Back to Home

Hapoel Tel Aviv vs Maccabi Haifa

2026-11-02 · Israeli Premier League · Israel · KO 11:30 · Dataset generated 2026-11-01T15:49:48.870Z · Page generated 2026-11-04

Recent Form

Statistics (Last 10 Matches)

Hapoel Tel Aviv

W
4
D
4
L
2
Scored
1.4
Conceded
0.8

Maccabi Haifa

W
7
D
0
L
3
Scored
2.2
Conceded
1.6

League Table

Hapoel Tel Aviv

Ligat ha'Al

Position
2nd
Played
8
Points
19
W-D-L
6-1-1
Goal difference
+13

Maccabi Haifa

Ligat ha'Al

Position
4th
Played
8
Points
18
W-D-L
6-0-2
Goal difference
+6

Head to Head

Maccabi Haifa4 - 1Hapoel Tel Aviv
Hapoel Tel Aviv4 - 0Maccabi Haifa
Hapoel Tel Aviv2 - 0Maccabi Haifa
Maccabi Haifa2 - 1Hapoel Tel Aviv
Maccabi Haifa0 - 0Hapoel Tel Aviv

Match Summary

Recent form gives Maccabi Haifa the edge: 4 wins and 1 loss in the last 5, compared with 2 wins and 1 loss for Hapoel Tel Aviv. Over the available recent sample, Hapoel Tel Aviv average 1.4 goals scored and 0.8 conceded per match; Maccabi Haifa average 2.2 scored and 1.6 conceded. The numbers pull in different directions: Maccabi Haifa have the higher scoring average, while Hapoel Tel Aviv have been tighter defensively. In the listed head-to-head meetings, Hapoel Tel Aviv won 2, Maccabi Haifa won 2, with 1 draw. Both teams scored in 2 of the 5 meetings, which averaged 2.8 goals overall. League context: Hapoel Tel Aviv sit 2nd and Maccabi Haifa 4th in Ligat ha'Al. Hapoel Tel Aviv are higher in the table. That is useful season-long context, while the recent results above show the more immediate form. Outcome leans: X2 (Maccabi Haifa or draw): form favors Maccabi Haifa, and the goal difference supports the lean. Over 2.5 lean (recent-rate baseline: 3.0 goals). BTTS: no clear lean.

What to Expect

Matchup outlook

  • Maccabi Haifa arrive with the better recent results, taking 12 points from 5 compared with 8 for Hapoel Tel Aviv. That is a form advantage, not by itself a reason to expect a comfortable win.
  • Using each side’s last-ten-match scoring and conceding averages, a cross-check against the opponent’s defense gives a descriptive baseline of about 1.5 for Hapoel Tel Aviv and 1.5 for Maccabi Haifa (3.0 combined). The rates point to a fairly balanced scoring setup. This is a comparison of past averages, not a score forecast.
  • Both attacks have averaged at least 1.3 goals per match, so neither arrives without recent scoring output. The defensive figures still matter: scoring averages alone are not enough to make a both-teams-to-score call.

Evidence and Caveats

What supports the read

  • Maccabi Haifa have taken 4 more points across the listed form sequence (2-2-1 for Hapoel Tel Aviv; 4-0-1 for Maccabi Haifa). The gap is more informative than wins alone because it also accounts for draws.
  • Maccabi Haifa have been the more productive attack in the last-ten sample (2.2 goals per match against 1.4 for Hapoel Tel Aviv).
  • Maccabi Haifa (1.6 conceded per match) have allowed at least 1.5 goals per match. That is a defensive weakness in the sample, though it does not show how those goals were created or whether the same pattern will carry into this fixture.

What challenges the read

  • Maccabi Haifa score more (2.2 vs 1.4 per match), but also concede more (1.6 vs 0.8). Their attacking edge comes with a defensive trade-off.

What could change it

  • Head-to-head results are useful context, but the list does not show when those matches were played; older meetings may say little about the current squads.
  • These are team-level averages, not a tactical or lineup report. They do not account for opponent strength, confirmed starters, injuries, venue conditions, or how each team performed home and away.

Players to Watch and Team News

No current player scoring data is available for this exact fixture and date. Injury and suspension status is not verified, so no absence claims are made.

18+ | T&Cs apply | Gamble responsibly | Includes affiliate commission disclosure

18+ Only

Predictions are for informational purposes only. Gambling involves financial risk and may lead to addiction. Please play responsibly.