Lille v Clermont Foot
How the SharpXI model rated this Ligue 1 fixture — every call it made on shots, cards and fouls, set against what actually happened on the day.
Before Lille beat Clermont Foot 4–0, the SharpXI model made 14 confident calls on the player markets and 12 landed — the strongest being Maxime Gonalons for 1+ tackles (95%, had 3). Its clearest miss: Benjamin André for 1+ fouls committed (90%, had 0). Every probability here was published before kick-off, priced the same way as every other fixture — one game is noise, not a verdict.
Player markets — the model's calls
Each probability is the model's own number for the headline (1+) line, before any bookmaker margin. The result column is what the player actually recorded.
| Player | Market | Line | Model | Actual | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maxime Gonalons | tackles | 1+ | 95% | 3 | ✓ |
| Jonathan David | shots total | 1+ | 94% | 6 | ✓ |
| Edon Zhegrova | shots total | 1+ | 94% | 4 | ✓ |
| Rémy Cabella | tackles | 1+ | 93% | 1 | ✓ |
| Yohann Magnin | tackles | 1+ | 93% | 2 | ✓ |
| Benjamin André | tackles | 1+ | 93% | 7 | ✓ |
| Nabil Bentaleb | tackles | 1+ | 92% | 1 | ✓ |
| Elbasan Rashani | fouls committed | 1+ | 90% | 1 | ✓ |
| Benjamin André | fouls committed | 1+ | 90% | 0 | ✗ |
| Yohann Magnin | fouls committed | 1+ | 90% | 2 | ✓ |
| Ismaily | tackles | 1+ | 88% | 1 | ✓ |
| Chrislain Matsima | tackles | 1+ | 88% | 3 | ✓ |
| Tiago Santos | tackles | 1+ | 88% | 2 | ✓ |
| Muhammed-Cham Saračević | fouls drawn | 1+ | 88% | 0 | ✗ |
How these are modelled: Tackles Shots total Fouls committed Fouls drawn
Team & match markets
| Market | Line | Model | Actual | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Match goals | O2.5 | 53% | 4 goals | ✓ |
| BTTS | Yes | 46% | No | ✗ |
| Match cards | O4.5 | 38% | 1 cards | ✗ |
How these are modelled: Match goals Match cards
Dig deeper
Past meetings
- Clermont Foot 0–0 Lille Dec 2023
- Lille 0–0 Clermont Foot Feb 2023
- Clermont Foot 0–2 Lille Dec 2022
Frequently asked
How did the SharpXI model do on Lille v Clermont Foot?
12 of its 14 most-confident calls landed. The board on this page lists every one with the model's pre-kickoff probability next to what actually happened, hits and misses in the same table.
What did the model get wrong on Lille v Clermont Foot?
The most confident call it got wrong was Benjamin André at 90% for fouls committed — shown in the same table as the hits, marked with a cross. A record that hides its misses isn't a record, so we don't.
Are these probabilities hindsight?
No. Each one is the number the model produced from data available before kick-off, using the same settings as every other fixture on the site — nothing was refitted after the result. That is the only way a per-match report means anything.
Does one match tell you if the model is any good in the Ligue 1?
No, and we'd rather say so. A single fixture is a handful of calls and mostly noise; the season-long, market-by-market record — including the markets that fail to beat a naive guess — is on the track record page.
SharpXI models probabilities from public match data; it does not take bets or guarantee outcomes. Prices are entered per leg in the tool. 18+ — please gamble responsibly.