Birmingham Legion 0 - 1 Rhode Island
14.05.2025 - 20:00
Finished
Match Scoring / Conceding First
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
New Mexico United |
12 | 80% |
| 2 |
Louisville City |
11 | 69% |
| 3 |
North Carolina FC |
11 | 69% |
| 4 |
Indy Eleven |
11 | 69% |
| 5 |
Miami FC II |
10 | 67% |
| 6 |
Sacramento Republic |
8 | 53% |
| 7 |
Charleston Battery |
9 | 53% |
| 8 |
San Antonio |
8 | 50% |
| 9 |
Phoenix Rising |
8 | 50% |
| 10 |
El Paso Locomotive |
8 | 50% |
| 11 |
Detroit City FC |
8 | 47% |
| 12 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
7 | 47% |
| 13 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
7 | 44% |
| 14 |
Lexington |
7 | 44% |
| 15 |
Orange County SC |
6 | 43% |
| 16 |
Colorado Springs |
6 | 40% |
| 17 |
Monterey Bay |
7 | 39% |
| 18 |
Las Vegas Lights |
6 | 38% |
| 19 |
Oakland Roots |
6 | 38% |
| 20 |
Rhode Island |
5 | 31% |
| 21 |
Loudoun United |
5 | 31% |
| 22 |
Hartford Athletic |
4 | 29% |
| 23 |
Birmingham Legion |
4 | 24% |
| 24 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
3 | 19% |
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
North Carolina FC |
8 | 100% |
| 2 |
New Mexico United |
6 | 86% |
| 3 |
Louisville City |
5 | 71% |
| 4 |
Orange County SC |
5 | 71% |
| 5 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
5 | 71% |
| 6 |
Miami FC II |
7 | 70% |
| 7 |
Indy Eleven |
6 | 67% |
| 8 |
San Antonio |
6 | 67% |
| 9 |
Colorado Springs |
4 | 67% |
| 10 |
Charleston Battery |
5 | 63% |
| 11 |
Detroit City FC |
4 | 57% |
| 12 |
El Paso Locomotive |
4 | 57% |
| 13 |
Las Vegas Lights |
5 | 50% |
| 14 |
Sacramento Republic |
4 | 50% |
| 15 |
Monterey Bay |
4 | 50% |
| 16 |
Lexington |
4 | 44% |
| 17 |
Phoenix Rising |
3 | 43% |
| 18 |
Loudoun United |
3 | 38% |
| 19 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
3 | 38% |
| 20 |
Oakland Roots |
3 | 33% |
| 21 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
2 | 29% |
| 22 |
Hartford Athletic |
2 | 25% |
| 23 |
Birmingham Legion |
2 | 22% |
| 24 |
Rhode Island |
1 | 14% |
| # | Team | MP | Scoring First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
New Mexico United |
6 | 75% |
| 2 |
Indy Eleven |
5 | 71% |
| 3 |
Louisville City |
6 | 67% |
| 4 |
Miami FC II |
3 | 60% |
| 5 |
Sacramento Republic |
4 | 57% |
| 6 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
4 | 57% |
| 7 |
Phoenix Rising |
5 | 56% |
| 8 |
Rhode Island |
4 | 44% |
| 9 |
El Paso Locomotive |
4 | 44% |
| 10 |
Charleston Battery |
4 | 44% |
| 11 |
Lexington |
3 | 43% |
| 12 |
Oakland Roots |
3 | 43% |
| 13 |
Detroit City FC |
4 | 40% |
| 14 |
North Carolina FC |
3 | 38% |
| 15 |
Hartford Athletic |
2 | 33% |
| 16 |
Monterey Bay |
3 | 30% |
| 17 |
San Antonio |
2 | 29% |
| 18 |
Birmingham Legion |
2 | 25% |
| 19 |
Loudoun United |
2 | 25% |
| 20 |
Colorado Springs |
2 | 22% |
| 21 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
2 | 22% |
| 22 |
Las Vegas Lights |
1 | 17% |
| 23 |
Orange County SC |
1 | 14% |
| 24 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
1 | 11% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
13 | 81% |
| 2 |
Birmingham Legion |
13 | 76% |
| 3 |
Hartford Athletic |
10 | 71% |
| 4 |
Rhode Island |
11 | 68% |
| 5 |
Loudoun United |
11 | 68% |
| 6 |
Oakland Roots |
10 | 62% |
| 7 |
Las Vegas Lights |
10 | 62% |
| 8 |
Monterey Bay |
11 | 61% |
| 9 |
Colorado Springs |
9 | 60% |
| 10 |
Orange County SC |
8 | 57% |
| 11 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
9 | 56% |
| 12 |
Lexington |
9 | 56% |
| 13 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
8 | 53% |
| 14 |
Detroit City FC |
9 | 52% |
| 15 |
El Paso Locomotive |
8 | 50% |
| 16 |
San Antonio |
8 | 50% |
| 17 |
Phoenix Rising |
8 | 50% |
| 18 |
Charleston Battery |
8 | 47% |
| 19 |
Sacramento Republic |
7 | 46% |
| 20 |
Miami FC II |
5 | 33% |
| 21 |
Indy Eleven |
5 | 31% |
| 22 |
North Carolina FC |
5 | 31% |
| 23 |
Louisville City |
5 | 31% |
| 24 |
New Mexico United |
3 | 20% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Rhode Island |
6 | 85% |
| 2 |
Birmingham Legion |
7 | 77% |
| 3 |
Hartford Athletic |
6 | 75% |
| 4 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
5 | 71% |
| 5 |
Oakland Roots |
6 | 66% |
| 6 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
5 | 62% |
| 7 |
Loudoun United |
5 | 62% |
| 8 |
Phoenix Rising |
4 | 57% |
| 9 |
Lexington |
5 | 55% |
| 10 |
Sacramento Republic |
4 | 50% |
| 11 |
Las Vegas Lights |
5 | 50% |
| 12 |
Monterey Bay |
4 | 50% |
| 13 |
Detroit City FC |
3 | 42% |
| 14 |
El Paso Locomotive |
3 | 42% |
| 15 |
Charleston Battery |
3 | 37% |
| 16 |
Colorado Springs |
2 | 33% |
| 17 |
San Antonio |
3 | 33% |
| 18 |
Indy Eleven |
3 | 33% |
| 19 |
Miami FC II |
3 | 30% |
| 20 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
2 | 28% |
| 21 |
Louisville City |
2 | 28% |
| 22 |
Orange County SC |
2 | 28% |
| 23 |
New Mexico United |
1 | 14% |
| 24 |
North Carolina FC |
0 | 0% |
| # | Team | MP | Conceding First |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
Tampa Bay Rowdies |
8 | 88% |
| 2 |
Orange County SC |
6 | 85% |
| 3 |
Las Vegas Lights |
5 | 83% |
| 4 |
Colorado Springs |
7 | 77% |
| 5 |
Pittsburgh Riverhounds |
7 | 77% |
| 6 |
Loudoun United |
6 | 75% |
| 7 |
Birmingham Legion |
6 | 75% |
| 8 |
San Antonio |
5 | 71% |
| 9 |
Monterey Bay |
7 | 70% |
| 10 |
Hartford Athletic |
4 | 66% |
| 11 |
North Carolina FC |
5 | 62% |
| 12 |
Detroit City FC |
6 | 60% |
| 13 |
Lexington |
4 | 57% |
| 14 |
Oakland Roots |
4 | 57% |
| 15 |
El Paso Locomotive |
5 | 55% |
| 16 |
Rhode Island |
5 | 55% |
| 17 |
Charleston Battery |
5 | 55% |
| 18 |
Phoenix Rising |
4 | 44% |
| 19 |
Tulsa Roughnecks |
3 | 42% |
| 20 |
Sacramento Republic |
3 | 42% |
| 21 |
Miami FC II |
2 | 40% |
| 22 |
Louisville City |
3 | 33% |
| 23 |
Indy Eleven |
2 | 28% |
| 24 |
New Mexico United |
2 | 25% |
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 Birmingham Legion and Rhode Island in terms of their tendencies from both an attacking and defensive perspective.
Birmingham Legion has come out and scored the first goal in 24% of the matches they have played so far in the USL Championship. And on the other side, they have conceded the first goal in 76% of matches.
Meanwhile, Rhode Island comes into this contest having scored a goal before their opponent in 31% 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.