Birmingham City
Championship · 2026Birmingham City 2–2 Middlesbrough · Championship
This page describes the completed match context. The result is not presented as a prior forecast.
Match at a glance
Birmingham City and Middlesbrough drew 2–2.
- Shots
- 15–15
- Shots on target
- 5–4
- Expected goals
- 1.14–1.93
- Possession
- 48%–52%
Full time
What the match recorded
Birmingham City and Middlesbrough drew 2–2. Recorded in this match (Birmingham City – Middlesbrough): shots 15–15, shots on target 5–4, expected goals 1.14–1.93, possession 48%–52%. This is what was recorded. It is not a claim that the result was foreseeable.
Pre-match record
What the data showed before kick-off. Kept for reference; it did not know the result.
Recent scheduling adds useful context
weakA compressed recent schedule is recorded for Birmingham City, Middlesbrough.
Evidence and caveat
Comparison: Rest days and completed matches in the prior 14 days are shown directly.
Window: previous 14 days
| Metric | Birmingham City | Middlesbrough | Baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rest days | 7.1 days | 3.8 days | — |
| Matches last 14 days | 3 matches | 3 matches | — |
Caveat: The database does not describe travel, rotation decisions or player-level workload.
Birmingham City's recent record differs from the season
weakBirmingham City's last-five shots average is above their season average.
Evidence and caveat
Comparison: An unweighted last-five average is compared with the unweighted season average.
Window: last_5 versus season
| Metric | Last 5 | Season | Baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shots | 15.8 shots/match | 13.4 shots/match | 13.2 shots/match |
Caveat: Five matches are sensitive to opponent mix and isolated match states.
Middlesbrough show a distinct attacking-volume record
weakMiddlesbrough's shot volume and the opposing shot-allowance context sit above their competition baselines.
Evidence and caveat
Comparison: Team shot volume is paired with the opponent's recorded shot allowance.
Window: season
| Metric | Birmingham City | Middlesbrough | Baseline |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shots | 13.4 shots/match | 17.4 shots/match | 13.2 shots/match |
| Shots against | 12 shots/match | 11.8 shots/match | 12.9 shots/match |
Caveat: Shot volume describes activity; it does not establish finishing quality or a match outcome.
This match
Match statistics
Every shot
Shot map
Every recorded shot, placed where it was taken and sized by its expected-goals value. Arrows show each team’s attacking direction.
- off target
- on target
- goal
- penalty
- size = xG
Birmingham City: 16 shots, 6 on target, 1.38 xG. Middlesbrough: 15 shots, 4 on target, 2.11 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: Birmingham City 1.38 xG · Middlesbrough 2.11 xG.
Who started
Lineups
Show both lineups
Lineups as recorded. The source does not mark them confirmed.
- James BeadleG
- Christoph KlarerD
- Phil NeumannD
- Alex CochraneD
- Bright Osayi-SamuelD
- Jhon SolísM
- Tomoki IwataM
- Jay StansfieldM
- Carlos VicenteF
- August PriskeF
- Liam MillarF
- Radek VitekG
- Callum BrittainD
- Ashley PhillipsD
- Maximilian ArfstenD
- Adilson MalandaD
- Riley McGreeM
- Aidan MorrisM
- Myles Peart-HarrisM
- Will LankshearF
- Amario Cozier-DuberryF
- Kyle JosephF
History
Head-to-head
Recent meetings between these teams.
Last 5 meetings
Metric comparison
Team comparison
Season averages, with the sample size beside each metric.
Season: Birmingham City favored in 2 of 13 directional metrics · Middlesbrough in 8 · 3 too close
Window
Season
Window
Last 10
Window
Last 5
Window
Home–Away
Competition percentiles describe recorded style; they do not rank likely outcomes.
Possession control
Relative share of recorded possession within the competition.
Attacking volume
Recorded shot and scoring volume, expressed as competition percentiles.
Defensive resistance
Lower recorded scoring and shot allowance produces a higher descriptive percentile.
Directness proxy
Shots per possession point; a descriptive transition/directness proxy, not an outcome score.
Physicality
Recorded fouls and cards relative to competition peers.
Set-piece relevance
Corner volume relative to competition peers.
Tempo and pressure proxy
Combined event-volume percentiles for shots, corners and fouls.
- Matches in previous 14 days · Both teams: 3 matches
Birmingham City / Middlesbrough
Evidence quality
How much supports this analysis
- Evidence is usable but does not meet the strongest completeness threshold.
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.
More football
Related matches
Derby County
Millwall
Wrexham
Southampton
Queens Park Rangers
Preston North EndTeam rankings in Championship
Make a graphic from this match
Creator Studio builds a branded post from this match's recorded data, with its evidence grade and source cutoff carried into the export.