Another engaging game in the USL Championship. Charleston Battery is in the 3rd place after playing three fixtures. They welcome Tampa Bay Rowdies who are placed 10th after three matches.
- Charleston Battery have the the best goal difference (+3) in USL Championship
- Tampa Bay Rowdies have the the worst goal difference (-3) away in USL Championship
There’s little time for restitution or working hard at the training pitch these days, with both teams having played their last game less than four days ago.
Charleston Battery form and stats
Only two USL Championship home games for Charleston Battery so far, yet both highs and lows with 1 win, 1 draw and 0 defeat.
Charleston's last game was hosting Tampa Bay Rowdies (placed 10th) and winning 3-0.
A 1-1 draw away before that, with Sacramento Republic the opponent.At MUSC Health Stadium, Charleston Battery has the goal stats of 4-1 (for/against) from 2 league fixtures.
Tampa Bay Rowdies form and stats
The USL Championship season is young and Tampa Bay Rowdies have only just started going through their travel schedule, with 2 away games done and still no victory. 1 draw and 1 defeat so far.
There might be some fixture complaints from Tampa Bay Rowdies as they are again playing away from home after losing on the road in their previous match, 0-3 against Charleston Battery.
Ahead of that match was the away draw versus Orange County that ended 1-1.As for goals scored and conceded in the league games away so far, Tampa Bay Rowdies has managed {1 goals} and let in 4 from 2 matches.
Head 2 Head
These two sides faced each other earlier this season: Charleston - Tampa Bay Rowdies 3-0. Charleston Battery-Tampa Bay Rowdies H2H statistics last ten meetings regardless of arena: Charleston Battery four wins, Tampa Bay Rowdies five wins, one draw. five of these ten matches had three or more goals (over 2,5).
Top Goalscorers
  A. Williams 1 goals | A. Booth 1 goals | F. Barajas Juarez Jr 1 goals |
Charleston Battery missing players
Tampa Bay Rowdies missing players
| Charleston Battery | Tampa Bay Rowdies | ||||||
| Total | Home | vs | Statistics | Stat | vs | Away | Total |
| 3 | 2 | 0 | Played | P | 0 | 2 | 3 |
| 1 | 1 | 0 | Won | W | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 | Drew | D | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | Lost | L | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| 5 | 4 | 0 | Scored | S | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 2 | 1 | 0 | Conceded | C | 0 | 4 | 5 |
| 100% | 100% | 0% | Over 0.5 | O 0.5 | 0% | 100% | 100% |
| 100% | 100% | 0% | Over 1.5 | O 1.5 | 0% | 100% | 100% |
| 33% | 50% | 0% | Over 2.5 | O 2.5 | 0% | 50% | 33% |
| 0% | 0% | 0% | Over 3.5 | O 3.5 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 0% | 0% | 0% | Over 4.5 | O 4.5 | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 67% | 50% | 0% | BTTS | BTTS | 0% | 50% | 67% |
| 33% | 50% | 0% | Clean Sheets | C S | 0% | 0% | 0% |
| 0% | 0% | 0% | Failed to Score | F T | 0% | 50% | 33% |
| 3.3 | 3.5 | 0 | Corners for (avg) | C F | 0 | 5 | 4.7 |
| 4 | 4 | 0 | Corners against (avg) | C A | 0 | 6.5 | 6.3 |
| 0.7 | 0 | 0 | Yellow cards (avg) | Y C | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| 0 | 0 | 0 | Red cards | R C | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 12.7 | 12.5 | 0 | Shots (avg) | S ( | 0 | 9 | 8.7 |
| 5.3 | 6 | 0 | Shots on Target (avg) | S O | 0 | 2 | 2.3 |
| 31% | 33% | 0% | Goal Efficiency | G E | 0% | 25% | 29% |
| 9.7 | 8.5 | 0 | Shots against (avg) | S A | 0 | 11.5 | 10.3 |
| 2.3 | 2.5 | 0 | Shots on Target against (avg) | S O | 0 | 5 | 4.3 |
- Charleston Battery have the the best goal difference (+3) in USL Championship
- Tampa Bay Rowdies have the the worst goal difference (-3) away in USL Championship
| Charleston Battery | Last season | Tampa Bay Rowdies | |||||
| Total | Home | Statistics | Stat | Away | Total | ||
| 34 | 17 | Played | P | 19 | 37 | ||
| 6 | 5 | Won | W | 9 | 22 | ||
| 7 | 2 | Drew | D | 4 | 7 | ||
| 21 | 10 | Lost | L | 6 | 8 | ||
| 41 | 23 | Scored | S | 33 | 77 | ||
| 77 | 35 | Conceded | C | 21 | 35 | ||
| 97% | 100% | Over 0.5 | O 0.5 | 95% | 97% | ||
| 88% | 94% | Over 1.5 | O 1.5 | 68% | 73% | ||
| 65% | 71% | Over 2.5 | O 2.5 | 53% | 51% | ||
| 38% | 29% | Over 3.5 | O 3.5 | 32% | 41% | ||
| 29% | 18% | Over 4.5 | O 4.5 | 21% | 19% | ||
| 59% | 47% | BTTS | BTTS | 63% | 62% | ||
| 12% | 18% | Clean Sheets | C S | 16% | 24% | ||
| 32% | 35% | Failed to Score | F T | 26% | 16% | ||
| 4.6 | 5.4 | Corners for (avg) | C F | 4.4 | 5.2 | ||
| 4.2 | 3.2 | Corners against (avg) | C A | 4.5 | 3.5 | ||
| 2.8 | 2.5 | Yellow cards (avg) | Y C | 2.1 | 1.9 | ||
| 4 | 2 | Red cards | R C | 1 | 2 | ||
| 8.4 | 9.6 | Shots (avg) | S ( | 9.1 | 9.8 | ||
| 2.9 | 3.5 | Shots on Target (avg) | S O | 4.5 | 4.7 | ||
| 42% | 38% | Goal Efficiency | G E | 38% | 45% | ||
| 8.9 | 7.4 | Shots against (avg) | S A | 9.3 | 7.6 | ||
| 4.2 | 3.7 | Shots on Target against (avg) | S O | 3.1 | 2.7 | ||
| Total | Home | Away | |||||||||||||||||||
| # | Team | MP | W | D | L | F | A | MP | W | D | L | F | A | MP | W | D | L | F | A | +/- | P |
| 1 | Birmingham Legion | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 7 |
| 2 | Louisville City | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| 3 | Charleston Battery | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 5 |
| 4 | Pittsburgh Riverhounds | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 5 |
| 5 | Tulsa Roughnecks | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| 6 | Indy Eleven | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| 7 | Loudoun United | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | -1 | 4 |
| 8 | Detroit City | 3 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| 9 | Miami FC II | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | -1 | 2 |
| 10 | Tampa Bay Rowdies | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | -3 | 2 |
| 11 | Hartford Athletic | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 6 | -3 | 1 |
| 12 | Memphis 901 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -4 | 0 |
| Last season | Total | Home | Away | ||||||||||||||||||
| # | Team | MP | W | D | L | F | A | MP | W | D | L | F | A | MP | W | D | L | F | A | +/- | P |
| 1 | Louisville City | 34 | 22 | 6 | 6 | 65 | 28 | 17 | 13 | 2 | 2 | 38 | 14 | 17 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 27 | 14 | 37 | 72 |
| 2 | Memphis 901 | 34 | 21 | 5 | 8 | 67 | 33 | 17 | 11 | 1 | 5 | 40 | 22 | 17 | 10 | 4 | 3 | 27 | 11 | 34 | 68 |
| 3 | Tampa Bay Rowdies | 34 | 20 | 7 | 7 | 73 | 33 | 17 | 12 | 3 | 2 | 41 | 13 | 17 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 32 | 20 | 40 | 67 |
| 4 | Birmingham Legion | 34 | 17 | 7 | 10 | 56 | 37 | 17 | 9 | 4 | 4 | 29 | 15 | 17 | 8 | 3 | 6 | 27 | 22 | 19 | 58 |
| 5 | Pittsburgh Riverhounds | 34 | 16 | 9 | 9 | 50 | 38 | 17 | 9 | 5 | 3 | 25 | 15 | 17 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 25 | 23 | 12 | 57 |
| 6 | Miami FC II | 34 | 15 | 10 | 9 | 47 | 32 | 17 | 5 | 7 | 5 | 18 | 18 | 17 | 10 | 3 | 4 | 29 | 14 | 15 | 55 |
| 7 | Detroit City | 34 | 14 | 12 | 8 | 44 | 30 | 17 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 21 | 16 | 17 | 8 | 4 | 5 | 23 | 14 | 14 | 54 |
| 8 | Tulsa Roughnecks | 34 | 12 | 6 | 16 | 48 | 58 | 17 | 9 | 3 | 5 | 27 | 23 | 17 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 21 | 35 | -10 | 42 |
| 9 | Indy Eleven | 34 | 12 | 5 | 17 | 41 | 55 | 17 | 9 | 2 | 6 | 26 | 22 | 17 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 15 | 33 | -14 | 41 |
| 10 | Hartford Athletic | 34 | 10 | 6 | 18 | 47 | 57 | 17 | 7 | 1 | 9 | 28 | 28 | 17 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 19 | 29 | -10 | 36 |
| 11 | Loudoun United | 34 | 8 | 4 | 22 | 36 | 74 | 17 | 6 | 2 | 9 | 22 | 30 | 17 | 2 | 2 | 13 | 14 | 44 | -38 | 28 |
| 12 | Charleston Battery | 34 | 6 | 7 | 21 | 41 | 77 | 17 | 5 | 2 | 10 | 23 | 35 | 17 | 1 | 5 | 11 | 18 | 42 | -36 | 25 |
| 13 | Atlanta United II | 34 | 6 | 5 | 23 | 39 | 85 | 17 | 3 | 4 | 10 | 18 | 36 | 17 | 3 | 1 | 13 | 21 | 49 | -46 | 23 |
| 14 | New York RB II | 34 | 3 | 6 | 25 | 24 | 76 | 17 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 14 | 33 | 17 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 10 | 43 | -52 | 15 |
