

Match Prediction
Leicestershire are 14th in the T20B Regular Season with 8 points and a 2W-3L record. Yorkshire are 3rd with 16 points and a 4W-1L record. LEI come in off two straight wins, both tight chases that went deep. YOR’s recent results include one heavy win and one clear defeat, so this is a test of whether their top-end level shows up again.
Toss & Conditions
Head-to-Head
Across the last three meetings, Yorkshire lead 2-1. The most recent clash was decided on the final ball, with Yorkshire winning by 2 wickets with no balls remaining after chasing down Leicestershire’s total. That finish underlined Yorkshire’s ability to close a chase under maximum pressure. The wider pattern is narrow but clear: Yorkshire have taken two of the last three, including the latest tight one.
Leicestershire
Leicestershire are 14th in the T20B Regular Season on 8 points. Their recent form is defined by late, scrappy chases: they’ve won their last two matches by 4 wickets with 14 balls remaining and by 2 wickets with 1 ball remaining. The swing factor is volatility—those wins followed an 85-run defeat in their previous game.
Yorkshire
Yorkshire are 3rd in the T20B Regular Season on 16 points. Their last three show extremes: a 106-run win, a 56-run loss, then a 58-run win. The clearest signal is their ceiling—when they get ahead, they’ve been able to turn games into one-sided results.
Playing XI
Key Stats
Verdict
All four models are in consensus for Yorkshire, with the model average at 65% for YOR. Bookmakers agree, pricing LEI at 39% (2.40) vs YOR at 61% (1.55). Key stats favour Yorkshire 6-1 overall; the gap in season position and net run rate points to YOR’s stronger baseline. The match likely turns on whether LEI can repeat their recent close-finish wins against a YOR side that has recently produced big-margin victories.
Rehan Ahmed flips the chase
Yorkshire looked set when Jonny Bairstow tore into the powerplay, but Rehan Ahmed’s spell dragged the chase off its rails. After Leicestershire posted 147/8, Yorkshire’s pursuit ended at 135 all out with one ball left, a 12-run Leicestershire win built on timely wickets rather than a runaway squeeze. Even with Adam Lyth and Bairstow putting on 44, the chase never fully settled once the middle overs arrived.
Middle overs choke Yorkshire
The decisive stretch was Yorkshire’s middle overs: 65/4 at 15 overs after being 48/2 in the first six. That slowdown (just 6.5 an over through the middle) turned a brisk start into a chase that required a big finish, and it never came. Leicestershire’s control meant Yorkshire entered the last five needing momentum, but managed only 22/4 at the death (5.7 rpo), with wickets repeatedly resetting the equation.
Hasan shines, Kelly anchors
Hasan Ali was outstanding with the ball, repeatedly hitting hard lengths and taking 4/18 to prevent Leicestershire from breaking away. Kelly’s 44 gave Leicestershire a functional base, helped by their best stand of 45, and that proved vital when runs were scarce later. For the hosts, Rehan’s 3/28 provided the key breakthroughs, while Bairstow’s 39 off 21 briefly threatened to make the target irrelevant before the middle-overs squeeze took hold.
Pre-match edge, match-day twist
Everything beforehand pointed to Yorkshire: stronger recent away results, a clear gap in season numbers, and even a bowling matchup that suggested they could control the end overs. They did half the job through Hasan Ali, whose 4/18 kept Leicestershire to a chaseable total despite Nick Kelly’s 44 off 31. But T20s turn on sequences, and Yorkshire’s chase couldn’t convert a strong powerplay into a stable platform; once the asking rate climbed, boundary options narrowed and risk brought wickets.
SUSussex
179/10
LELeicestershire
180/6
LALancashire
145/9
LELeicestershire
146/8
LELeicestershire
145/10
DEDerbyshire
230/5
DUDurham
150/4
LELeicestershire
148/8
LELeicestershire
164/4
WOWorcestershire
188/9
LELeicestershire
185/10
YOYorkshire
188/8
WOWorcestershire
176/4
LELeicestershire
173/6
LELeicestershire
173/4
NONorthamptonshire
171/7
NONottinghamshire
189/9
LELeicestershire
188/2
LELeicestershire
154/10
WAWarwickshire
158/4
LE5
YO5
LELeicestershire
185/10
YOYorkshire
188/8
YOYorkshire
213/7
LELeicestershire
107/10
YOYorkshire
146/9
LELeicestershire
166/10
LELeicestershire
155/3
YOYorkshire
151/7
YOYorkshire
197/2
LELeicestershire
195/5
LELeicestershire
126/10
YOYorkshire
156/7
LELeicestershire
211/7
YOYorkshire
151/9
YOYorkshire
157/9
LELeicestershire
188/7
LELeicestershire
207/3
YOYorkshire
173/10
YOYorkshire
240/4
LELeicestershire
222/8
YOYorkshire
213/7
LALancashire
107/10
YOYorkshire
161/10
GLGloucestershire
217/6
DUDurham
93/10
YOYorkshire
151/9
YOYorkshire
195/8
DEDerbyshire
194/4
NONottinghamshire
167/7
YOYorkshire
169/3
LELeicestershire
185/10
YOYorkshire
188/8
YOYorkshire
153/10
LALancashire
174/10
YOYorkshire
151/9
DEDerbyshire
157/2
LALancashire
217/7
YOYorkshire
236/6
DEDerbyshire
201/3
YOYorkshire
200/6
HAM
6
5-1
20
NOR
4
4-0
16
YOR
5
4-1
16
GLO
5
4-1
16
KEN
4
3-1
12
SUR
6
3-3
12
WOR
4
3-1
12
DER
5
2-3
8
GLA
5
2-3
8
ESS
4
2-2
8
DUR
4
2-2
8
NOT
5
2-3
8
SOM
5
2-3
8
LEI
5
2-3
8
SUS
5
1-4
4
MID
5
1-4
4
LAN
4
1-3
4
WAR
5
0-5
0
HAM
6
5
1
—
+0.855
20
NOR
4
4
0
—
+1.848
16
YOR
5
4
1
—
+1.497
16
GLO
5
4
1
—
+1.260
16
KEN
4
3
1
—
+0.571
12
SUR
6
3
3
—
+0.516
12
WOR
4
3
1
—
-0.566
12
DER
5
2
3
—
+0.856
8
GLA
5
2
3
—
+0.291
8
ESS
4
2
2
—
+0.005
8
DUR
4
2
2
—
-0.309
8
NOT
5
2
3
—
-0.672
8
SOM
5
2
3
—
-0.691
8
LEI
5
2
3
—
-1.397
8
SUS
5
1
4
—
-0.646
4
MID
5
1
4
—
-1.288
4
LAN
4
1
3
—
-1.607
4
WAR
5
0
5
—
-0.878
0
HAMWWWWW
NORWWWW
YORWWWLW
GLOWWLWW
KENWWLW
SURWLLWL
WORWLWW
DERLLWWL
GLALLWWL
ESSLLWW
DURWWLL
NOTLLLWW
SOMWWLLL
LEILLLWW
SUSWLLLL
MIDLLWLL
LANLWLL
WARLLLLL
