01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Double chance Shrewsbury Town or draw (1X)71%
- Under 3.5 goals86%
EFL League TwoNew Meadow, Shrewsbury17°0,1 mm29 km/h
Läs på svenskaOscar Nilsson · · Model-assisted analysis, fact-checked · How the predictions work
The number that jumps out here is the 38% model probability for a draw between Shrewsbury Town and Northampton Town. This suggests a rather balanced affair, with both sides struggling to gain an outright advantage. The predicted most likely scorelines, 1-0, 0-0, and 1-1, further underline a cautious game, with neither team expected to dominate offensively. In fact, the match is leaning heavily towards lower-scoring outcomes, indicated by the 32% chance for over 2.5 goals and a mere 40% probability for both teams to score.
Shrewsbury, despite sitting three points behind Northampton in the standings, showcases a stronger expected goals (xG) metric per match at 1.2 compared to the visitors' 0.74. This might suggest an offensive edge for the home team. However, Shrewsbury's style of relying on counter-attacks and crosses could be hampered by the forecasted 9.9 mm of rain, which tends to suppress attacking fluidity and has been considered in the model's calculations.
On the defensive side, both teams are quite similar, with Northampton having a slight edge in xGA (expected goals against) at 0.96 compared to Shrewsbury's 1.0. Northampton's possession-control style might help them navigate the adverse weather better, as maintaining possession can mitigate the unpredictability of a slick pitch.
Current form and expected goals metrics point to a tight contest. Shrewsbury may have a slight xG edge, but Northampton's higher xG within eight seconds of winning the ball indicates their potential for breaking quickly and efficiently when opportunities arise.
The standout betting angle here is the value on the draw, with Betsafe, Betsson, and Nordicbet offering odds at 3.1. The model gives a 38% probability for this result, translating to a 16% edge for bettors. Given the even nature of the matchup and the likelihood of a low-scoring affair, backing the draw seems the sharpest play.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
Bets where the model's probability beats what the odds imply (EV+).
| Bookmaker | 1 · Shrewsbury Town | X | 2 · Northampton Town |
|---|---|---|---|
| Betsafe | 2.55 | EV+ 16% 3.10 | 2.72 |
| Betsson | 2.55 | EV+ 16% 3.10 | 2.72 |
| Nordicbet | 2.55 | EV+ 16% 3.10 | 2.72 |
| Pinnacle | 2.66 | EV+ 20% 3.21 | 2.74 |
Odds updated 11 Sept, 16:32
Market signal
The market has moved clearly towards under 2.5 goals since 6 September — the odds have shortened from 1.67 to 1.60 (−4%).
2.59 → 2.66
3.27 → 3.21
2.68 → 2.74
2.17 → 2.35
Pinnacle · 6 recorded price levels · 06/09/2026 → 11/09/2026 · 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 | Shrewsbury Town | Northampton Town |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 3 | 6 |
| xPoints | 6.7 | 6.7 |
| xG per match | 1.2 | 0.74 |
| xGA per match | 1 | 0.96 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.1 | 0.22 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.17 | 0.24 |
| Playing style | Shrewsbury Town | Northampton Town |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.33 | 0.32 |
| Field tilt | 0.44 | 0.38 |
| xT per match | 1.1 | 0.49 |
| xTA per match | 0.76 | 0.75 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 33 | 27 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.23 | 0.24 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.31 | 0.36 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.26 | 0.32 |
| Entries into the box per match | 13 | 9 |
| Entries into the box against | 11 | 12 |
| Pass completion % | 0.62 | 0.67 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.58 | 0.63 |
| Passes per match | 226 | 268 |
| Passes against per match | 320 | 335 |
| Switches of play per match | 15.9 | 16.3 |
| Long balls per match | 27 | 21 |
| Set pieces | Shrewsbury Town | Northampton Town |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.18 | 0.02 |
| Corners per match | 4.8 | 5.3 |
| Corners against per match | 3.8 | 3.2 |
| xG per corner | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.03 | 0.01 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.42 | 0.5 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.63 | 0.62 |
| Other | Shrewsbury Town | Northampton Town |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.76 | 0.72 |
| The goalkeepers | William Sam Douglas Harry Boyle (Shrewsbury Town) | Zachary Anton John Jeacock (Northampton Town) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 6 | 11 |
| Save % | 100% | 79% |
| xG prevented | 100% | 54% |
| Claims | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) |
The model sees a draw as the most likely outcome: Shrewsbury Town 37%, draw 38%, Northampton Town 26%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-0 at 15% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 32% and under at 68%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 40% 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.