Nottingham Forest vs Tottenham: result, lineups & analysis — Premier League
Saturday, 5 September 2026 at 14:00 UTC
🏟 City Ground · Nottingham
📋 Overview
Confidence 3/5Nottingham Forest have the stronger 1X2 lean thanks to home advantage, the model and Tottenham’s projected low attacking output, with the game tending towards under 2.5 goals.
Forest have a slight home edge and the more consistent attacking profile: 1.47 xG compared with Tottenham’s 0.80. The Poisson model projects a 1.86–0.72 scoreline and clearly favours the hosts, although the market sees a much more balanced contest. With the season still in its early stages, the sample is small, the line-ups have not been announced and reports about Tottenham’s management conflict with the supplied registration data.
📌 Analysis direction
Forest offer the stronger overall direction thanks to home advantage, higher xG and a favourable wing-back matchup against Tottenham’s 4-2-3-1. The visitors’ low attacking output supports a low-scoring scenario, although the line-ups and reports concerning Richarlison and Sávio reduce confidence.
🔑 Key points
Model rates Forest well above the market
The Poisson model gives Forest a 64% chance of winning, compared with 22% for a draw and 14% for Tottenham, while the market is at 37.8%, 28% and 34.2% respectively. The biggest discrepancy concerns the visitors, whom the market prices as far more competitive than the model does.
Uneven attacking output
Forest average 1.47 xG and 12 shots, compared with Tottenham’s 0.80 xG and 13 shots. Spurs have not converted their shot volume into quality chances, favouring a low-scoring home win.
Early-season data lowers confidence
Forest average 0.5 points per game, scoring 1.0 goal and conceding 1.5 in the available data; Tottenham average 0 points per game, have scored none and conceded 2.5. These figures point to current problems, but the sample remains too small to be treated as definitive.
Reports still lack official confirmation
Reports claim Richarlison wants to leave Tottenham and that Sávio has been signed, but this conflicts with the coaching data and no official line-ups have been released. Richarlison’s possible departure reduces confidence in Spurs’ attacking reference point, but is not being treated as a confirmed absence.
⚖️ Edges & risks per team
- +Forest produce 1.47 xG compared with Tottenham’s 0.80, indicating better average chance quality and favouring the hosts despite their fragile points numbers.
- +The 3-4-2-1 used in 100% of matches offers potential superiority in the wide areas against the 4-2-3-1, especially if Forest’s wing-backs can pin back Spurs’ full-backs and feed the two attacking midfielders inside.
- +The Poisson model projects 1.86 Forest goals and a 64% win probability, well above the market’s implied 37.8%. The discrepancy suggests the model sees a structural home advantage that the odds have not fully priced in.
- +The two supplied recent 3-0 head-to-head wins reinforce confidence in Forest’s matchup, although they cannot replace current data or imply another emphatic scoreline.
- −Forest average 0.5 points per game, concede 1.5 goals per match and have yet to keep a clean sheet, so their back three offers no guarantee of complete transition control.
- −A corner average of just four compared with Tottenham’s six could allow the visitors to maintain territorial pressure and put the game into the box despite creating less valuable chances.
- −Taiwo Awoniyi’s departure and Liam Delap’s arrival change the attacking reference point. Delap was signed to become the focal point, but the supplied data do not yet confirm that his adaptation has improved attacking efficiency.
- −The short season and absence of official line-ups leave the availability of key players uncertain and reduce confidence in a reading based on the opening two matches.
- +Tottenham average 13 shots and six corners, suggesting they can reach the final third despite their low xG; better final-pass selection could see them exceed the projected 0.72 goals.
- +The 4-2-3-1 can attack the space behind Forest’s wing-backs, particularly when the home side pushes both attacking midfielders forward and leaves its defensive transition exposed.
- +Roberto De Zerbi’s reports describe Sávio as strong in one-on-one situations and capable of playing on either flank. If selected, he could offer an individual solution against Forest’s back five, although the coaching information in those reports does not match the coach listed in the official data.
- +The market gives Tottenham 34.2%, almost level with Forest, showing that the visitors should not be dismissed solely on the basis of their early xG and goals numbers.
- −Tottenham average 0 points per game, have scored none and conceded 2.5 goals per match in the season data, leaving little margin for a transitional game against Forest.
- −The model projects just 0.72 away goals and a 14% win probability, a major gap from the market’s 34.2%. Spurs’ attack must perform well above its current level to turn possession and shots into a genuine threat.
- −Reports say Richarlison wants to leave and may be omitted from the Premier League squad, but there is no official confirmation; if unavailable, Tottenham could lose physical presence and ball retention in the final third.
- −The departure of important players listed in the previous squad, including Cristian Romero and Guglielmo Vicario, increases uncertainty around defensive stability and the coordination of the back line, although the goals conceded cannot automatically be attributed to those changes.
📐 Tactical analysis
Nottingham Forest have used a 3-4-2-1 in 100% of their matches, a structure that can form a back five without the ball and release two attacking midfielders behind the striker into the space between full-back and centre-back. Under S. Dyche, a coach with ten years’ experience and spells at Burnley and Everton, the tendency is towards a more direct, physical game focused on protecting the box, although the 1.47 xG shows that Forest can also create at home. Tottenham have used a 4-2-3-1 in 100% of matches, but their 0.80 xG points to difficulty turning possession or circulation into clear chances. The key battle will be corridor protection: Forest’s wing-backs can target the gaps between Tottenham’s full-backs and wingers, while the visitors must attack behind that structure without exposing their double pivot to transitions.
📊 Market expectation (1X2)
Market heat 🔥🔥Odds movement ±2pts
Market read：The no-vig implied probabilities indicate a balanced game: 37.8% for Forest, 28% for the draw and 34.2% for Tottenham. The market also gives 48% to over 2.5 goals and 53% to both teams scoring, so there is no strong expectation of either a rout or an entirely closed game. The model diverges significantly on the 1X2, giving Forest 64% and Tottenham just 14%, but projects 2.6 goals and 47% for the over, broadly aligning with the market’s goals view. Since the season has only just begun, the statistical home advantage should be tempered by the small sample and the still-uncertain strength of the opponents faced.
De-vigged implied probability · for analysis only, not betting advice.
📐 Statistical score reference
Poisson reference based only on season goal averages. It is not the full-analysis prediction or betting advice.
🎓 Coaches / Formations
Coaches & tactical battle：S. Dyche has been at Forest for 14 months, has ten years of management experience and worked at Burnley and Everton. His fully established 3-4-2-1 fits a compact, direct and combative approach, but the 1.47 xG shows the team are not reliant solely on set pieces. T. Frank has also been at Tottenham for 14 months, has 15 years’ experience and worked at Brøndby, Brentford and with Denmark’s youth teams. His 4-2-3-1 suggests a more conventional structure for pressing and occupying the half-spaces, but the 0.80 xG and two opening negative results show that the attacking execution is not yet settled. The battle will be between Forest’s wing-back width and Tottenham’s wingers’ ability to force them back. If Spurs lose the ball with their full-backs advanced, Dyche’s side will have routes into the box in transition; if Tottenham can isolate the wing-backs, their corner superiority could become sustained pressure.
🔬 Advanced data (averages)
Per-game averages in this competition · FootyStats / API-Football
🚩 Corners & special markets
Tottenham win or earn an average of six corners, compared with Forest’s four, which could create territorial pressure and a set-piece threat for the visitors. However, Tottenham’s 0.80 xG indicates that corner volume has not automatically become clear chances; overall, the data point to a low-scoring game, with Forest more dangerous in transition and from second balls.
X-factors
- ▸Richarlison’s possible absence for market-related reasons could leave Tottenham without a recognised physical reference point, but his status has not been officially confirmed.
- ▸If available, Sávio’s debut would add dribbling and one-on-one ability on both flanks, although the reports themselves suggest he still needs to improve his goal output.
- ▸Forest average four corners compared with Tottenham’s six, creating a possible territorial edge for the visitors despite their lower xG output.
What to watch
- ▸Who leads the line for Tottenham if Richarlison is actually left out of the squad.
- ▸How Forest’s wing-backs advance and how Tottenham’s full-backs respond to the individual duels in the wide areas.
- ▸Whether Tottenham’s average of six corners produces genuine chances or merely territorial possession without quality.
📈 Recent form
- 2026-09-05 · (H) 0–0 vs Tottenham
- 2026-08-29 · (A) 2–2 vs Liverpool
- 2026-08-22 · (H) 0–1 vs Leeds
- 2026-05-24 · (H) 1–1 vs Bournemouth
- 2026-05-17 · (A) 2–3 vs Manchester United
- 2026-09-12 · (H) 0–0 vs Everton
- 2026-09-05 · (A) 0–0 vs Nottingham Forest
- 2026-08-29 · (H) 0–2 vs Newcastle
- 2026-08-22 · (A) 0–3 vs Brentford
- 2026-05-24 · (H) 1–0 vs Everton
🆚 Head-to-head
- 2026-09-05 · Nottingham Forest 0–0 Tottenham
- 2026-03-22 · Tottenham 0–3 Nottingham Forest
- 2025-12-14 · Nottingham Forest 3–0 Tottenham
🧑⚖️ Referee
Craig Pawson, England
Referee averages in this competition · 23 games · PK Sport
C. Pawson averages four cards per game, enough to punish physical duels and tactical fouls, particularly between Forest’s wing-backs and Tottenham’s wingers. His 3.14-goal average and 55% both-teams-to-score rate support some threat from both sides, but do not erase the xG gap or Tottenham’s recent lack of attacking production.
✅ Confirmed lineups · Nottingham Forest [3-4-2-1]
API-Football · 5 Sept 2026, 13:39 UTC
- 26M. Sels
- 23Jair
- 31N. Milenković
- 5Murillo
- 34O. Aina
- 21X. Schlager
- 24J. McAtee
- 3N. Williams
- 10M. Gibbs-White
- 14D. Ndoye
- 19L. Delap
✅ Confirmed lineups · Tottenham [4-2-3-1]
API-Football · 5 Sept 2026, 13:39 UTC
- 31A. Kinský
- 23Pedro Porro
- 6J. van Hecke
- 37M. van de Ven
- 13D. Udogie
- 30R. Bentancur
- 16S. Tonali
- 17Sávio
- 8C. Gallagher
- 11M. Tel
- 22Omar Marmoush
🚑 Injuries / Absences
- outN. Savona
- outN. Savona
- outD. Kulusevski
- outJ. Maddison
- outW. Odobert
- outX. Simons
- outD. Kulusevski
- outJ. Maddison
- outW. Odobert
- outX. Simons
⚡ Key intel: favorable & unfavorable factors
- + FavorableLiam Delap has joined Nottingham Forest for up to £50 million and is registered to play. The centre-forward gives Oliver Glasner a more physical focal point in attack and adds options following Taiwo Awoniyi’s departure.
- − UnfavorableRicharlison has been left out of Tottenham’s Premier League squad and is ineligible for the competition while he remains at the club. The Spurs’ top league scorer last season with 11 goals, his absence reduces the team’s finishing power and attacking depth.
- − UnfavorableMicky van de Ven remains out while recovering from injury, while Pedro Porro has yet to return to action since the World Cup. The absences are forcing Tottenham to improvise in defence and making it harder to establish stability for a team that already began the season with cohesion problems.
- − UnfavorableTottenham come under pressure after two Premier League defeats without scoring, and Roberto De Zerbi is still seeking his best line-up. Their weaknesses in pressing and build-up play, along with the lack of coordination in the reshaped squad, could be exploited by Forest.
AI-curated from all collected news: only facts likely to affect the result.
📰 Recent news
- C★★★★
- C★★★★
- C★★★★
- C★★★★
- C★★★★
- C★★★★
- C★★★★
- C★★★
Only intel rated ≥3★ impact is shown.
🧭 Final integrated verdict
The league-table context carries little weight because the Premier League is still in its early stages and the standings are not yet a reliable measure of strength. Even so, the current indicators favour Nottingham Forest: 1.47 xG against 0.80, home advantage, two recent wins in the supplied head-to-head record and a model that rates them well above the market in the 1X2. Tottenham have more corners and a higher raw shot volume, but conceded 2.5 goals per game in the available data and are yet to score, while reports about Richarlison remain uncertain and the information on Sávio does not guarantee an immediate impact. Referee C. Pawson averages 3.14 goals per game and 55% for both teams to score, which argues against an overly conservative reading, but his four cards per match could suit Forest’s physical approach if they control transitions. The final view is a Nottingham Forest win and under 2.5 goals, with the model supporting the hosts and both the market and Poisson model converging on a balanced goals line rather than an open, high-scoring contest.
🎯 Analysis decision
The conclusion combines competition context, team traits, form, tactics, availability, match intel, graded lessons and market/model references.
Analysis based on public data and market signals. For analysis only — not betting advice.
Data: Sportmonks / API-Football · pksport.net