Skip to content
Compare Radcliffe vs Macclesfield

Radcliffe vs Macclesfield Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

Compare Radcliffe vs Macclesfield: head-to-head stats, recent form, goals, defensive record and strength indicators from last matches.

Radcliffe Radcliffe Home Team
Macclesfield Macclesfield Away Team
Radcliffe
28.9
D D W L L L L D L L

Last 10 Matches

Macclesfield
37.0
W D D L W L W L L W

Performance Radar

Radcliffe
Macclesfield

Categories Won

3

Radcliffe

2

Draw

10

Macclesfield

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
10%

1W, 3D, 6L

40%

4W, 2D, 4L

Goals Scored / Match
1.1

11 / 10 matches

1.6

16 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
2.3

23 / 10 matches

1.8

18 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
-12

-12

-2

-2

Clean Sheet
30%

3 / 10 matches

0%

0 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
60%

6 / 10 matches

70%

7 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
50%

5 / 10 matches

80%

8 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
R. Clegg (6 goals)
J. Kay (2 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 3 / 2nd Half: 8
1st Half: 1 / 2nd Half: 15
Home Win Rate
17%

1W / 6 matches

67%

2W / 3 matches

Away Win Rate
0%

0W / 4 matches

29%

2W / 7 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
39.2

League Difficulty: 33.0, Opponent Quality: 43.3

29.7

League Difficulty: 34.5, Opponent Quality: 45.3

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 1 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
0.73

Actual: 1.1 | Diff: +0.37

1.59

Actual: 1.6 | Diff: +0.01

Adjusted Power Rating
28.9

Attack: 32.7, Defense: 20.8, Form: 8.9

37.0

Attack: 42.5, Defense: 31.9, Form: 31.9

Goal Timing Analysis

0-15'

16-30'

1
2

31-45'

3

46-60'

1
4

61-75'

2
2

76-90+'

4
Radcliffe
Macclesfield
Radcliffe

Power Rating Breakdown

28.9

Overall

Attack 32.7
Defense 20.8
Form 8.9
Consistency 74.8
Macclesfield

Power Rating Breakdown

37.0

Overall

Attack 42.5
Defense 31.9
Form 31.9
Consistency 44.8

Strength of Schedule

Measures the difficulty of opponents faced. Higher = tougher schedule.

League Difficulty

33.0 vs 34.5

Opponent Quality

43.3 vs 45.3

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Radcliffe logo Radcliffe
D
Barrow (40%)
D
Shrewsbury (40%)
W
Macclesfield (39%)
L
Hereford (45%)
L
Kidderminster (67%)
L
South Shields (42%)
L
Fylde (52%)
D
Curzon Ashton (27%)
Macclesfield logo Macclesfield
W
Altrincham (48%)
D
Warrington (44%)
D
Leek (47%)
L
Kidderminster (72%)
W
Chester (46%)
L
Radcliffe (30%)
W
Southport (44%)
L
Spennymoor (40%)

Opponent Quality: Quality blends league strength, recent points form, goal difference, and home/away context. It is not only club size or reputation.

Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Barrow H
0 - 0 D
40%
Shrewsbury H
0 - 0 D
40%
Macclesfield H
1 - 0 W
39%
Hereford A
1 - 3 L
45%
Kidderminster H
1 - 3 L
67%
South Shields H
2 - 5 L
42%
Fylde A
3 - 4 L
52%
Curzon Ashton H
3 - 3 D
27%
Worksop A
0 - 2 L
51%
Darlington A
0 - 3 L
30%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Altrincham A
5 - 2 W
48%
Warrington A
2 - 2 D
44%
Leek A
1 - 1 D
47%
Kidderminster A
1 - 3 L
72%
Chester H
2 - 1 W
46%
Radcliffe A
0 - 1 L
30%
Southport H
2 - 1 W
44%
Spennymoor H
0 - 2 L
40%
South Shields A
1 - 4 L
47%
Merthyr A
2 - 1 W
35%

AI Analysis

The statistics point to a clear direction in this matchup, though the underdog should not be underestimated. When we factor in the quality of opponents each team has faced, the gap narrows slightly but the overall picture remains consistent.

The level of competition each team has encountered is broadly aligned (SoS: 39.2 vs 29.7), which adds credibility to any direct statistical comparisons drawn between these two sides.

Offensively, Macclesfield outperforms Radcliffe with 1.6 goals per match to 1.1, though the margin leaves the contest genuinely open.

Macclesfield's backline outperforms Radcliffe's, with 1.8 goals conceded per match versus 2.3.

Radcliffe has not faced any elite-level opponents in their recent matches, making it difficult to assess their ceiling.

Crunching the numbers, this match averages out to 3.4 total goals. Going Over 2.5 carries the stronger statistical case, with the BTTS market looking likely given current form.

❄️ Form Momentum: Radcliffe is struggling for form, winning just 1 of their last 10 matches. Teams in this state often lack the confidence to compete in tight moments.

📊 Key Trend: The form trajectories are diverging. Macclesfield is on the rise with 4W in last 10, while Radcliffe shows signs of decline with 1W in last 10.

⚠️ Risk Factor: Despite being the statistical favorite, Macclesfield faces a key vulnerability: their defense concedes 1.8 goals per match. If Radcliffe can exploit this, an upset becomes plausible.

💡 Why This Matters: The 8.1-point power rating gap between these teams translates to approximately a 70% win probability for Macclesfield. In practical terms, Macclesfield would win 7 out of 10 such matchups.

Macclesfield has the edge based on adjusted metrics, but this is far from a foregone conclusion. The 8.1-point power gap suggests an advantage without guaranteeing victory.

In their recent National League N / S match (2026-04-25), Radcliffe prevailed 1-0 against Macclesfield. This result provides valuable insight into how these teams match up against each other. Radcliffe secured this victory at home, where they tend to be strongest. However, the next encounter could present a different challenge if the venue changes. The narrow 1-0 result shows how tight these encounters are. A single moment of quality or a tactical tweak could swing the next meeting either way. Macclesfield will be eager to avenge this defeat. The desire for revenge can be a powerful motivator, and they may come into the next meeting with extra determination. Radcliffe will carry a psychological advantage from this recent victory. Knowing you've beaten your opponent recently provides a significant confidence boost.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Radcliffe

Radcliffe

VS
Macclesfield

Macclesfield

In H2H (head-to-head) matchups, to eliminate momentary fluctuations and coincidences, we limit our analyses to an optimal depth of exactly 10 matches. Neither less, nor more. This focused approach is our undisputed gold standard, revealing the tactical and psychological supremacy teams hold over each other in its purest form. We do not dwell on the noise of the past; we concentrate on the millimetric precision of current form.

Compare Another Pair

Comparison Summary

This head-to-head comparison analyzes the last 10 matches of each team, evaluating attack power, defensive strength, form consistency, and overall performance metrics. The power ratings are calculated using a weighted algorithm that considers goals scored, goals conceded, win rate, and recent form trends.

Radcliffe

1W 3D 6L · 11 goals scored · 23 conceded

Macclesfield

4W 2D 4L · 16 goals scored · 18 conceded

Popular Teams

We use cookies & local storage to enhance your experience. Learn more

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or