheus Cunha 1–1
João Gomes
Malo Gusto 🟨
30′
38′
🟨 Nélson Semedo
41′
🟨 Pedro Neto
43′
A. Disasi 2–1
own goal
Half-time 2–1
Moisés Caicedo 🟨
56′
N. Jackson 🔁
↦ M. Caicedo
63′
63′
Matheus Cunha 2–2
Pedro Neto
C. Chukwuemeka 🔁
↦ C. Nkunku
72′
M. Mudryk 🔁
↦ R. Sterling
72′
72′
🔁 J. Bellegarde
↦ Pedro Neto
72′
🔁 T. Doyle
↦ Pablo Sarabia
Ben Chilwell 🟨
78′
B. Badiashile 🔁
↦ B. Chilwell
81′
A. Gilchrist 🔁
↦ M. Gusto
81′
82′
Matheus Cunha 2–3
3–3 Thiago Silva
M. Mudryk
86′
87′
🔁 Hugo Bueno
↦ R. Aït-Nouri
90′
🔁 M. Doherty
↦ João Gomes
Full-time 3–3

Line-ups

Chelsea

4-2-3-1
28 Đ. Petrović G
27 M. Gusto D
2 A. Disasi D
6 Thiago Silva D
21 B. Chilwell D
25 M. Caicedo M
8 E. Fernández M
20 C. Palmer M
23 C. Gallagher M
7 R. Sterling M
18 C. Nkunku F
Bench (9)
15 N. Jackson
17 C. Chukwuemeka
10 M. Mudryk
5 B. Badiashile
42 A. Gilchrist
11 N. Madueke
47 L. Bergström
31 C. Casadei
13 M. Bettinelli

Coach: M. Pochettino

Wolves

3-4-2-1
1 José Sá G
23 M. Kilman D
15 C. Dawson D
24 Toti Gomes D
22 Nélson Semedo M
5 M. Lemina M
8 João Gomes M
3 R. Aït-Nouri M
21 Pablo Sarabia F
12 Matheus Cunha F
7 Pedro Neto F
Bench (9)
27 J. Bellegarde
20 T. Doyle
17 Hugo Bueno
2 M. Doherty
62 T. Chirewa
63 N. Fraser
25 D. Bentley
42 H. Griffiths
4 S. Bueno

Coach: G. O'Neil

Odds comparison

Green columns are the outcomes that came in.

1X2
H
1,63
U
4,22
B ✓
5,24
Over/under goals
O1,5 ✓
O2,5 ✓
1,69
U2,5
2,19
O3,5 ✓
Both teams to score
BLS ja ✓
BLS nei

Referee

T Robinson · 200 kamper i vår database

🟨 Yellow cards
3,8 / match
Average
⚽ Free kicks
23,1 / match
Above average

🟥 Red cards: 0,13 per match

The analysis is a statistical estimate based on the teams' results and underlying performances (xG) — not a guarantee. See the model's results.