EFL ChampionshipSt Andrew's, Birmingham16°0,1 mm18 km/h

    Läs på svenska
    Birmingham CityBirmingham CityPossession control
    vs
    SouthamptonSouthamptonPossession & high press
    The model's lean: 1 · Birmingham City (38%)Soft drawBest value by the model: Under 0,5 @ 13.00 (+7 %)

    Birmingham CitySouthampton · EFL Championship

    1 · Birmingham City 38%X 27%35% Southampton · 2

    Analysis: Birmingham CitySouthampton

    Sofia Andersson · · The model's read on the match · How the predictions work

    TEXT: Birmingham City's unbeaten streak of eight league matches stands against Southampton's marginal statistical edges. While the hosts have been consistent, the visitors' superior expected goals (xG) figures—1.2 for Birmingham and 2.2 for Southampton—highlight a potential threat on paper. This edge extends to defense as well: Southampton's expected goals against (xGA) of 1.0 per match is better than Birmingham's 1.2, giving the visitors the advantage on both sides of the ball.

    The head-to-head record, albeit limited with just two matches since 2023, shows Southampton with a slight advantage. However, this small sample holds less weight than the current form and expected goals. Despite Southampton's higher xPoints and xG, Birmingham's possession control strategy may stymie the visitor's high-press approach enough to tilt the balance slightly in their favor, supported by the model's 38% win probability for the hosts versus 35% for Southampton.

    With only a 47% chance for over 2.5 goals, the under 2.5 market is attractive. Odds of 1.98 on Betsafe, Betsson, and Nordicbet offer a 5% value edge, with the model supporting a 53% likelihood. Expect a tight encounter, with a 1-1 draw as the most plausible outcome.

    Birmingham CityBirmingham City
    Form WDDDW
    League ranking xG #15xGA #8xT #15xP/match #14Points #10
    Key players
    • Jhon SolísCMxG 0.02 · xT 0.04
    • Alexander William CochraneLWBxG 0.01 · xT 0.31
    • Christoph KlarerCBxG 0.08 · xT 0.09
    SouthamptonSouthampton
    Form WDLWW
    League ranking xG #3xGA #4xT #6xP/match #4Points #5
    Key players
    • Cyle Christopher LarinFxG 0.74 · xT 0.09
    • Taylor Jay Harwood-BellisCBxG 0.16 · xT 0.17
    • Jack StephensCBxG 0.18 · xT 0.07

    Match prediction: Birmingham CitySouthampton

    Predicted score matrix

    Southampton
    Birmingham City
    0
    1
    2
    3
    4+
    0
    0–08.2%
    0–19.2%
    0–25.9%
    0–32.4%
    0–4+1.0%
    1
    1–010.0%
    1–113.1%
    1–27.8%
    1–33.2%
    1–4+1.3%
    2
    2–06.9%
    2–18.4%
    2–25.1%
    2–32.1%
    2–4+0.8%
    3
    3–03.0%
    3–13.7%
    3–22.3%
    3–30.9%
    3–4+0.4%
    4+
    4+–01.3%
    4+–11.6%
    4+–21.0%
    4+–30.4%
    4+–4+0.2%
    Probability per final score. Rows = home goals, columns = away goals.

    Most likely scorelines

    1. 1.1-113%
    2. 2.1-010%
    3. 3.0-19%
    4. 4.2-18%
    5. 5.0-08%
    Expected goals
    1,321,22
    Both teams to score
    52%

    Over/under goals

    Expected goals: 2,5
    Under 2,553%
    @2.00EV+6%
    Over 2,547%
    @1.85

    Ready-made bet suggestions

    More combos & build your own

    01 · 2 legs

    Safe

    • Double chance Birmingham City or draw (1X)66%
    • Under 3.5 goals75%

    Combined probability

    50%

    Fair odds

    2.02

    Two legs pulling the same way — the probability is computed exactly from the score matrix, not multiplied.

    02 · 3 legs

    Balanced

    • Double chance Birmingham City or draw (1X)66%
    • Under 2.5 goals53%
    • Patrick John Joseph Roberts to score15%

    Combined probability

    Fair odds

    The whole slip is priced jointly via 20,000 simulated matches — the scorer interacts with result and total goals, never naive multiplication.

    03 · 4 legs

    Bold

    • Both teams to score52%
    • Over 2.5 goals47%
    • Cameron Desmond Archer to score27%
    • Tomoki Iwata to be booked25%

    Combined probability

    Fair odds

    The goal-fest: both teams score with at least three goals, plus the match's most likely scorer and card candidate — all priced jointly via 20,000 simulated matches.

    Odds & value

    The model's value spots

    Bets where the model's probability beats what the odds imply (EV+).

    • Under 0.58% probability@13.00BetsafeEV+7%reference odds
    • Under 0.58% probability@13.00BetssonEV+7%reference odds
    • Under 0.58% probability@13.00NordicbetEV+7%reference odds
    Bookmaker1 · Birmingham CityX2 · Southampton
    Bet3652.303.302.88
    Betsafe2.403.452.80
    Betsson2.403.452.80
    Nordicbet2.403.452.80
    Pinnacle2.453.412.84

    Odds updated 31 Aug, 16:28

    Odds movement

    10 %
    41 %36 %

    2.452.45

    X+2 %
    31 %26 %

    3.353.41

    2-2 %
    36 %31 %

    2.892.84

    Over 2,5-2 %
    54 %49 %

    1.871.84

    Pinnacle · 6 recorded price levels · 30/08/2026 → 31/08/2026 · fixed scale 5 percentage points

    Statistics

    Head-to-head

    2 matches
    Birmingham City 0Draw 1Southampton 1
    Goals: 24 (⌀ 3)

    Head-to-head based on Championship data since 2023.

    Key facts

    • Birmingham City are unbeaten in their last 8 league matches.
    xG & xGA per match — 3-game rolling average

    Solid line = created (xG), dashed = conceded (xGA).

    Birmingham City
    Southampton
    When goals are scored and conceded 2026
    Birmingham City (43)
    Southampton (94)
    Pass networks

    Last 5 matches. Circle size = pass volume, line width = combinations between players. Attacking left to right.

    Birmingham City
    Jhon Solís: 119 passningar, xT 0.06SolísTomoki Iwata: 111 passningar, xT 0.17IwataChristoph Klarer: 102 passningar, xT 0.27KlarerAlexander William Cochrane: 98 passningar, xT 0.92CochraneBright Osayi-Samuel: 90 passningar, xT 0.12Osayi-SamuelPhil Yannik Neumann: 83 passningar, xT 0.12NeumannSeung-Ho Paik: 50 passningar, xT 0.1PaikCarlos Vicente Robles: 47 passningar, xT 0.06RoblesJames Beadle: 39 passningar, xT 0.14BeadleDemarai Ramelle Gray: 32 passningar, xT -0.04GrayAugust Priske Flyger: 24 passningar, xT 0.41Flyger
    Southampton
    Ryan Phelim Manning: 163 passningar, xT 0.65ManningJames Bree: 130 passningar, xT 0.17BreeJack Stephens: 128 passningar, xT 0.14StephensFlynn Downes: 116 passningar, xT 0.05DownesKuryu Matsuki: 103 passningar, xT 0.13MatsukiCameron Roger Bragg: 97 passningar, xT 0.2BraggFinn Azaz: 85 passningar, xT 0.78AzazLeonardo Weschenfelder Scienza: 79 passningar, xT 0.26ScienzaTaylor Jay Harwood-Bellis: 76 passningar, xT 0.17Harwood-BellisNathan Dean Joshua Wood-Gordon: 68 passningar, xT 0.06Wood-GordonDaniel Peretz: 60 passningar, xT 0.06Peretz
    xT networks

    The same network weighted by offensive threat (xT): circle size = threat created by the player, line width = threat of the combinations. Last 5 matches, attacking left to right.

    Birmingham City
    Jhon Solís: 119 passningar, xT 0.06SolísTomoki Iwata: 111 passningar, xT 0.17IwataChristoph Klarer: 102 passningar, xT 0.27KlarerAlexander William Cochrane: 98 passningar, xT 0.92CochraneBright Osayi-Samuel: 90 passningar, xT 0.12Osayi-SamuelPhil Yannik Neumann: 83 passningar, xT 0.12NeumannSeung-Ho Paik: 50 passningar, xT 0.1PaikCarlos Vicente Robles: 47 passningar, xT 0.06RoblesJames Beadle: 39 passningar, xT 0.14BeadleDemarai Ramelle Gray: 32 passningar, xT -0.04GrayAugust Priske Flyger: 24 passningar, xT 0.41Flyger
    Southampton
    Ryan Phelim Manning: 163 passningar, xT 0.65ManningJames Bree: 130 passningar, xT 0.17BreeJack Stephens: 128 passningar, xT 0.14StephensFlynn Downes: 116 passningar, xT 0.05DownesKuryu Matsuki: 103 passningar, xT 0.13MatsukiCameron Roger Bragg: 97 passningar, xT 0.2BraggFinn Azaz: 85 passningar, xT 0.78AzazLeonardo Weschenfelder Scienza: 79 passningar, xT 0.26ScienzaTaylor Jay Harwood-Bellis: 76 passningar, xT 0.17Harwood-BellisNathan Dean Joshua Wood-Gordon: 68 passningar, xT 0.06Wood-GordonDaniel Peretz: 60 passningar, xT 0.06Peretz

    The teams in numbers

    PerformanceBirmingham CitySouthampton
    Points56
    xPoints3.95.6
    xG per match1.22.2
    xGA per match1.21
    xG within 8s of winning the ball00.47
    xGA within 8s of losing the ball0.120.36
    Playing styleBirmingham CitySouthampton
    Build-up efficiency0.330.3
    Field tilt0.550.71
    xT per match0.931.2
    xTA per match10.81
    Won balls, offensive half2524
    Pressing intensity0.220.21
    Pressing efficiency0.390.26
    Pressing efficiency, offensive half0.40.18
    Entries into the box per match1213
    Entries into the box against1010
    Pass completion %0.650.81
    Pass completion % under pressure0.630.78
    Passes per match281412
    Passes against per match255260
    Switches of play per match19.922.1
    Long balls per match3033
    Set piecesBirmingham CitySouthampton
    xG from free kicks0.120.14
    Corners per match76.6
    Corners against per match2.65.6
    xG per corner0.050.01
    xGA per corner against0.060.01
    First touch, offensive corners %0.450.45
    First touch, defensive corners %0.750.71
    OtherBirmingham CitySouthampton
    Throw-in control0.730.65
    The goalkeepersJames Beadle (Birmingham City)Daniel Peretz (Southampton)
    Saves87
    Save %73%70%
    xG prevented54%55%
    Claims0 (0%)0 (0%)

    Frequently asked questions

    Who wins Birmingham City vs Southampton according to our model?

    The model gives Birmingham City a 38% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Birmingham City 38%, draw 27%, Southampton 35%.

    What is the most likely scoreline?

    The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 13% probability.

    Over or under 2.5 goals?

    The model rates over 2.5 goals at 47% and under at 53%.

    Will both teams score?

    The probability of both teams scoring is 52% according to the model.

    Why are some legs locked in the bet builder?

    The same rules as the bookmakers’ builders: legs that contradict or already follow from your slip cannot be combined — for example correct score 2–1 with under 2.5 goals. The difference is that we don’t look the rules up in a table; we compute them straight from the score matrix.

    More matches in the league

    Predictions come from PlaymakerAI's match model and reflect the model's assessment — not betting advice. Gamble responsibly.