Skip to content
Compare Rotherham vs Huddersfield

Rotherham vs Huddersfield Head-to-Head Stats and Form Comparison

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

Rotherham Rotherham Home Team
Huddersfield Huddersfield Away Team
Rotherham
35.0
L W D D L D L W L L

Last 10 Matches

Huddersfield
49.1
W L L W W L D D D W

Performance Radar

Rotherham
Huddersfield

Categories Won

2

Rotherham

2

Draw

11

Huddersfield

Statistical Comparison

Win Percentage
20%

2W, 3D, 5L

40%

4W, 3D, 3L

Goals Scored / Match
0.9

9 / 10 matches

2.1

21 / 10 matches

Goals Conceded / Match
1.6

16 / 10 matches

1.9

19 / 10 matches

Goal Difference
-7

-7

+2

+2

Clean Sheet
20%

2 / 10 matches

10%

1 / 10 matches

Over 2.5 Goals
30%

3 / 10 matches

90%

9 / 10 matches

Both Teams to Score
50%

5 / 10 matches

90%

9 / 10 matches

Top Scorer
S. Nombe (3 goals)
M. Harness (4 goals)
Most Goals by Half
1st Half: 4 / 2nd Half: 5
1st Half: 3 / 2nd Half: 18
Home Win Rate
0%

0W / 4 matches

25%

1W / 4 matches

Away Win Rate
33%

2W / 6 matches

50%

3W / 6 matches

Schedule Strength (SoS)
46.9

League Difficulty: 45.0, Opponent Quality: 48.2

48.4

League Difficulty: 45.0, Opponent Quality: 50.6

Elite Opponent Record
0%

0W / 0 matches

0%

0W / 0 matches

Expected Goals (xG)
0.82

Actual: 0.9 | Diff: +0.08

1.82

Actual: 2.1 | Diff: +0.28

Adjusted Power Rating
35.0

Attack: 29.1, Defense: 45.2, Form: 19.4

49.1

Attack: 68.9, Defense: 36.1, Form: 39.4

Goal Timing Analysis

0-15'

1
4

16-30'

1

31-45'

1

46-60'

5
1

61-75'

4
1

76-90+'

2
Rotherham
Huddersfield
Rotherham

Power Rating Breakdown

35.0

Overall

Attack 29.1
Defense 45.2
Form 19.4
Consistency 61.3
Huddersfield

Power Rating Breakdown

49.1

Overall

Attack 68.9
Defense 36.1
Form 39.4
Consistency 50.5

Strength of Schedule

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

League Difficulty

45.0 vs 45.0

Opponent Quality

48.2 vs 50.6

Elite Opponent Record

0% vs 0%
Rotherham logo Rotherham
L
Sheff Utd (53%)
W
Alfreton (50%)
D
Matlock (47%)
D
Emley (44%)
L
Wycombe (49%)
D
Reading (38%)
L
Luton (66%)
W
L Orient (40%)
Huddersfield logo Huddersfield
W
Oldham (35%)
L
Fleetwood (55%)
L
Sheff Utd (58%)
W
Fylde (58%)
W
Wimbledon (41%)
L
Mansfield (52%)
D
Bolton (60%)
D
Cardiff (63%)

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
Sheff Utd H
0 - 2 L
53%
Alfreton A
1 - 0 W
50%
Matlock A
1 - 1 D
47%
Emley A
1 - 1 D
44%
Wycombe A
2 - 3 L
49%
Reading H
1 - 1 D
38%
Luton H
0 - 2 L
66%
L Orient A
2 - 0 W
40%
Wigan A
0 - 3 L
52%
Barnsley H
1 - 3 L
43%
Opponent Breakdown
Opponent Breakdown
Score
Opp. Quality
Oldham H
3 - 1 W
35%
Fleetwood A
1 - 2 L
55%
Sheff Utd A
1 - 3 L
58%
Fylde A
2 - 1 W
58%
Wimbledon A
4 - 0 W
41%
Mansfield H
1 - 4 L
52%
Bolton A
3 - 3 D
60%
Cardiff H
1 - 1 D
63%
Wycombe H
3 - 3 D
44%
L Orient A
2 - 1 W
40%

AI Analysis

A statistical edge is evident here, but the trailing side carries enough threat to keep this competitive. Once opponent quality is accounted for, the differential softens somewhat without fundamentally altering the overall outlook.

The level of competition each team has encountered is broadly aligned (SoS: 46.9 vs 48.4), which adds credibility to any direct statistical comparisons drawn between these two sides.

Huddersfield possess a formidable attacking unit, with M. Harness accounting for 4 goals and the squad maintaining an impressive 2.1 goals per game — a threat no opponent can afford to overlook.

Both defenses are comparable, with Rotherham conceding 1.6 and Huddersfield conceding 1.9 per match.

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

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

Based on the combined statistics, expect 3.2 total goals. Over 2.5 goals is the statistical lean, with BTTS (Both Teams to Score) being likely.

❄️ Form Momentum: Rotherham is struggling for form, winning just 2 of their last 10 matches. Teams in this state often lack the confidence to compete in tight moments.

📈 Form Momentum: Huddersfield has been remarkably consistent, maintaining a steady 1.5 points per game over their last 10 matches. This stability makes them a predictable but reliable force.

⚠️ Risk Factor: Despite being the statistical favorite, Huddersfield faces a key vulnerability: their defense concedes 1.9 goals per match. If Rotherham can exploit this, an upset becomes plausible.

💡 Why This Matters: The 14.1-point power rating gap between these teams translates to approximately a 85% win probability for Huddersfield. In practical terms, Huddersfield would win 8 out of 10 such matchups.

While Huddersfield holds a measurable edge in the adjusted standings, the 14.1-point differential in power ratings indicates a competitive matchup rather than a clear-cut outcome.

Match Simulator

AI-powered match simulation based on real statistics

Rotherham

Rotherham

VS
Huddersfield

Huddersfield

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.

Rotherham

2W 3D 5L · 9 goals scored · 16 conceded

Huddersfield

4W 3D 3L · 21 goals scored · 19 conceded

Popular Teams

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

Login / Register

5 + 2 = ?
or