FC RFS 3-1 BFC Daugavpils: 2026 Virslīga Round 21 Review
Football
FC RFS 3-1 BFC Daugavpils: 2026 Virslīga Round 21 Review
FC RFS won 3-1. Review the official score, event timeline, actual lineup evidence, attendance and match-specific historical context.
Матч
FC RFS vs BFC Daugavpils
Автор
OddNexo Editorial Team
This event is complete, so the page has been converted from a pre-event prediction into a factual archive. FC RFS won the completed match 3-1 at LNK Sporta Parks, Riga. The LFF timeline marks the match finished and publishes the final 3-1 score. There are no current odds, live picks or bookmaker calls to action below.
The FC RFS vs BFC Daugavpils result and event details were checked against Latvian Football Federation official match protocol. Statistics not published by those sources are not added. Tactical explanations are editorial analysis and are kept separate from the official record.
Dmitrijs Zelenkovs 21'; Papa Omar Gningue own goal 54'; Žiga Lipušček 62'; Rihards Matrevics own goal 85'
Discipline
No red card; yellow cards to Doukumo Wadulu Ayebadiepreye 30', Ervīns Piņaskins 33' and Alain Cedric Herve Kouadio 79'
Actual starting XIs
FC RFS: Rihards Matrevics, Ismael Diomande, Rostand Ndjiki, Dmitrijs Zelenkovs, Herdi Prenga, Stefan Panič, Žiga Lipušček, Mor Talla Gaye, Gauthier Bwayi Mankenda, Strahinja Rakič, Kumater Joshua Shina. BFC Daugavpils: Jurijs Saveļjevs, Doukumo Wadulu Ayebadiepreye, William Eseme Mukwelle, Papa Omar Gningue, Raivis Skrebels, Abdoul Kader Traore, Joel Yakubu, Ervīns Piņaskins, Taty Tchibinda Ceti Junior, Ziad Ouled-Haj-M'Hand, Gļebs Mihaļcovs.
Historical consequence
RFS collected the round-21 win; Daugavpils's only goal was recorded as Matrevics's own goal
Official result and event timeline
Latvian Football Federation match protocol 23300171 identifies FC RFS 3-1 BFC Daugavpils as a completed 2026 Tonybet Virslīga, round 21 fixture. The page records 30 June 2026, 18:00 local time, LNK Sporta Parks, Riga and an attendance of 407. Those fields close the identity check before any analysis begins: this is not a similarly named friendly, cup tie or future schedule entry, and the expired prediction is therefore replaced by a post-match archive.
Zelenkovs opened the scoring with Ndjiki credited for the assist, Gningue's own goal doubled the margin, and Lipušček made it 3-0 from Zelenkovs's assist before Matrevics's late own goal. The complete official scoring record is Dmitrijs Zelenkovs 21'; Papa Omar Gningue own goal 54'; Žiga Lipušček 62'; Rihards Matrevics own goal 85'. Minutes are kept in the form published by the source, including added time where present, rather than rounded or reassigned from an unauthorised score page.
RFS led 1-0 at halftime, moved to 3-0 within 17 second-half minutes and conceded only after the three-goal cushion had been established. The final margin alone would hide those changes in game state. This review therefore separates what the authority publishes from the editorial explanation: scorers, assists, cards and times are sourced facts, while the effect of taking or losing a lead is match analysis.
Actual lineup evidence and player involvement
The protocol publishes two complete eleven-player starting columns and separates them from the reserve lists. The relevant official record says: FC RFS: Rihards Matrevics, Ismael Diomande, Rostand Ndjiki, Dmitrijs Zelenkovs, Herdi Prenga, Stefan Panič, Žiga Lipušček, Mor Talla Gaye, Gauthier Bwayi Mankenda, Strahinja Rakič, Kumater Joshua Shina. BFC Daugavpils: Jurijs Saveļjevs, Doukumo Wadulu Ayebadiepreye, William Eseme Mukwelle, Papa Omar Gningue, Raivis Skrebels, Abdoul Kader Traore, Joel Yakubu, Ervīns Piņaskins, Taty Tchibinda Ceti Junior, Ziad Ouled-Haj-M'Hand, Gļebs Mihaļcovs. This is actual match evidence, not the pre-match projection language left in the legacy URL.
Zelenkovs appears as both the first scorer and the provider for Lipušček, while both own goals are assigned explicitly by the federation rather than reclassified as ordinary opposition finishes. Naming the participants matters because it connects the verified events to people who were actually involved. It also prevents an old preview from presenting an anticipated starter as if the player had appeared.
The protocol records Daugavpils's halftime introduction of Kouadio and RFS changes from the 66th minute onward, allowing the late own goal to be read against the actual personnel changes. The article does not manufacture a formation, role map or injury claim from the order of names. A starting list and a substitution event can establish participation; they cannot by themselves establish average position, pressing intensity or an undisclosed medical reason.
Score-state and performance analysis
RFS created separation through one direct scoring combination and two events involving defenders, then managed a three-goal score state before the late concession. That is a narrower and more useful conclusion than treating FC RFS 3-1 BFC Daugavpils as proof of a permanent attack or defence level. A single completed fixture can show the sequence that produced the result, but it cannot support an unpublished chance-quality value, ball-share figure or attempt total.
Zelenkovs's involvement in the first and third goals framed the decisive period, while Gningue's own goal turned a narrow halftime deficit into a steeper chase. This mechanism is the central match-specific signal for the archive. It may be relevant when the teams are compared again, but only alongside new team news, venue, competition and current form rather than copied as a prediction shortcut.
The official event list contains yellow cards but no dismissal, so the 3-1 pattern cannot be attributed to either side playing with ten. The discipline record is handled chronologically so the article does not imply that a card caused an earlier goal. Where no red card is recorded, the review does not invent a numerical-advantage explanation; where dismissals occurred, it states when the balance changed and what happened afterwards.
Competition history, form context and evidence limits
The record belongs to round 21 of the 2026 Virslīga season and should be used as one league result, not merged with cup or European meetings. The verified consequence is RFS collected the round-21 win; Daugavpils's only goal was recorded as Matrevics's own goal. That is historical context anchored to this event, not a claim that one result determines a full season or that a later meeting must follow the same pattern.
A round number and a complete event protocol give reliable match context, but they do not by themselves create a verified five-match form sequence. Readers still gain a usable form reference from the exact opponent, venue, score state, lineup evidence and event sequence. What they do not get is a fabricated last-five table or head-to-head percentage assembled without primary match records.
The LFF protocol supplies the result, venue, attendance, officials, events, assists, full starting lineups, substitutions and benches in one match-specific page. The source chain supports the score, timing, venue, attendance, named events and documented participants used above. Advanced metrics, current odds and unverified availability are excluded. If an automated refresh cannot recover the same match identity and completed status, this page should remain fail-closed instead of substituting a nearby fixture.
How to read this result in future analysis
FC RFS 3-1 BFC Daugavpils should remain the canonical score for this specific kickoff. A later cup meeting, return fixture or league rematch is a separate event and must not overwrite this archive simply because the team names match.
The score moved 1-0, 2-0, 3-0 and 3-1, so Daugavpils never held parity after the 21st minute and its response came after RFS had established control of the result. This is the most durable score-state lesson from the match, but it describes an observed sequence rather than a guaranteed repeat.
Zelenkovs and Lipušček were verified RFS starters, while Gningue and Matrevics were also starters on the sides credited with the two own goals. The participant record replaces the old projected lineup and should be updated only from another match-specific official source, never from a generic squad page.
Keeping the round-21 label prevents the fixture from being confused with a later rematch and preserves the correct league context. Historical use is strongest when it preserves the competition round and consequence together with the score. Removing that context would turn a specific result into a misleading general trend.
For FC RFS 3-1 BFC Daugavpils, the archive deliberately omits unsupported ball-share, attempt and chance-quality figures. The absence is a quality control decision: data density comes from verified events, actual participants, attendance and transparent analysis rather than invented precision.
Editorial verdict
RFS won 3-1 after Zelenkovs shaped two scoring events and a rapid second-half double moved the game beyond Daugavpils before the late own goal. The old prediction slug is retained for continuity, but its content now answers the completed-match search intent with official dynamic data and a bounded historical review.
This completed Tonybet Virslīga page is retained as a historical reference. It is not a current recommendation, and its old result should not be displayed as a scheduled or live event.
FAQ
What was the FC RFS vs BFC Daugavpils score?
FC RFS 3-1 BFC Daugavpils.
Who scored?
Dmitrijs Zelenkovs 21'; Papa Omar Gningue own goal 54'; Žiga Lipušček 62'; Rihards Matrevics own goal 85'.
What attendance was reported?
407 at LNK Sporta Parks, Riga.
Are the lineup names predictions?
No. They are actual starters or participants explicitly documented by the match-specific official record.
Is this still a betting prediction?
No. It is a completed-match archive with no live odds or betting call to action.
