Premier League 18th-20th September 2026

The final set of Premier League games before the three week international break.

Friday
Brentford 3-0 Chelsea - this game was a pick'em before kick-off with Brentford slightly favoured at a win price of 38c, game total set at just over 3 goals and both teams to score at 68c. Volatility was priced into this game not only through BTTS but also the draw line being 27c. The way this game played out was tighter than that. First half there were relatively few chances as Brentford played tight and looked to counter. Chelsea dominated possession throughout but went behind from a corner in the second half, set pieces being a recurring vulnerability for Chelsea so far this season. The second goal came from a Chelsea forward ball being intercepted by the Brentford defence, then moved forward rapidly and splitting Chelsea's defence for 2-0. The third goal from Brentford came from a ball across box that took a deflection for a tap in. From a chance creation perspective, there was a very clear edge for Brentford. We did see some volatility expansion in the second half but I am not convinced that it was enough to justify the pre game lines, where the draw price became very compressed. In spite of that, there may still have been some value on the over but I would not go quite so far myself. I think there was some value taking no on BTTS because Brentford did consistently suppress Chelsea's chance creation and BTTS was priced very high to begin with. You need both teams to be consistently creating chances to justify that kind of price or for chance creation to tilt towards the team going behind and that didn't happen here. I think there was value here on Brentford, with no on Chelsea available at 64c pre game. There was late line movement in Brentford's favour here so you could have got no on Chelsea around 61c an hour before. This meant a flip from Chelsea being favoured to Brentford being favoured, a significant movement, one which top down odds analysis bettors may find interesting (though it's not really something I put heavy weight on in football). It appears João Pedro was expected to play but was ruled out late on, which may explain the late line movement.

Saturday
Tottenham Hotspur 2-3 Aston Villa - the early afternoon kick-off had Spurs favoured by half a goal with win price at 51c, total set at just under 3 goals and BTTS at 61c. Despite the transfer market valuations of both teams, this was a big early season clash at the bottom of the table for both sides. Spurs after narrowly avoiding relegation had spent big yet had not scored a goal in the league before this game. Aston Villa meanwhile after winning the Europa League sold some crucial first team players which affected their ability to control games and find a cutting edge in attack. Which one of these teams who desperately needed a break would come out on top, if at all? In the early stages Spurs dominated possession and territory, though that was not the first time that happened this season. They made Zion Suzuki pull off some good saves so there was chance creation there. It was Villa who struck first while Spurs were temporarily down to ten men with Micky Van de Ven off the pitch receiving treatment. It's a recurring theme of Spurs going back to last season: they appear to need everything to go right to score a goal and yet they only need one thing to go wrong to concede a goal. Villa extended their lead in the second half before adding at third in the 80th minute but Spurs still had a lot of possession and were mounting attacks. They pulled two goals back but it wasn't enough to prevent them from losing at home for the second time this season. The betting markets saw two teams struggling for the talent they had and pricing Spurs to be better by half a goal at home because of it. I had these teams as much closer to a pick'em on neutral ground, which would translate to Spurs favoured by about a quarter of a goal here. From a chance creation perspective this was very even with Spurs maybe edging it so I do think Vila represented value here. If you do not play open and try to press Spurs you deprive them of their favoured game state and Unai Emery no doubt understood this very well.

Newcastle 2-1 Hull City - moving on the 3pmm kick-offs Newcastle were favoured by almost a goal with win price at 62c, total set at 3 goals and BTTS at 59c. Newcastle built up a two goal lead in the opening ten minutes, with both goals coming from pressure, the first through sustaining an attack after Hull cleared the ball and the second from winning the ball in midfield and getting to forward quickly where Hull's three central defenders were isolated with the fullbacks pushed higher up the pitch. Hull did grow into the game and pulled a goal back in the second half after Newcastle switched to three central defenders. Newcastle showed they were able to pressure Hull enough that they weren't able to simply shut the game down defensively but they still showed a failure to manage the game state because Hull didn't need to make any radical adjustments to get back in the game, simply leaving themselves less exposed at the back and then attacking Newcastle with direct balls and players being first to the second ball. Chance creation had a very small edge to Newcastle so with pricing before the game there might be a case that there was a bit of value on Hull but I think BTTS had a little value here as both teams had the means to harm the other as well as Newcastle not being able to reduce the volatility of their games so far.

Brighton 3-0 Arsenal - going into this game Arsenal were favoured by three quarters of a goal away to Brighton with win price at 58c, total set at 2.5 goals and BTTS at 54c. Arsenal had started the season well, with decent chance creation and strong chance suppression, but their opening matchups were ultimately quite favourable ones. They ground out a 1-0 win over an Aston Villa side missing half the team that won the Europa League a few months before and the expected goals read of their win against Chelsea made them look far more dominant than they were. The warning signs were there against Sunderland where despite coming away with a 2-0 win, they became uncomfortable when the volatility of the game expanded and this showed up in the chance creation. Arsenal under Mikel Arteta play a system that is based around reducing the volatility of games to manageable levels and then letting incremental chance creation and suppression edges build up over the game until Arsenal's victory becomes a matter of risk management. Where Arsenal have generally struggled as challengers for top honours under Arteta is how they handle a game that becomes volatile and their 3-0 loss to Brighton was a very good example of that. Normally Arsenal are very good at resisting a high press because their team is very physical and so are not easy to bully off the ball and they tend to focus their bodies on the middle of the pitch where they can be hard to play through. In this game Brighton pressed them very intensely and that led to them creating chances from early on. When the game was 1-0 Arsenal had a fast counterattack that led to a very big chance to equalise. In the next play Brighton broke fast and then scored again to make it 2-0. This is exactly the kind of chaos that Arteta's system is designed to prevent. The third goal came from a corner, with Arsenal showing an uncharacteristic weakness on set pieces. Some sources disagree on chance creation but based on Arsenal being favoured by three quarters of a goal before the game I think there was value on Brighton. I don't necessarily think there was value on game total going over but I think there was some value on BTTS in spite of Arsenal failing to score because the key variable here is volatility expansion, Arsenal might not have been able to find space to attack Brighton consistently but both teams had enough chances to score.

Everton 1-0 Ipswich - before this match Everton were favoured by half a goal against Ipswich with win price at 55c, total set at just over 2.5 goals and BTTS at 58c. This was a very emblematic game for the time and place it was played, with lots of physicality, fluffed finishes and a very unusual goal, coming from Thierno Barry deflecting James Tarkowski's shot from outside the box in with his chest. Ipswich played a high pressing based game but Everton were able to contest the ball in midfield and they had a lot of attacks from quick moves after winning the ball. Ipswich also had their chances coming from catching Everton in possession and launching quick attacks from it. Abdul Fatawu was sent off after his second yellow card of the match was for a dive. Ipswich's style of play is capable of catching unprepared teams off guard but Everton despite not being a particularly dominant team on the ball are quite robust against teams that try and challenge them for the ball. Their physicality meant they could bypass Ipswich's press effectively and progress the ball away from Ipswich's front line. Everton had a clear chance creation edge even before then so I do think there may have been some value on Everton. I would say the over had a little bit of value too though a red card can distort it slightly. I think BTTS had some value because once again both teams had paths to scoring and Everton despite keeping a clean sheet were not secure in seeing the game out, they had sloppy moments in possession that led to chances.

Nottingham Forest 0-1 Coventry City - the evening time kick-off had Nottingham Forest favoured by three quarters of a goal with win price at 60c, total set at 2.5 goals and BTTS at 54c. Coventry got their first win of the season away to Nottingham Forest and they certainly had to work for it. Forest dominated possession and had Coventry's goal under siege at times but a lot of it was potentially dangerous play around the box that Coventry's defence was able to reposition for and get bodies in the way of the ball. Coventry's goal came from a long ball to Jay Dasilva on the left wing and from there he got some space behind the defender and hit the shot straight past the keeper. Forest intensified their efforts after the goal but it primarily direct play trying to use their physicality to break the doors down but this game state if anything suited Coventry more because they were able to keep on getting players in the way. Forest did have the ball in the net from Igor Jesus but it was ruled out for a foul on Caleb Yirenkyi. Oliver Glasner's style of football is heavily based on compactness and fast transitions. This style has helped him to beat big teams while he was at Crystal Palace and he has brought that style with him to Nottingham Forest. Where it is not always so effective is against teams that are more willing to defend and not give them easy transition opportunities. Nottingham Forest did have a chance creation, maybe even enough to imply that they had value, but I would consider this slightly misleading. When Coventry went ahead, they didn't need to continue attacking. Teams defending a lead often will give up a bit of expected goals because they already have the lead and adding a second goal might not have the same utility as suppressing their opponent's chance creation. A lot of Forest's shots were low probability shots and despite Forest having many more shots, Coventry had more shots on target. Because of this I would say that there was an edge on Coventry to get a result here. I think there was a bit of value on no for BTTS, not only because of modest chance creation but also because both teams had a pathway to suppress volatility if they took the lead. On this occasion it was Coventry but had Forest taken the lead they could plausibly have seen the game out. Because of this I would say the under 2.5 had some value too.

Sunday
Manchester City 5-3 Sunderland - in the afternoon Manchester City were favoured by a goal and a half against Sunderland with win price at 73c, total set around 2.75 goals and BTTS at 51c. An astonishingly open game to such a degree that there is the serious secondary question of whether or not anything was predictive at all and may have been a freak tail end occurrence. The scoring was opened from a free kick in which Enzo Fernández say the Sunderland keeper had left his near post open and he hit it in before he could cover his top corner. Sunderland responded by playing very aggressively, finding Brian Brobbey for the equaliser. City went up soon afterwards but it wasn't long before Sunderland equalised again, once more from Brobbey whose physicality was causing City a lot of problems. City led 3-2 at half time and went 4-2 up just before the hour mark before Brobbey completed his hat trick. City added a fifth goal from Erling Haaland and won 5-3. After last weeks win over Manchester United this was a totally different game. At Old Trafford City played much more tightly when they were a man down and that helped them to keep a clean sheet. At home to Sunderland, City played much more openly and Sunderland were more than willing to challenge them high up the pitch. The result was a volatile game where both teams were stretched in transition and made mistakes trying to keep pace. From a chance creation perspective this game exceeded expected goals by a lot but it was still over 5 xG, more than that for PSG and Bayern Munich's 5-4 was in last season's Champions League semi final. Sunderland had the chance creation edge so I think there was very real value on them to cover the +1.5 line and they were unlucky not to at least keep it within one goal. There was even a comical moment where Rúben Dias almost scored an own goal and then recovered just in time. I would say there was value on the over and BTTS too but what was revealing about this game was Sunderland's willingness to engage City and create repeated scoring opportunities. When other teams do this they run the risk of losing 3-0 or 4-0 but in Sunderland's case, just as against Arsenal last week, when they are able to turn up the temperature in the game, they do create opportunities against teams that play more on the front foot. I don't expect this level of volatility to be the norm for either side but it does show that it is a very real potential path for a game involving these teams to take.

Continued in comments section.