Detroit City FC 2 - 0 Rhode Island
19.04.2025 - 16:00
Finished
Match Scoring / Conceding First
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Louisville City |
14 | 64% |
| 2 |
North Carolina FC |
13 | 62% |
| 3 |
Indy Eleven |
13 | 62% |
| 4 |
New Mexico United |
12 | 60% |
| 5 |
Sacramento Republic |
12 | 57% |
| 6 |
Phoenix Rising |
12 | 55% |
| 7 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
12 | 55% |
| 8 |
Charleston Battery |
12 | 55% |
| 9 |
Orange County |
10 | 50% |
| 10 |
Miami FC II |
11 | 50% |
| 11 |
San Antonio |
10 | 48% |
| 12 |
El Paso Locomotive |
10 | 48% |
| 13 |
Colorado Springs |
10 | 48% |
| 14 |
Oakland Roots |
10 | 48% |
| 15 |
Detroit City FC |
10 | 45% |
| 16 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
10 | 45% |
| 17 |
Hartford Athletic |
9 | 43% |
| 18 |
Lexington |
9 | 41% |
| 19 |
Monterey Bay |
8 | 35% |
| 20 |
Rhode Island |
7 | 32% |
| 21 |
Loudoun United |
7 | 32% |
| 22 |
Las Vegas Lights |
7 | 32% |
| 23 |
Birmingham Legion |
6 | 27% |
| 24 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
5 | 24% |
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
North Carolina FC |
9 | 82% |
| 2 |
Charleston Battery |
7 | 70% |
| 3 |
Orange County |
7 | 70% |
| 4 |
Colorado Springs |
6 | 67% |
| 5 |
New Mexico United |
6 | 67% |
| 6 |
Louisville City |
7 | 64% |
| 7 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
7 | 64% |
| 8 |
Phoenix Rising |
6 | 60% |
| 9 |
El Paso Locomotive |
6 | 60% |
| 10 |
Detroit City FC |
6 | 60% |
| 11 |
Indy Eleven |
7 | 58% |
| 12 |
Sacramento Republic |
6 | 55% |
| 13 |
San Antonio |
6 | 55% |
| 14 |
Miami FC II |
6 | 50% |
| 15 |
Las Vegas Lights |
6 | 46% |
| 16 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
5 | 45% |
| 17 |
Lexington |
5 | 45% |
| 18 |
Hartford Athletic |
5 | 42% |
| 19 |
Monterey Bay |
4 | 40% |
| 20 |
Loudoun United |
4 | 36% |
| 21 |
Oakland Roots |
4 | 36% |
| 22 |
Rhode Island |
3 | 27% |
| 23 |
Birmingham Legion |
3 | 25% |
| 24 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
2 | 22% |
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Indy Eleven |
6 | 67% |
| 2 |
Louisville City |
7 | 64% |
| 3 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
7 | 64% |
| 4 |
Sacramento Republic |
6 | 60% |
| 5 |
Oakland Roots |
6 | 60% |
| 6 |
New Mexico United |
6 | 55% |
| 7 |
Miami FC II |
5 | 50% |
| 8 |
Phoenix Rising |
6 | 50% |
| 9 |
Hartford Athletic |
4 | 44% |
| 10 |
Charleston Battery |
5 | 42% |
| 11 |
San Antonio |
4 | 40% |
| 12 |
North Carolina FC |
4 | 40% |
| 13 |
El Paso Locomotive |
4 | 36% |
| 14 |
Lexington |
4 | 36% |
| 15 |
Rhode Island |
4 | 36% |
| 16 |
Colorado Springs |
4 | 33% |
| 17 |
Detroit City FC |
4 | 33% |
| 18 |
Monterey Bay |
4 | 31% |
| 19 |
Birmingham Legion |
3 | 30% |
| 20 |
Orange County |
3 | 30% |
| 21 |
Loudoun United |
3 | 27% |
| 22 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
3 | 27% |
| 23 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
3 | 25% |
| 24 |
Las Vegas Lights |
1 | 11% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
16 | 76% |
| 2 |
Birmingham Legion |
16 | 72% |
| 3 |
Loudoun United |
15 | 68% |
| 4 |
Las Vegas Lights |
15 | 68% |
| 5 |
Rhode Island |
15 | 68% |
| 6 |
Monterey Bay |
15 | 65% |
| 7 |
Lexington |
13 | 59% |
| 8 |
Hartford Athletic |
12 | 57% |
| 9 |
Detroit City FC |
12 | 54% |
| 10 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
12 | 54% |
| 11 |
El Paso Locomotive |
11 | 52% |
| 12 |
Colorado Springs |
11 | 52% |
| 13 |
San Antonio |
11 | 52% |
| 14 |
Oakland Roots |
11 | 52% |
| 15 |
Orange County |
10 | 50% |
| 16 |
Miami FC II |
11 | 50% |
| 17 |
Phoenix Rising |
10 | 45% |
| 18 |
Charleston Battery |
10 | 45% |
| 19 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
10 | 45% |
| 20 |
Sacramento Republic |
9 | 42% |
| 21 |
New Mexico United |
8 | 40% |
| 22 |
North Carolina FC |
8 | 38% |
| 23 |
Indy Eleven |
8 | 38% |
| 24 |
Louisville City |
8 | 36% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
7 | 77% |
| 2 |
Birmingham Legion |
9 | 75% |
| 3 |
Rhode Island |
8 | 72% |
| 4 |
Loudoun United |
7 | 63% |
| 5 |
Oakland Roots |
7 | 63% |
| 6 |
Monterey Bay |
6 | 60% |
| 7 |
Hartford Athletic |
7 | 58% |
| 8 |
Lexington |
6 | 54% |
| 9 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
6 | 54% |
| 10 |
Las Vegas Lights |
7 | 53% |
| 11 |
Miami FC II |
6 | 50% |
| 12 |
San Antonio |
5 | 45% |
| 13 |
Sacramento Republic |
5 | 45% |
| 14 |
Indy Eleven |
5 | 41% |
| 15 |
Phoenix Rising |
4 | 40% |
| 16 |
El Paso Locomotive |
4 | 40% |
| 17 |
Detroit City FC |
4 | 40% |
| 18 |
Louisville City |
4 | 36% |
| 19 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
4 | 36% |
| 20 |
Colorado Springs |
3 | 33% |
| 21 |
New Mexico United |
3 | 33% |
| 22 |
Orange County |
3 | 30% |
| 23 |
Charleston Battery |
3 | 30% |
| 24 |
North Carolina FC |
2 | 18% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Las Vegas Lights |
8 | 88% |
| 2 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
9 | 75% |
| 3 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
8 | 72% |
| 4 |
Loudoun United |
8 | 72% |
| 5 |
Birmingham Legion |
7 | 70% |
| 6 |
Orange County |
7 | 70% |
| 7 |
Monterey Bay |
9 | 69% |
| 8 |
Colorado Springs |
8 | 66% |
| 9 |
Detroit City FC |
8 | 66% |
| 10 |
El Paso Locomotive |
7 | 63% |
| 11 |
Rhode Island |
7 | 63% |
| 12 |
Lexington |
7 | 63% |
| 13 |
North Carolina FC |
6 | 60% |
| 14 |
San Antonio |
6 | 60% |
| 15 |
Charleston Battery |
7 | 58% |
| 16 |
Hartford Athletic |
5 | 55% |
| 17 |
Phoenix Rising |
6 | 50% |
| 18 |
Miami FC II |
5 | 50% |
| 19 |
New Mexico United |
5 | 45% |
| 20 |
Oakland Roots |
4 | 40% |
| 21 |
Sacramento Republic |
4 | 40% |
| 22 |
Louisville City |
4 | 36% |
| 23 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
4 | 36% |
| 24 |
Indy Eleven |
3 | 33% |
This page keeps track of the number of matches a team has scored or conceded the first goal in a match. This helps give you a better idea of what to expect from Detroit City FC and Rhode Island in terms of their tendencies from both an attacking and defensive perspective.
Detroit City FC has come out and scored the first goal in 45% of the matches they have played so far in the USL Championship. And on the other side, they have conceded the first goal in 54% of matches.
Meanwhile, Rhode Island comes into this contest having scored a goal before their opponent in 32% of matches in this campaign. And in terms of giving up the first goal, they have done so in 68% of matches.
This information helps to provide a deeper insight into the two teams’ play in the competition. A higher rate of scoring the first goal indicates a more aggressive side that imposes its will onto its opponents. Similarly, a high rate of conceding the first goal points to a side whose defence struggles to keep things tight at the back.
It should prove useful to study these teams’ tendencies of scoring or conceding first, as well as whether these tendencies change when they play at home or away in USL Championship.