Match analysisAI-assisted
Hull City 2–2 Ipswich Town: what changed at minute 74?
Hull City's win probability moved from 84.2% to 22.1%. Compare the match sequence with 0.68–1.02 xG.
By xG Lab ·
The recorded evidence
On 31 October 2026, Hull City and Ipswich Town finished 2–2. The verified goal sequence was: Ipswich Town at minute 22 (0–1); Hull City at minute 58 (1–1); Hull City at minute 68 (2–1); Ipswich Town at minute 74 (2–2).
At kick-off the model assigned Hull City 48.6%, the draw 24.3% and Ipswich Town 27.2%. At minute 73, the home win probability was 84.2%; at minute 74 it was 22.1%. This was the largest consecutive home probability change before the settled endpoint, at 62.1 percentage points. Values are independently rounded. At the later checkpoint the draw was 62.6% and the away win probability was 15.2%.
Hull City recorded 0.68 xG and Ipswich Town recorded 1.02. Total xG sums the scoring probabilities of chances; it does not establish average shot quality or a deserved result. The replay model uses pre-match strengths, score, remaining time and recorded red cards, rather than updating from live xG. The final checkpoint is settled by the actual result.
What the minute 74 checkpoint does and does not show
The question in the title has a narrow answer in the recorded data. Between minute 73 and minute 74, the home win probability for Hull City moved from 84.2% to 22.1%. The goal sequence, Ipswich Town at minute 22 (0–1); Hull City at minute 58 (1–1); Hull City at minute 68 (2–1); Ipswich Town at minute 74 (2–2), includes Ipswich Town at minute 74 making the score 2–2. That is an observation: the recorded score change sits at the same checkpoint as the largest home probability change before the settled endpoint.
A cautious interpretation is that the swing reflects a lead being replaced by a level score late in the replay. The recorded data does not tell us why that goal happened, so tactics, fatigue or individual decisions should not be inferred from it.
Reading xG beside the probability curve
The xG totals, 0.68 for Hull City and 1.02 for Ipswich Town, are a separate layer from the curve. The curve does not update from live xG, so it cannot show whether chances changed the probabilities. Because the total is a sum of scoring probabilities, the higher Ipswich Town figure should not be read as proof of better average shot quality or of a deserved result. It also cannot change the goals that were scored.
The final checkpoint at minute 90 shows 0.0% for Hull City, 100.0% for the draw and 0.0% for Ipswich Town. That is a settled endpoint from the result, not a prediction made before the whistle.
The data behind this analysis
| Minute | Hull City win | Draw | Ipswich Town win |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0′ | 48.6% | 24.3% | 27.2% |
| 73′ | 84.2% | 13.9% | 1.8% |
| 74′ | 22.1% | 62.6% | 15.2% |
| 90′ | 0.0% | 100.0% | 0.0% |
Method, sources and limitations
This article uses a fixed snapshot captured on 2026-11-02. The latest data used is dated 2026-10-31. The snapshot stays fixed as the underlying tools update.
xG values use xG Lab’s licensed TheStatsAPI feed; other providers may produce different values. Probabilities come from xG Lab’s model using pre-match strengths, score, remaining time and recorded red cards. The model does not update strengths from live xG. The replay follows recorded minute checkpoints, including available stoppage time, with a settled final endpoint. Figures are rounded.
Short samples are descriptive and are not adjusted for opposition strength. A goals-minus-xG gap does not by itself isolate finishing skill or forecast future results. Pre-match probabilities are uncertain snapshots and may change with later data.
Prepared by xG Lab with AI assistance, following the analysis methods and editorial standards our team designed. Every figure is checked against the data snapshot above before publication. Interpretations should be read with these limitations.