01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Rochdale to win45%
- Under 3.5 goals78%
EFL League TwoSpotland, Rochdale14°0,2 mm25 km/h
Läs på svenskaMarcus Johansson · · Analysis from the match model · How the predictions work
TEXT:
A striking 45% win probability for Rochdale suggests a slight edge for the hosts, yet the numbers hint at a more nuanced picture. Rochdale's strategy of possession control contrasts sharply with Gillingham's low defensive block and preference for direct play. Despite a modest expected goals statistic of 1.38 for the home team, their defensive acumen, with an expected goals against of 1.4, might just hold the key.
Gillingham, with a superior xPoints of 4.6 compared to Rochdale's 3.3, appear better on paper, yet their approach tends to suppress goal-scoring opportunities. An xG of 0.89 per match against Rochdale's 0.71 favors them slightly, but the visitors' defensive vulnerabilities could tilt the balance. The key may lie in the rapid transition game, where Gillingham's xG within eight seconds of winning the ball is three times that of the hosts.
The model leans towards a low-scoring affair, with the 1-1 draw as the most probable outcome at 13%. An under 2.5 goals scenario is credible, given the 43% probability for over. Yet, a tight 1-0 win for Rochdale also lurks.
The verdict on the pre-built bet builders for this match, priced against the model’s score matrix before kickoff. Graded on the 90-minute result.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
Bets where the model's probability beats what the odds imply (EV+).
| Bookmaker | 1 · Rochdale | X | 2 · Gillingham |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bet365 | 2.00 | 3.30 | 3.50 |
| Betfair Exchange | 2.12 | 2.94 | 3.05 |
| Betsafe | 2.08 | 3.30 | 3.45 |
| Betsson | 2.08 | 3.30 | 3.45 |
| Nordicbet | 2.08 | 3.30 | 3.45 |
| Pinnacle | 2.10 | EV+ 1% 3.56 | 3.42 |
Odds updated 5 Sept, 10:32
2.13 → 2.10
3.52 → 3.56
3.20 → 3.42
1.99 → 1.94
Pinnacle · 13 recorded price levels · 02/09/2026 → 05/09/2026 · fixed scale 5 percentage points
Solid line = created (xG), dashed = conceded (xGA).
Last 5 matches. Circle size = pass volume, line width = combinations between players. Attacking left to right.
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.
| Performance | Rochdale | Gillingham |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 3 | 3 |
| xPoints | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| xG per match | 0.71 | 0.89 |
| xGA per match | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.02 | 0.06 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.11 | 0.21 |
| Playing style | Rochdale | Gillingham |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.32 | 0.33 |
| Field tilt | 0.48 | 0.35 |
| xT per match | 0.64 | 0.82 |
| xTA per match | 0.89 | 0.73 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 16 | 29 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.23 | 0.24 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.32 | 0.29 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.28 | 0.31 |
| Entries into the box per match | 7 | 9 |
| Entries into the box against | 14 | 15 |
| Pass completion % | 0.77 | 0.63 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.72 | 0.57 |
| Passes per match | 386 | 227 |
| Passes against per match | 241 | 339 |
| Switches of play per match | 23.1 | 14.2 |
| Long balls per match | 32 | 30 |
| Set pieces | Rochdale | Gillingham |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.01 | 0.12 |
| Corners per match | 3.8 | 3.5 |
| Corners against per match | 5.1 | 7.7 |
| xG per corner | 0.02 | 0 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.05 | 0.02 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.2 | 0.29 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.7 | 0.63 |
| Other | Rochdale | Gillingham |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.76 | 0.67 |
| The goalkeepers | Nils Ramming (Rochdale) | Oliver Lennon George Wright (Gillingham) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 12 | 8 |
| Save % | 67% | 80% |
| xG prevented | 37% | 74% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model gives Rochdale a 45% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Rochdale 45%, draw 28%, Gillingham 26%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 13% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 43% and under at 57%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 48% according to the model.
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.
Predictions come from PlaymakerAI's match model and reflect the model's assessment — not betting advice. Gamble responsibly.