Chelsea FC
4º#4 with 13 points (4W · 1D · 2L). Averages 2.33 goals for and 1.83 goals against per match.
- W @ Everton FC 2-0
- W AFC Bournemouth 5-1
- L @ Brentford FC 0-3
- D Hull City AFC 2-2
- L @ Arsenal FC 1-2
To get the alert, turn on notifications.
Notifications are blocked in this browser. Allow them in the site settings to get the preview.
To get the alert, turn on notifications.
Notifications are blocked in this browser. Allow them in the site settings to get the preview.
We'll notify you of the goals, red cards and the final score.
Log in to turn it onChelsea FC hosts Tottenham Hotspur FC holding a positive start at home with two wins in three matches, contrasting with the visitors who arrive winless across six rounds and without victories away. Considering that Chelsea FC claimed victory in six of the last eight encounters between both sides, the local team attempts to leverage this historical advantage against a rival struggling in attack.
Updated on Monday, October 19, 2026 at
Tottenham Hotspur FC are still without an away win in the competition: 3 games on the road.
Chelsea FC won 2 of their 3 home games in the competition.
41% of Chelsea FC's goals come in the first fifteen minutes.
Tottenham Hotspur FC failed to score in 4 of their 7 games in the competition.
#4 with 13 points (4W · 1D · 2L). Averages 2.33 goals for and 1.83 goals against per match.
#16 with 6 points (1W · 3D · 3L). Averages 0.83 goals for and 1.17 goals against per match.
While Chelsea FC records a strong scoring average at Stamford Bridge, Tottenham Hotspur FC travels with a low conversion rate that restricts their output on the road.
Implied probability, normalised so the three add up to 100.
The market aligns with the home side holding better recent form against opponents struggling to find the net on the road.
| Team | MP | GD | Pts | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Manchester City FC | 7 | +12 | 21 |
| 2 | Arsenal FC | 7 | +6 | 18 |
| 3 | Brighton & Hove Albion FC | 7 | +18 | 16 |
| 4 | Chelsea FC | 7 | +4 | 13 |
| 5 | Liverpool FC | 7 | +1 | 12 |
| 6 | Brentford FC | 7 | +5 | 10 |
| 7 | Leeds United FC | 7 | +3 | 10 |
| 8 | Everton FC | 7 | +1 | 10 |
| 9 | Hull City AFC | 7 | +1 | 9 |
| 10 | Ipswich Town FC | 7 | -4 | 9 |
| 11 | Newcastle United FC | 7 | -4 | 8 |
| 12 | Aston Villa FC | 7 | -4 | 8 |
| 13 | Manchester United FC | 7 | 0 | 7 |
| 14 | Crystal Palace FC | 7 | -8 | 7 |
| 15 | AFC Bournemouth | 7 | -4 | 6 |
| 16 | Tottenham Hotspur FC | 7 | -4 | 6 |
| 17 | Coventry City FC | 7 | -8 | 6 |
| 18 | Fulham FC | 7 | -3 | 5 |
| 19 | Nottingham Forest FC | 7 | -4 | 5 |
| 20 | Sunderland AFC | 7 | -8 | 4 |
Chelsea FC. Joao Pedro carries the primary scoring burden with five goals, leaving the hosts heavily dependent on his output given that the remaining squad contributions drop significantly.
Tottenham Hotspur FC. Dominic Solanke accounts for the entire scoring output of the visitors, a stark contrast to a squad that failed to find the net in four appearances and struggles to back up high possession figures.
Average of the most recent matches with stats available (7 and 7 respectively).
Tottenham Hotspur FC registers higher possession figures despite struggling to convert chances, while Chelsea FC relies on high scoring output where matches routinely feature three goals or more.
Chelsea FC concentrates the bulk of its attacking output in the opening quarter of an hour against a visiting side showing difficulties to generate constant scoring danger on the road.
The historical advantage of Chelsea FC, reflected in six victories across the last eight meetings, aligns with the struggles of Tottenham Hotspur FC on the road.
80 5 · in 18 meetings
Cole Palmer stands out as the primary continuity threat from historical scorer lists for Chelsea FC, while the high booking and dismissal frequency across past meetings indicates a sharp edge in these encounters that tests discipline on both sides.