01 · 2 legs
Safe
- Hässleholms IF to win48%
- Over 1.5 goals82%
Swedish Ettan14°0,9 mm17 km/h
Läs på svenska
Hässleholms IFLow block & direct
AFC MalmöPossession & high pressErik Lindberg · · Written from the model's numbers · How the predictions work
TEXT:
Hässleholms IF, riding a wave of confidence with seven consecutive wins, are set to dominate as they take on Ariana FC Malmö. The matchup puts the spotlight on contrasting styles: the hosts are known for their low defensive setup and direct play, while the visitors favor possession and a high press. The rain forecasted for the match could dampen Malmö’s possession game, likely playing into the hands of the more disciplined home side.
The numbers strongly favor Hässleholm. They have scored in eight straight league matches and win a significant 60% of their home games historically. The model gives them a 48% chance of victory and even suggests a narrow win is likely, with 2-1 emerging as the second most probable scoreline. Their xPoints are also notably superior to Malmö's (33.6 vs 25.4), indicating an edge that goes beyond mere form.
However, Malmö aren't without their strengths. They’ve managed to score in 12 consecutive league matches, demonstrating a consistent offensive threat. This aligns with the expected goals for both teams: Hässleholm at 1.85 and Malmö at 1.27, suggesting both are likely to find the net. With a 61% probability of both teams scoring and a 60% chance of over 2.5 goals, the match is expected to be lively despite Hässleholm's defensive leanings.
The most likely result, given the data, is a narrow 1-1 draw, with 2-1 to the hosts as the next most probable outcome, though the soggy weather could slightly temper goal-scoring opportunities.
01 · 2 legs
02 · 3 legs
03 · 4 legs
No odds available yet.
Head-to-head based on Ettan data since 2023.
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 | Hässleholms IF | AFC Malmö |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 39 | 31 |
| xPoints | 33.6 | 25.4 |
| xG per match | 1.4 | 1.5 |
| xGA per match | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| xG within 8s of winning the ball | 0.34 | 0.32 |
| xGA within 8s of losing the ball | 0.26 | 0.35 |
| Playing style | Hässleholms IF | AFC Malmö |
|---|---|---|
| Build-up efficiency | 0.33 | 0.36 |
| Field tilt | 0.39 | 0.55 |
| xT per match | 1.4 | 1.6 |
| xTA per match | 1.6 | 1.3 |
| Won balls, offensive half | 28 | 30 |
| Pressing intensity | 0.46 | 0.49 |
| Pressing efficiency | 0.29 | 0.28 |
| Pressing efficiency, offensive half | 0.3 | 0.29 |
| Entries into the box per match | 10 | 17 |
| Entries into the box against | 15 | 13 |
| Pass completion % | 0.74 | 0.8 |
| Pass completion % under pressure | 0.67 | 0.75 |
| Passes per match | 272 | 410 |
| Passes against per match | 381 | 349 |
| Switches of play per match | 15.1 | 17.3 |
| Long balls per match | 24 | 37 |
| Set pieces | Hässleholms IF | AFC Malmö |
|---|---|---|
| xG from free kicks | 0.21 | 0.13 |
| Corners per match | 3.2 | 5.4 |
| Corners against per match | 6.3 | 4.9 |
| xG per corner | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| xGA per corner against | 0.02 | 0.03 |
| First touch, offensive corners % | 0.3 | 0.56 |
| First touch, defensive corners % | 0.61 | 0.59 |
| Other | Hässleholms IF | AFC Malmö |
|---|---|---|
| Throw-in control | 0.48 | 0.59 |
| The goalkeepers | Liam Bengtsson (Hässleholms IF) | Philip Mårtensson (AFC Malmö) |
|---|---|---|
| Saves | 39 | 41 |
| Save % | 64% | 70% |
| xG prevented | 45% | 34% |
| Claims | 97 (96%) | 69 (92%) |
The model gives Hässleholms IF a 48% win probability. Full 1X2 picture: Hässleholms IF 48%, draw 26%, AFC Malmö 26%.
The model's most likely final score is 1-1 at 11% probability.
The model rates over 2.5 goals at 60% and under at 40%.
The probability of both teams scoring is 61% 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.