

Match Prediction
Lancashire sit 11th in the T20B regular season with 4 points from a 1W-1L record and an NRR of -0.500. Leicestershire are 18th with 0 points, 0W-3L, and an NRR of -2.802. LAN come in off a 36-run win, while LEI are trying to halt a three-match losing run. The table gap is already significant this early in the regular season.
Toss & Conditions
Head-to-Head
Lancashire lead the last three head-to-heads 2-1. In the most recent meeting last season, Leicestershire chased down Lancashire’s total to win by five wickets with nine balls remaining, finishing the job with time in hand. The key detail was the margin: a five-wicket chase completed with nine balls left, pointing to a controlled pursuit rather than a last-ball scramble. Across the last three meetings, results have flipped, with both teams taking wins rather than one side dominating.
Lancashire
Lancashire are 11th in the T20B regular season with 4 points, a 1W-1L record, and an NRR of -0.500. Their latest outing was a 36-run win over Nottinghamshire, a response after being beaten by 59 runs by Surrey in the match before. The recent pattern is volatile: they’ve shown they can post a winning margin, but they’ve also been on the wrong end of a heavy defeat.
Leicestershire
Leicestershire are 18th in the T20B regular season with 0 points, a 0W-3L record, and an NRR of -2.802. They come in on a three-match losing streak, capped by an 85-run defeat to Derbyshire. The recent story is one-sided losses rather than tight finishes, with opponents repeatedly getting clear separation on the scoreboard.
Playing XI
Key Stats
Verdict
All four models are in consensus for Lancashire, with the average projection at 71% for LAN. Bookmakers align with that view, pricing Lancashire at 63% (1.49) vs Leicestershire at 37% (2.45). Key stats favour Lancashire 6-1 overall, driven by advantages in points, NRR, Elo, and the last-three head-to-head record. The match narrative hinges on whether LEI can reverse a 0-3 start, or whether LAN’s broader statistical edge and recent win momentum holds.
Mahmood’s late burst, not quite enough
Saqib Mahmood ripped through the end of the chase and briefly made 146 feel miles away, but Leicestershire clung on to win by 2 wickets with one ball remaining. After Rishi Patel had given them early control, the finish turned into a scramble as Lancashire kept striking and the target narrowed to a handful in the final over.
Lancashire’s powerplay hole hurts
The game was largely shaped in the first six overs of Lancashire’s innings. They slid to 30/3 in the powerplay, forcing a rebuild that left too much to do later. Joe Moores’ 55 off 39 and his 79-run stand with Chris Green hauled Lancashire back through the middle overs, but the recovery never fully translated into a launch: 27/4 at the death meant 145/9 was competitive rather than commanding.
Moores rebuilds, Patel sets pace
Moores was Lancashire’s innings, absorbing the early collapse and still scoring at 141, while Green’s support in that 79-run partnership gave them a platform. Mahmood’s 3/22 was the standout spell, repeatedly yanking momentum back late. For Leicestershire, Patel’s brisk 40 off 27 ensured the chase stayed ahead of the rate before the nerves arrived, and Nick Kelly’s 29 helped bridge the innings through the quieter middle phase.
Pre-match edge, match-day squeeze
All the pre-match numbers leaned heavily towards Lancashire, but this contest was decided by match-ups and moments rather than season-long trends. Leicestershire’s bowlers got the new-ball breakthroughs that Lancashire were expected to avoid, flipping the script early. Then, even with Mahmood and George Balderson dragging the chase into the final over, Leicestershire had banked enough in the powerplay (41/1) and middle overs (81/2) to survive a messy finish.
LALancashire
208/4
NONottinghamshire
172/9
SUSurrey
213/6
LALancashire
154/10
LALancashire
159/10
SOSomerset
182/7
LALancashire
156/7
KEKent
153/10
NONottinghamshire
127/6
LALancashire
126/10
YOYorkshire
153/10
LALancashire
174/10
LALancashire
156/7
DUDurham
155/6
LALancashire
217/7
YOYorkshire
236/6
WAWarwickshire
203/9
LALancashire
167/10
LALancashire
178/6
DEDerbyshire
136/6
LA7
LE3
LALancashire
145/7
LELeicestershire
149/5
LELeicestershire
137/9
LALancashire
162/10
LALancashire
105/2
LELeicestershire
99/10
LELeicestershire
135/10
LALancashire
139/3
LALancashire
172/8
LELeicestershire
156/5
LALancashire
132/5
LELeicestershire
154/5
LALancashire
143/5
LELeicestershire
142/9
LALancashire
190/5
LELeicestershire
194/5
LELeicestershire
146/2
LALancashire
142/10
LELeicestershire
169/3
LALancashire
173/5
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
LELeicestershire
160/6
NONottinghamshire
156/10
LELeicestershire
153/4
WOWorcestershire
150/8
NOR
2
2-0
8
SUR
2
2-0
8
DUR
2
2-0
8
SOM
2
2-0
8
GLO
2
2-0
8
KEN
2
2-0
8
YOR
2
2-0
8
DER
3
1-2
4
SUS
2
1-1
4
HAM
2
1-1
4
LAN
2
1-1
4
WOR
2
1-1
4
GLA
2
0-2
0
MID
2
0-2
0
WAR
2
0-2
0
ESS
2
0-2
0
NOT
2
0-2
0
LEI
3
0-3
0
NOR
2
2
0
—
+2.575
8
SUR
2
2
0
—
+1.848
8
DUR
2
2
0
—
+1.757
8
SOM
2
2
0
—
+1.508
8
GLO
2
2
0
—
+1.200
8
KEN
2
2
0
—
+1.167
8
YOR
2
2
0
—
+1.133
8
DER
3
1
2
—
+1.198
4
SUS
2
1
1
—
+0.632
4
HAM
2
1
1
—
-0.133
4
LAN
2
1
1
—
-0.500
4
WOR
2
1
1
—
-2.050
4
GLA
2
0
2
—
-0.100
0
MID
2
0
2
—
-1.043
0
WAR
2
0
2
—
-1.616
0
ESS
2
0
2
—
-1.864
0
NOT
2
0
2
—
-1.929
0
LEI
3
0
3
—
-2.802
0
NORWW
SURWW
DURWW
SOMWW
GLOWW
KENWW
YORWW
DERLLW
SUSWL
HAMLW
LANLW
WORWL
GLALL
MIDLL
WARLL
ESSLL
NOTLL
LEILLL
