Group H · Matchday 3

Cape VerdevsSaudi Arabia

2026-06-26·19:00 localPredictions finalised

Snapshot · 2026-07-14Model 1.0.0Final prediction · locked 26 Jun, 21:07 UTCCape Verde·Saudi Arabia·Head-to-head →·
Full time · forecast gradedCape Verde 0 0 Saudi ArabiaThe locked pre-match forecast has been graded against this result.See the calibration recap →

The forecast

Match-outcome probability

  • Cape Verde win
    30.3%
  • Draw
    33.2%
  • Saudi Arabia win
    36.5%

The model projects one of the most closely-contested fixtures of the round — Cape Verde and Saudi Arabia are separated by fine margins across every outcome.

Rank checkFIFA ranks Cape Verde #68 in the world; the model ranks them #36 in this tournament field, 32 places higher than the FIFA list suggests. All 48 compared →
Likeliest score0–019.3%
First goal0-15'24.5%
Both teams score33.3%
Over 2.5 goals24.0%
Top scorerLivramento8.0%
Expected goals0.9 - 0.8
Loading pitch visualisation...

Why the model says this

Favoring Cape Verde

  • ·Cape Verde has demonstrated greater stability in recent results, recording only 1 loss in their last 6 matches (1 win, 4 draws), compared to Saudi Arabia's 4 losses over the same period.
  • ·Over their last six matches, Cape Verde holds a positive goal difference of +1 (10 goals scored, 9 conceded), contrasting with Saudi Arabia's negative goal difference of -5 (6 goals scored, 11 conceded).

Favoring Saudi Arabia

  • ·Saudi Arabia is ranked 60th by FIFA, eight places higher than Cape Verde, who are ranked 68th.
  • ·The model projects Saudi Arabia to generate more expected goals (0.96 xG) in this fixture compared to Cape Verde (0.83 xG).
  • ·Key sub-models, including ELO (41.7% vs 36.3%), DC (36.0% vs 29.3%), and HP (34.1% vs 31.2%), consistently assign a higher win probability to Saudi Arabia.

What the model can't fully price

  • ·One projected starter across both squads is carrying a fitness doubt. The model's current lineup channel does not account for this, meaning the impact of this potential absence is not factored into the probabilities.
  • ·The 'Group H · Matchday 3' context implies this is a group stage match, where qualification scenarios or dead rubber status could influence team approach, which is not explicitly modeled.
  • ·The venue for the match is not specified, meaning any specific conditions (e.g., altitude, pitch quality) that could influence performance are not factored into the probabilities.

Form check

Cape Verde

Steady

Cape Verde has shown resilience recently, with only one loss in their last six matches. They have drawn four times, including two 1-1 results and a goalless draw, alongside a 3-0 victory. Their most recent loss was a 2-4 defeat.

1 loss in their last 6 matches

Saudi Arabia

Declining

Saudi Arabia's recent form has been challenging, with four losses in their last six fixtures. They secured two wins but suffered significant defeats, including a 0-4 loss and a 1-2 defeat in their most recent outing.

4 losses in their last 6 matches

Analysis

How it plays out

Cape Verde press high and force the tempo. Saudi Arabia's balanced setup needs to absorb that pressure early and find the right moments to play forward.

What decides it

Cape Verde press high (PPDA 17.2). If the press doesn't win the ball early, the space behind their back line becomes exposed. The scoring threat is evenly split: Nuno da Costa (6.6%) and Abdullah Al-Hamdan (5.3%).

Off the pitch

Bubista (6 years in charge of Cape Verde) vs Georgios Donis (0 years). That tenure gap shows up in squad familiarity and set-piece coordination.

The angle

A Group H fixture where the result matters more for the standings than the headlines.

Goals & scorelines

Likeliest score 0–0 (19.3%) · xG 0.9 - 0.8

Expected goals

Cape Verde
0.85
Saudi Arabia
0.84

Mean of the Dixon-Coles joint goal distribution. Same fit that produces the most-likely-scoreline list below.

Most likely scorelines

  • 0–0
    19.3%
  • 1–0
    14.9%
  • 0–1
    14.6%
  • 1–1
    14.0%
  • 2–0
    6.7%

From the Dixon-Coles joint Poisson with the low-score correction. Scorelines are listed in probability order; this is a description of the model's distribution, not a recommendation.

Most likely half-time scorelines

  • 0–0
    43.4%
  • 1–0
    17.9%
  • 0–1
    17.5%
  • 1–1
    8.1%
  • 2–0
    3.9%

Same Dixon-Coles fit as the full-time list above, with rates halved to a 45-minute window and the low-score correction applied to that 1st-half block. The 0-0 row sits higher here than at full-time because fewer minutes have elapsed.

Goal totals

  • More than 0.5 goals
    80.7%
  • More than 1.5 goals
    51.1%
  • More than 2.5 goals
    24.0%
  • More than 3.5 goals
    9.2%
  • More than 4.5 goals
    2.9%
  • More than 5.5 goals
    0.8%
  • Both teams score
    33.3%

Each row is the probability the match finishes with more than the listed number of goals. Both-teams-to-score is the probability each side scores at least once. All values are marginals of the Dixon-Coles joint goal grid that produces the scoreline list above — not market lines or any other operator construct.

Event-typed probabilities

  • Cape Verde clean sheetOpposing team scores zero43.4%
  • Saudi Arabia clean sheetOpposing team scores zero42.6%

Derived from the same Dixon-Coles joint distribution as the scoreline list. These are descriptive event probabilities — see CLAUDE.md §3/§4 (formerly COMPLIANCE.md §4.2.7) for the framing the project uses.

Win-margin probability

  • Cape Verde by 4+
    0.6%
  • Cape Verde by 3+
    2.8%
  • Cape Verde by 2+
    11.3%
  • Cape Verde by 1+
    32.6%
  • Draw
    35.8%
  • Saudi Arabia by 1+
    31.6%
  • Saudi Arabia by 2+
    10.8%
  • Saudi Arabia by 3+
    2.7%
  • Saudi Arabia by 4+
    0.5%

Each row is the probability the match ends with the listed margin or larger in that direction. Marginal of the Dixon-Coles joint goal grid; the “by 1+” rows plus the draw row sum to 1.

How the match unfolds

Over 2.5 goals 24.0% · BTTS 33.3%

Game state through the match

0%25%50%75%100%0'15'30'45'60'75'90'
  • Cape Verde ahead33.4%
  • Level34.2%
  • Saudi Arabia ahead32.4%

Probability of each game state at minutes 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90 — derived from two independent thinned-Poisson processes with the Dixon-Coles per-team rates. The three lines always sum to 1 at each minute. The right column shows the state at the match's closing minute.

When the first goal arrives

  • 0–15
    24.5%
  • 15–30
    18.5%
  • 30–45
    14.0%
  • 45–60
    10.5%
  • 60–75
    8.0%
  • 75–90
    6.0%
  • No goal
    18.5%

Probability the match's first goal arrives in each 15-minute window. Homogeneous Poisson with combined rate λ = λh + λa from the Dixon-Coles fit; the seven rows (six windows + no-goal tail) sum to 1.

Half-time / full-time grid

Joint probability of half-time and full-time results
HT ↓ / FT →HCape Verde winDDrawASaudi Arabia win
HCape Verde ahead19.4%4.0%0.9%
DLevel12.9%26.5%12.6%
ASaudi Arabia ahead0.9%4.0%18.8%

Each cell is P(half-time result, full-time result). All nine cells sum to 1. Derived from a halved-λ Dixon-Coles fit for the first half plus an independent-Poisson second-half convolution.

Comeback probability

  • Cape Verde trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT
    5.0%
  • Saudi Arabia trail at HT, avoid defeat at FT
    4.9%

Joint probability — P(side trailing at half-time AND avoiding defeat at full-time). NOT conditional on trailing at HT. Derived from the same half-time / full-time decomposition that produces the HT/FT grid above; a tied first half is neither a home nor an away comeback opportunity.

Cards

  • Expected yellow cardsMean of the Poisson on total yellow cards.3.45
  • Total yellows over 2.567.0%
  • Total yellows over 3.545.3%
  • Total yellows over 4.526.5%
  • Any red cardP(at least one red card in the match).9.5%

Referee not yet assigned. Using the 2026 pool-mean per-match rate as a placeholder; the model picks up the referee's personal rate once the assignment is published. Total yellow cards modelled as a Poisson with mean equal to two team baselines plus the referee's deviation from the pool mean. Reds are modelled the same way, independently. See /docs/methodology/.

Teams & players

Top scorer: Livramento (8.0%)

Match detail

Cape Verde

Model-rated key players: Nuno da Costa (FW) — P(scores) 6.6%; Dailon Livramento (FW) — P(scores) 8.0%; Ryan Mendes (FW) — P(scores) 8.0%.

How they play

Cape Verde under Bubista play a high press game with 53% possession. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 17.2) and move the ball forward quickly at 5.7 passes per attack. They generate a high volume of shots (13.2 per 90).

What they must execute

Cape Verde need their high press to force turnovers in dangerous areas — if opponents can play through the press, the space left behind is vulnerable. Physical conditioning and squad rotation will be critical to sustain pressing intensity across a long tournament.

Storylines
Model bold: Model rates them #47 by tournament-winner probability — 21 places higher than FIFA #68.
Veteran #1: Vozinha40 at kickoff with 85 caps — last World Cup for the #1.
Local-league core: Only 3 of 25 predicted-squad players played in a top-5 European league last season — the rest play home or in non-top-5 leagues.

Saudi Arabia

Model-rated key players: Abdullah Al-Hamdan (FW) — P(scores) 5.3%; Firas Al-Buraikan (FW) — P(scores) 5.3%; Saleh Al-Shehri (FW) — P(scores) 5.3%.

How they play

Saudi Arabia under Georgios Donis play a balanced game with 52% possession. Their likely shape is a 4-1-4-1, though they have also used 4-3-3. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 17.8). They are selective in their shooting (10.1 per 90).

What they must execute

Saudi Arabia will need to leverage their strengths while managing the physical demands of a tournament spread across three host countries. With Georgios Donis appointed relatively recently (161 days before kickoff), building tactical cohesion in limited preparation time is the immediate challenge.

Storylines
Club core: 6 of 26 predicted-squad players play their club football for Al-Hilal — a single-club spine on the international side.
Local-league core: Only 0 of 26 predicted-squad players played in a top-5 European league last season — the rest play home or in non-top-5 leagues.
Model bold: Model rates them #42 by tournament-winner probability — 18 places higher than FIFA #60.
Set-piece outlook

Cape Verde historically converts 16.1% of xG from set-pieces, contributing 0.14 expected set-piece goals in this fixture. Combined, the model expects 0.14 set-piece goals across the 90 minutes.

  • P(Cape Verde scores set-piece goal) 12.8%
  • P(set-piece goal in match) 12.8%
Penalty outlook

If a penalty is awarded to Cape Verde, the model gives 72.0% conversion, 70.0% for Saudi Arabia.

Cape Verde primary PK: Nuno da Costa (1/1 in 2018-19, per fbref 2018 19).

Derived from the model's per-fixture forecast joint and supporting reference data (predicted squads, set-piece xG share, PK posteriors, club minutes). See /docs/methodology/ for the full methodology.

Tactical forecast

Cape Verdehigh-press
PPDA
17.2
Possession
53%
Directness (yds/pass)
6.6
Long balls/90
37
Set-piece xG
16%
Saudi Arabiabalanced
PPDA
17.8
Possession
52%
Directness (yds/pass)
6.2
Long balls/90
36
Set-piece xG

Style profile per side from StatsBomb open-data aggregation across recent international tournaments (Euro 2020/2024, Copa America 2024, AFCON 2023, World Cup 2018/2022). The tactical-fingerprint badge maps each team’s observed style vector into one of eight canonical archetypes via a rule-based classifier; teams with fewer than three matches of qualifying coverage carry an “insufficient-data” label rather than being forced into a default. Sides outside the StatsBomb-open corpus use FotMob team match stats from recent qualifiers and friendlies instead (possession and shot volume only), marked as partial coverage. PPDA = passes the side allows per defensive action (lower = more intense press). Formation distributions are not yet produced — that head of the §2.7 classifier is pending its own data pull. See /docs/methodology/.

Squad depth

Most irreplaceable starters

Cape Verde

  1. Logan CostaCentre-backCover: Diney · 0.360.41gap
  2. Kevin PinaDefensive midfieldCover: Laros Duarte · 0.280.25gap
  3. Jamiro MonteiroCentral midfieldCover: Yannick Semedo · 0.130.24gap

Saudi Arabia

  1. Firas Al-BuraikanStrikerCover: Abdullah Al-Salem · 0.050.51gap
  2. Abdullah Al-HamdanStrikerCover: Abdullah Al-Salem · 0.050.30gap
  3. Salem Al-DawsariWingerCover: Saleh Abu Al-Shamat · 0.030.29gap

Gap = how far a side's rating at the position falls from the starter to his likely in-squad replacement (named under each name). Larger = harder to replace. Descriptive metric, does not feed the published probabilities. Methodology →

Match conditions

  • AltitudeNear sea level13 m
  • Avg temperatureFive-year mean over the tournament window28.4 °C
  • Avg humidity78%
  • Heat stressShade WBGT ~31.8 °CHigh heat stress
  • Pitch surfacetemporary natural grass over artificial turf

Indoor artificial-turf stadium laying a temporary natural-grass pitch for the tournament.

Heat stress is a shade Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature proxy from the venue's climatology mean temperature and humidity; FIFA mandates cooling breaks at WBGT 32 °C. Evening kickoff (local time). These are long-window averages, not a match-day forecast, and they are not inputs to the forecast.

Top scorers · P(scores in this match)

Per-player scoring rate from Model #5 (`p_score_per_match`). Reflects each player's npxG/90, expected minutes, team xG share, and the average opposing-team defence. See /docs/methodology/.

Recent match form

Last match player ratings

Cape Verde

vs Argentina · avg 7.0

9
VozinhaGK
ATK
DEF
PAS
8
Sidny Lopes CabralCM
ATK
DEF
PAS
7
Deroy DuarteCM
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Pico LopesCB
ATK
DEF
PAS

Saudi Arabia

vs Spain · avg 3.7

4
Firas Al-BuraikanST
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Salem Al-DawsariLW
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Mohamed KannoCM
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Saleh Al-ShehriST
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Abdullah Al-HamdanST
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Musab Al-JuwayrCM
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Abdullah Al-KhaibariDM
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Ayman YahyaRW
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Ziyad Al-JohaniCM
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Abdullah Al-SalemST
ATK
DEF
PAS
4
Khalid Al-GhannamLW
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Hassan Al-TambaktiCB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Saud AbdulhamidRB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Mohammed Al-OwaisGK
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Abdulelah Al-AmriCB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Nasser Al-DawsariLB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Nawaf Al-AqidiGK
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Nawaf BoushalRB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Ali LajamiCB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Ali MajrashiRB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Hassan KadeshLB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Ahmed Al-KassarGK
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Jehad ThakriCB
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Mohammed Abu Al-Shamat
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Saleh Abu Al-Shamat
ATK
DEF
PAS
3.5
Moteb Al-HarbiLB
ATK
DEF
PAS

Worked well: Not observable from highlights

Struggled: Not observable from highlights

Player scores from official highlight analysis of each team's most recent match. Observational, not a model input. Methodology →

Video analysis: player performance

Per-player ratings and event breakdowns from official highlights analysis. Tap a player to see their full match timeline.

Cape Verde
8
DA COSTA

Scored two crucial goals with clinical finishing from inside the box.

7
Nuno da Costa111'–142'

Was a persistent attacking threat, forcing multiple good saves from the goalkeeper.

1goals3shots3on target

Match timeline

111'Nuno da Costa's close-range effort is saved by Al-Owais.
142'Nuno da Costa's shot is saved by Al-Owais.
6
Semedo14'–19'

Involved in multiple attacking sequences, demonstrating a willingness to shoot but lacked precision.

2shots1on target

Match timeline

14'Semedo's shot goes wide.
19'Al-Owais parries a shot from Semedo.
6
Ryan Mendes53'–53'

Contributed to the attack by getting a shot on target, though it was blocked.

1shots

Match timeline

53'Ryan Mendes' shot is blocked by a Saudi Arabia defender.
6
Duarte127'–127'

Attempted a shot that was blocked, contributing to the team's offensive efforts.

1shots

Match timeline

127'Duarte's shot is blocked by a Saudi Arabia defender.
5
Vozinha

Made several diving saves but ultimately conceded multiple goals.

1saves

Match timeline

Saudi Arabia
8
Al-Owais19'–142'

Made numerous crucial saves to keep his team in the game despite sustained pressure.

7saves

Match timeline

19'Al-Owais parries a shot from Semedo.
39'Montero's shot from close range is saved by Al-Owais.
111'Nuno da Costa's close-range effort is saved by Al-Owais.
119'Al-Owais drops a cross but recovers the ball.
135'A close-range shot from Cape Verde is saved by Al-Owais.
142'Nuno da Costa's shot is saved by Al-Owais.
6
Al-Shammari

Had a shot on target that was saved by the opposing goalkeeper.

6
CHAKHTI

Contributed to offensive movements and provided support in the final third.

Match observations

  • The match was a hard-fought contest with Cape Verde dominating attacking opportunities, particularly in the final third.
  • Saudi Arabia's goalkeeper, Al-Owais, was a standout performer, making numerous important stops to deny Cape Verde a breakthrough.
  • Despite the scoreboard showing 0-0 throughout the match action, Cape Verde's jubilant celebration at the end, coupled with commentary, indicates they secured a victory and progressed to the knockout phase.

Under the hood

Model-by-model comparison

Cape Verde vs Saudi Arabia

High disagreement (13.4%)
ModelWeightHomeDrawAway
EloRating-based strength estimate32%
38.9%
22.0%
39.1%
Dixon-ColesGoal-process model with low-score correction63%
31.9%
35.4%
32.6%
Hierarchical PoissonBayesian model with confederation pooling6%
33.2%
34.4%
32.4%
Bayesian stackingLearned-weight combination
33.2%
36.0%
30.8%
Ensemble (published)Uniform average + isotonic calibration
33.3%
34.1%
32.6%
Home spread: 6.9%
Draw spread: 13.4%
Away spread: 6.7%
How each model works
Elo
Each team carries a single strength rating updated after every match by a margin-aware K-factor. Match probabilities come from the logistic function of the rating gap. Elo is fast-adapting but coarse — it sees only who won and by how much, not how the goals were scored.
Dixon-Coles
A Poisson regression on team-level attack and defence parameters, fitted via maximum likelihood with an exponential time-decay weighting. The Dixon-Coles correction adjusts the four low-score cells (0-0, 1-0, 0-1, 1-1) where independent Poisson underestimates dependence. Produces full scoreline distributions, not just H/D/A.
Hierarchical Poisson
A Bayesian Poisson model fitted via MCMC (PyMC) with hierarchical priors that pool attack and defence parameters within confederations. Shrinks small-sample teams toward their confederation mean — helpful for nations with few recent competitive fixtures. Slower to fit but better-calibrated on the tails.
Bayesian stacking
Optimises simplex weights (w_elo, w_dc, w_hp) to maximise the leave-one-out log-score across a walk-forward backtest (Yao et al. 2018). The result is a weighted average of the three component models' probabilities, then isotonic-calibrated. Adds no extra features — just learns which component to trust more from historical accuracy.
Ensemble (published)
Equal-weight average of all three component models, followed by per-class isotonic regression calibration fitted on 24 months of walk-forward out-of-fold predictions. This is the probability published on the site. The uniform mean is deliberately simple — it avoids overfitting to the stacking weights' training window.

Three independent component models feed two combination strategies. The uniform ensemble is the published probability; Bayesian stacking uses learned weights. Amber bars flag >5pp divergence from the published number. Full methodology

Probability decomposition (transparency surface)

  • Baseline ensemble — P(Cape Verde win)30.6%
  • + Lineup contribution0.0pp
  • + Style-matchup contribution0.0pp
  • Published P(Cape Verde win)30.6%
Cape Verde
30.6%
Draw
30.1%
Saudi Arabia
39.3%

Decomposition of the published P(Cape Verde win) into the calibrated- baseline plus contributions from the §2.3 expected-XI lineup delta and the §2.7 style-matchup interaction. The §2.7 roadmap is explicit that style effects are second-order to team strength — single-digit-percentage P(win) shifts on extreme style matchups, near-zero on balanced ones. We surface the decomposition for transparency even when the contributions are small; the baseline carries the prediction. Methodology: /docs/methodology.

For this fixture both contributions round to under 0.05pp — the fitted style-matchup pair effect is in the small-magnitude regime the model expects to dominate.

Latest news & match context

Team news

No recent headlines for Cape Verde or Saudi Arabia.

Match conditions
Stage:
Group H · Matchday 3
Date:
26 Jun
Availability

Cape Verde

Cape Verde come in at close to full strength.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia come in at close to full strength.

What it means

Cape Verde and Saudi Arabia both come in at close to full strength, so the forecast rests on baseline team strength rather than late team-news swings.

Availability from the predicted squads and injury feed; forecast adjustments from the model's own decomposition. See /docs/methodology/.

Standard Pass

This match is a free preview

You're seeing the model's full forecast for this fixture for free. Unlock the same depth: probabilities, expected goals, scoreline distributions, and per-player scoring, for all 104 matches with a Standard Pass, valid through the tournament.

Get the Pass, $15

Every forecast graded against the real result, scored on 987 matches since 2014. See the scorecard.

24h money-back, no questions asked·No subscription, no auto-renewal·Access through 31 Dec 2026. See refund policy.