Championship · 2025Sat, 23 Aug 2025, 14:00 UTCFull timeCoventry Building Society ArenaFull-time recap

Coventry City

7–1Full-time recap

Queens Park Rangers

This page describes the completed match context. The result is not presented as a prior forecast.

This match

Match statistics

Metric	Coventry City	Queens Park Rangers
Shots	19 shots/match▲	10 shots/match
Shots on target	8 shots/match▲	1 shots/match
Expected goals	1.27 xG/match▲	0.61 xG/match
Possession	53%●	47%
Corners	9 corners/match●	4 corners/match
Fouls	15 fouls/match	8 fouls/match

Every shot

Shot map

Every recorded shot, placed where it was taken and sized by its expected-goals value. Each team attacks towards its own end of the pitch.

off target
on target
goal
penalty
size = xG

Coventry City: 19 shots, 8 on target, 1.29 xG. Queens Park Rangers: 10 shots, 1 on target, 0.58 xG.

How the match built

Expected-goals timeline

Expected goals accumulated minute by minute. Circles mark the goals that were actually scored.

The step line is cumulative expected goals; circles mark goals. Final: Coventry City 1.29 xG · Queens Park Rangers 0.58 xG.

30-second read

What the record shows

The clearest recorded pattern is: Coventry City's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit above their competition baselines. No second pattern clears the sample and coverage gates. Limitation: At least one team has fewer than the configured season sample.

Coventry City show a distinct attacking-volume record

weak

Coventry City's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit above their competition baselines.

19 shots/match▲ShotsCoventry City · Queens Park Rangers12 shots/match

Evidence and caveat

Comparison: Team shot volume is paired with the opponent's recorded shot allowance.

Window: season

Metric	Coventry City	Queens Park Rangers	Baseline
Shots	19 shots/match	12 shots/match	12 shots/match
Shots against	10 shots/match	15.7 shots/match	12.5 shots/match

Caveat: Shot volume describes activity; it does not establish finishing quality or a match outcome.

Metric comparison

Team comparison

Season averages · sample sizes shown with each metric. Context, not a forecast.

Where the edge is

Coventry City favored in 0 of 13 directional metrics · Queens Park Rangers in 0 · 13 too close

4 goals/matchGoals scoredseason · 3/31 goals/match

1.33 goals/matchGoals allowedseason · 3/33.33 goals/match

1.99 xG/matchExpected goalsseason · 3/30.68 xG/match

0.84 xG/matchExpected goals allowedseason · 3/31.39 xG/match

19 shots/matchShotsseason · 3/312 shots/match

10 shots/matchShots allowedseason · 3/315.7 shots/match

7 shots/matchShots on targetseason · 3/32.33 shots/match

2.67 shots/matchShots on target allowedseason · 3/35 shots/match

54.7%●Possessionseason · 3/353%

7.33 corners/match●Cornersseason · 3/34.33 corners/match

4 corners/matchCorners allowedseason · 3/35 corners/match

—Cardsseason · 0/0—

11 fouls/matchFoulsseason · 3/38 fouls/match

—Passesseason · 0/0—

—Pass accuracyseason · 0/0—

—Shots inside boxseason · 0/0—

—Blocked shotsseason · 0/0—

—Goalkeeper savesseason · 0/0—

—Offsidesseason · 0/0—

33%Clean-sheet frequencyseason · 3/30%

67%Scoring frequencyseason · 3/3100%

Style profile

How the teams compare

Competition percentiles describe recorded style; they do not rank likely outcomes.

Possession control

Relative share of recorded possession within the competition.

Coventry City72.9

Queens Park Rangers60.4

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Attacking volume

Recorded shot and scoring volume, expressed as competition percentiles.

Coventry City97.9

Queens Park Rangers30.5

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Defensive resistance

Lower recorded scoring and shot allowance produces a higher descriptive percentile.

Coventry City60.4

Queens Park Rangers10.4

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Directness proxy

Shots per possession point; a descriptive transition/directness proxy, not an outcome score.

Coventry City97.9

Queens Park Rangers31.2

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Physicality

Recorded fouls and cards relative to competition peers.

Coventry City29.2

Queens Park Rangers8.3

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 50%

Set-piece relevance

Corner volume relative to competition peers.

Coventry City91.7

Queens Park Rangers39.6

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Tempo and pressure proxy

Combined event-volume percentiles for shots, corners and fouls.

Coventry City79.2

Queens Park Rangers26.6

0–100 competition percentile · coverage 100%

Recent form

Season, last 10 and last 5

Window

Season

Coventry City3 matchesQueens Park Rangers3 matches

4 goals/match▲Goals scored3/31 goals/match

1.33 goals/match▲Goals allowed3/33.33 goals/match

1.99 xG/match▲Expected goals3/30.68 xG/match

19 shots/match▲Shots3/312 shots/match

7 shots/match▲Shots on target3/32.33 shots/match

54.7%●Possession3/353%

7.33 corners/match●Corners3/34.33 corners/match

—Cards0/0—

11 fouls/matchFouls3/38 fouls/match

Venue split

Home and away samples

Window

Home team at home / away team away

Coventry City2 matchesQueens Park Rangers2 matches

—Goals scored2/2—

—Goals allowed2/2—

—Expected goals2/2—

—Shots2/2—

—Shots on target2/2—

—Possession2/2—

—Corners2/2—

—Cards0/0—

—Fouls2/2—

Schedule context

Rest and recent workload

7.1 daysRest before fixtureprevious completed fixtures · 1/17 days

1 matchesMatches in previous 14 daysprevious completed fixtures · 1/12 matches

Evidence quality

How much supports this analysis

Grade C · Limited evidencelimited

Season samples3 / 3home / away teams

Recent samples3 / 3last-five windows

FreshnessLess than one dayfrom nearest prior match

At least one team has fewer than the configured season sample.
At least one team has an incomplete last-five window.

Known unknowns

Lineups, injuries, suspensions and tactical changes are not available in the retained dataset.
Some metrics are unavailable or below their observation minimum: cards.
The completed-match sample is too small for broad style conclusions.

Analysis cutoff: Sat, 23 Aug 2025, 18:00 UTC · analysis-v4