← Match Finder
Premier League
Referee: C Pawson
Nott'm Forest
T U U S T
2–2
Full-time
Wolves
S T T U 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

Nott'm Forest Wolves
Last 6 — all competitions · 6/6 matches
Win Ø 17%
17%
17%
Points per game
0,8
0,7
Over 2.5 Ø 50%
33%
67%
Both score Ø 67%
67%
67%
Average goals
2,3
3,0
Scored
1,0
1,0
Conceded
1,3
2,0
Goal diff per game
-0,3
-1,0
xG created Pro
xG conceded Pro
xG diff Pro
This season — Premier League · 32/31 matches
Win Ø 31%
22%
39%
Points per game
0,9
1,4
Over 2.5 Ø 59%
53%
65%
Both score Ø 67%
66%
68%
Average goals
3,0
3,0
Scored
1,3
1,4
Conceded
1,8
1,6
Goal diff per game
-0,5
-0,2
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: 1–1

1,92 xG 1,09
46% Possession 54%
18 Shots 11
9 Shots on target 4
3 Blocked shots 3
1 Goalkeeper saves 7
10 Corners 1
1 Offside 1
15 Free kicks against 10
2 Yellow cards 3
0 Red cards 0
The table before the match Nott'm Forest 17. · Wolves 11.
# Team K V U T +/− xG +/− P
1 Arsenal 31 22 5 4 +51 +40.8 71
2 Liverpool 31 21 8 2 +42 +35.3 71
3 Man City 31 21 7 3 +40 +33.7 70
4 Aston Villa 32 18 6 8 +17 +7.0 60
5 Tottenham 32 18 6 8 +16 +2.2 60
6 Newcastle 32 15 5 12 +17 +7.6 50
7 Man United 31 15 4 12 -1 -11.8 49
8 West Ham 32 13 9 10 -4 -12.6 48
9 Chelsea 30 12 8 10 +3 +12.7 44
10 Brighton 31 11 10 10 +2 +2.4 43
11 Wolves 31 12 6 13 -5 -9.9 42
12 Bournemouth 31 11 8 12 -10 -2.1 41
13 Fulham 32 11 6 15 -4 -11.4 39
14 Everton 31 9 8 14 -10 +1.8 35
15 Crystal Palace 31 7 9 15 -18 -8.3 30
16 Brentford 32 7 8 17 -13 +2.9 29
17 Nott'm Forest 32 7 8 17 -16 -5.9 29
18 Luton 32 6 7 19 -20 -27.1 25
19 Burnley 32 4 7 21 -35 -25.9 19
20 Sheffield United 31 3 7 21 -52 -31.5 16

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

Nott'm Forest Wolves
30′
🟨 Mario Lemina
40′
Matheus Cunha 0–1
José Sá
Half-time 1–1
1–1 M. Gibbs-White
G. Reyna
46′
47′
🟨 Matheus Cunha
52′
🟨 João Gomes
2–1 Danilo
57′
59′
🔁 Hwang Hee-Chan
↦ M. Doherty
59′
🔁 Hugo Bueno
↦ João Gomes
62′
Matheus Cunha 2–2
N. Domínguez 🔁
↦ R. Yates
66′
D. Origi 🔁
↦ G. Reyna
71′
76′
🔁 B. Traoré
↦ Matheus Cunha
Morgan Gibbs-White 🟨
77′
88′
🔁 N. Fraser
↦ Pablo Sarabia
88′
🔁 T. Chirewa
↦ Nélson Semedo
Nuno Tavares 🔁
↦ O. Aina
89′
Rodrigo Ribeiro 🔁
↦ Danilo
89′
Murillo 🟨
95′
Full-time 2–2

Line-ups

Nott'm Forest

4-2-3-1
26 M. Sels G
7 N. Williams D
32 A. Omobamidele D
40 Murillo D
43 O. Aina D
22 R. Yates M
28 Danilo M
20 G. Reyna M
10 M. Gibbs-White M
14 C. Hudson-Odoi M
11 C. Wood F
Bench (9)
16 N. Domínguez
27 D. Origi
3 Nuno Tavares
37 Rodrigo Ribeiro
19 M. Niakhaté
1 M. Turner
29 G. Montiel
6 I. Sangaré
15 H. Toffolo

Coach: Nuno Espírito Santo

Wolves

3-4-1-2
1 José Sá G
4 S. Bueno D
23 M. Kilman D
24 Toti Gomes D
22 Nélson Semedo M
20 T. Doyle M
5 M. Lemina M
2 M. Doherty M
8 João Gomes F
21 Pablo Sarabia F
12 Matheus Cunha F
Bench (9)
11 Hwang Hee-Chan
17 Hugo Bueno
6 B. Traoré
63 N. Fraser
62 T. Chirewa
15 C. Dawson
40 T. King
25 D. Bentley
45 T. Barnett

Coach: G. O'Neil

Odds comparison

Green columns are the outcomes that came in.

1X2
H
2,16
U ✓
3,55
B
3,37
Over/under goals
O1,5 ✓
O2,5 ✓
1,83
U2,5
2,00
O3,5 ✓
Both teams to score
BLS ja ✓
BLS nei

Referee

C Pawson · 173 kamper i vår database

🟨 Yellow cards
3,8 / match
Average
⚽ Free kicks
22,7 / match
Above average

🟥 Red cards: 0,12 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.