العربيةSeasonThis season · 2026All seasons
Building the full report
Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
VISION AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Player Intelligence Report · Egyptian Premier League 2026

Zizo

Al Ahly FC
Advanced playmaker AM
2.65 key passes/90 · 0.88 xT/90
attacking midadvanced playmaker (8)creationbetween the lines
339
minutes
4 apps
10
key passes
2.65/90
15
progressive passes
4.0/90
7
box entries
1.86/90
21
final-3rd entries
5.6/90
2
goals
1.79 xG
5
dribbles
40% won
81%
pass completion
192 passes
Thin sample this season. Zizo has played 4 matches (339 min) so far, so sections that need a bigger sample to say anything reliable are not shown here — they are missing on purpose, not broken. See all seasons combined →
Part 1

Overview

The headline read on him, and how he compares to his peers.
01

What Patterns Define Him?

His repeatable signature. A step only appears if its reliability score (sample size × match coverage) reaches at least Medium confidence — pattern mining, not anecdotes.

RECEIVE
Right Wing, Attacking third — between the lines — mostly in the attacking third (51% of his 192 passes)
81% completion · 192× in 4/4 matches
TURN / BEAT MAN
face forward in the pocket
40% won · 5× in 3/4 matches
CREATE
through-ball, cut-back, key pass
2.65/90 · 10× in 4/4 matches
FINISH
arrive and shoot from central zones
2 goals · 1.79 xG · 9× in 4/4 matches
Signature: receive between the lines → turn → create or finish. Deny him the pocket in zone 14 and force him to receive facing his own goal.
Part 2

In Possession

What he does with the ball — build-up, progression, creation, carrying and finishing.
02

How does he create chances?

10 key passes (2.65/90), 0 of them assists — where his chance creation specifically comes from, 18 zones (6×3), showing his share of key passes originating there.

Chance creation — key pass origin zone share
Filter:
22%22%22%22%11%VISION AI
chance creation (9)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
Box deliveries — key passes reaching the final third, by flank
VISION AI
from the left (4)from the right (5)of 9 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
03

Where Does He Receive?

The zones where Zizo gets on the ball — his top three ball-collection areas highlighted (gold = primary). Reception is proxied by where his on-ball actions begin (the event feed gives no explicit receiver).

123VISION AI
1 = primary, 2 = secondary, 3 = third · own goal left, attacking
His collection zones
15%
Primary
Right Wing, Attacking third
15%
Secondary
Left Wing, Attacking third
13%
Third
Central, Middle third
These are his primary ball-collection zones — where any plan to involve him (or deny him) has to start.
04

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Zizo actually gets on the ball. Hover any zone for its breakdown by action type, its share of all touches, and the exact coordinate range it covers.

Filter:
11212417382416535232323VISION AI
own goal left, attacking · brighter + higher number = more touches

Passes only — completed vs incomplete, by zone

Same zone grid, restricted to passes so completed/incomplete and match filters actually mean something — a shot or a dribble has no "completed" in the pass sense.

2%3%10%11%11%2%4%12%7%1%6%11%11%9%VISION AI
own goal left, attacking
05

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

60 tracked carries (15.9/90, 13 progressive, 516m total) — the ball moving with his touches, a different signal from dribbles below (beating an opponent 1v1). this counts every touch-carry, not just his dribble attempts below — a fuller picture of how much of his ball-carrying is control-and-move rather than beating a man.

2%3%15%12%5%2%7%12%8%3%3%2%13%8%5%VISION AI
progressivelateral/short% of his 60 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking
Every carry, exact path — median 7m, longest 30m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
10Outside → Inside
34Inside → Inside
13Outside → Outside
3Inside → Outside
VISION AI
First (25)Second (17)Third (10)Fourth (8)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Dribbles (1v1s)

Only 5 dribbles attempted this season — too little volume to map a location pattern.

06

Tactical patterns — how his football actually looks

Three clustered sequence diagrams from his own event data — his three busiest routes: the way he progresses, the pattern behind his chances, and where a turnover turns dangerous.

own goal left, attacking
How does he progress the ball forward?
His most common route for progressing play: he plays straight through the right hs, advancing it forward in the middle third — 1 passes worth 0.39 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 10 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the right wing toward the central in the final third — 2 times. The receiver isn't identifiable in this data, only where the pass started and ended.
Where does he lose the ball most?
This is a RATE, not a raw count — the share of his touches in each zone that end in a turnover, so a zone he simply plays in more often doesn't automatically look riskier. His weakest zone is the right wing in the final third: 43% of his 30 touches there are lost (13 times).
0 touches · too few3 touches · too few3 touches · too few0 touches · too few0 touches · too few21%3/14 lost33%5/15 lost4%1/25 lost4%1/24 lost10%1/10 lost43%13/30 lost14%2/14 lost14%2/14 lost0%0/11 lost28%8/29 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATTVISION AI
07

Does he carry inside or outside — his ball-carries across the pitch

Four arrows, one per movement class of his ball-carries: outside→inside (cutting in with the ball), inside→outside (carrying wide), outside→outside (down the touchline) and inside→inside (through the middle). Each count is measured from the carry's real start and end coordinates.

own goal left, attacking
Across 60 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he carries through central areas (57%). He carries from outside into the middle 10 times and out toward the touchline 3 — a genuine inside forward who cuts in with the ball.
08

What happens right after he carries the ball

Every carry's end point matched against his own very next pass or shot in the same match, when one starts almost exactly there — the direct continuation of that touch, not a separate stat. “No clean link” means no pass or shot of his own started close enough to count (often the carry ended in a tackle or a loss); it isn't a claim about exactly what happened, only that nothing traceable followed.

Shot
7 · 12%
Progressive / key pass
5 · 8%
Simple pass
38 · 63%
No clean link
10 · 17%
Of 60 carries, 12% flow straight into a shot of his own, 8% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 17% have no clean link to a next touch of his own close to where the carry ended.
09

Crosses & Cutbacks

7 crosses (1.86/90, 4 completed) and 1 cutbacks (0.27/90, 0 completed) — two separate wide-delivery patterns into the box, each its own map with a completed/failed filter. Neither is a tagged event on this data source, so both are inferred from pass geometry — the intended end point of a failed attempt is still real data (an interception doesn’t erase where the ball was aimed): a cross is a pass aimed into the box starting from a wide channel; a cutback starts almost on the byline but is squared back rather than driven forward, aimed centrally around the box. The completed-cross count was checked against this platform’s own real match-level cross totals and lands within about 1 cross of the true count.

Crosses — close-up on the final third
VISION AI
Cutbacks — close-up on the final third
VISION AI
completedfailed (dashed)close-up on the box — attacking ↑ toward goal
10

How does he progress play?

How much he drives the ball forward. Progressive = completed pass advancing ≥15 toward goal.

15
progressive · 4.0/90
21
final-third entries · 5.6/90
7
box entries · 1.86/90
21
progression index /90
Progression index: one composite number — progressive passes + progressive carries + 2% of total distance progressed + 8× positive xT added, all per 90. Weights VOLUME and THREAT together rather than counting progressive actions alone.
11

Preferred Progression Routes — xT-weighted

His progressive passes as zone→zone routes, weighted by expected threat (xT) added — arrow width and the number are the total xT generated on each route, not just how often he plays it. This is where he actually moves the needle.

0.390.350.280.230.210.14VISION AI
own goal left, attacking
Highest-value routes (xT)
0.39
Right Half-Space Mid third → Right Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.35
Left Wing Att third → Left Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.28
Left Half-Space Att third → Central Att third
1 passes · 1 to a shot
0.23
Right Half-Space Att third → Right Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.21
Left Wing Mid third → Left Wing Att third
2 passes
0.14
Left Half-Space Mid third → Left Half-Space Att third
1 passes
12

Where does he become vulnerable?

40 possessions lost. Directness has a cost — the question is where. Attacking-third losses are cheap; deep ones are dangerous.

25
attacking third (cheap)
14
middle third
1
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 62% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 1.48 danger-index/90 · 0.140 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
13

What is his passing profile?

192
passes attempted
42%
mostly sideways
57%
mostly short
Direction
Forward
57 · 30%
Sideways
81 · 42%
Backward
54 · 28%
Length (completed)
Short (<15m)
89 · 57%
Medium
55 · 35%
Long (>30m)
11 · 7%
14

Every Pass This Season — completed vs incomplete

Every pass this season, plotted individually — green = completed, red = incomplete, gold = key pass. Filter by outcome or isolate one match below.

10Key pass
7Cross
1Cutback
15Progressive
18Long ball
9Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
28Outside → Inside
72Inside → Inside
30Outside → Outside
25Inside → Outside
By direction
57Forward
54Backward
81Sideways
VISION AI
own goal left, attacking
15

How does he build & move the ball?

How he moves the ball — his 4 busiest progression routes, not where every pass starts and ends separately. Arrow width = how often, colour = xT gained, dashed = switch of play. The full breakdown is in the lane matrix below.

own goal left, attacking
Lane transition matrix — when he receives in a lane, where does it go?
TO →RWRHSCLHSLWRW2843%1239%1111%34%14%1RHS2528%736%928%74%14%1C385%221%842%1626%105%2LHS349%326%926%938%13LW303%110%330%957%17FROM
Rows normalised: each row sums to 100% of that lane's completed passes. Grey number = passes from that lane.

Primary route: the right wing in the final third → central areas in the final third — 3 progressive passes (14% of his progression) at 0.198 xT each. He moves it inside.

His progression is inward: 57% of progressive passes move the ball toward the middle versus 0% going wider — he cuts in rather than holding width.

8% of his passes are cross-field switches — he changes the point of attack often.

Quality behind the volume: 10 line-breaking passes and 21 final-third entries, 3.3 total xT added.

Origin and destination are measured on the same event row — no receiver inference. Receiver identity is not recoverable from this data source.
All passes — origin zone share
Filter: from to
2%3%10%11%11%2%4%12%7%1%6%11%11%9%VISION AI
completedincomplete192 passes · any zone → any zone · own goal left, attacking
192
passes
81%
completed
37
lost
Vision AIIn line with his 81% season completion rate.
Part 3

Team Context

How much of the team's output runs through him, and what changes when he isn't on the pitch.
16

Impact on the Team

Al Ahly FC's output per match with Zizo (4 matches) versus without him (15 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 15 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.

WITH (4)
WITHOUT (15)
Δ
goals for /match
1.75
nan
+nan
xG for /match
1.45
0.00
+1.45
goals against /match
0.75
nan
+nan
points /match
2.50
0.00
+2.50
17

His Share of the Team

Of everything Al Ahly FC produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Zizo specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.

category
share
him / team
goals
29%
2 / 7
expected goals (xG)
21%
7.8 / 37.3
box entries
17%
79 / 468
Part 4

Overview

The headline read on him, and how he compares to his peers.
18

Where is he influential — vs where is he merely present?

Red fill = raw touch territory. Gold rings = zones where his influence (xT added, progression, line-breaks, key passes) outweighs how often he's actually there — one combined map instead of two separate maps to compare by eye. Red with no ring: present but not dangerous. A ring on faint red: rare touches, outsized impact.

VISION AI
own goal left, attacking
48
passes / match
1.7
dribbles / match
39–60
pass range (matches)
1–2
dribble range (matches)
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (39 at the low end, 60 at the high) — a measure of match-to-match involvement, not pass distance. Dribble range works the same way, for dribbles/carries per match.
Part 5

Recruitment

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary verdict.
19

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 221 attacking mids in the league (min 450 min). This is what separates players who post similar numbers but play differently. Proxy dimensions are inferred from on-ball data; true off-ball running / under-pressure context is not measured.

Advanced playmaker (8)90%Half-space creator88%
Why Advanced playmaker (8) 90%: a weighted blend of creativity 98 (weight 35%) + final-third threat 92 (weight 25%) + progression 89 (weight 25%) + box threat 94 (weight 15%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
creativity, receiving zones, through-balls, box threat, final-third threat, line-breaking, progression, crossing
Strong
retention
Average
territory (wide vs central), press resistance, carrying, build-up, defensive aggression, dribbling
Weak
transition, passing directness, ball-winning
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Creativity
98
Receiving zones
96
Through-balls ~proxy
95
Box threat
94
Final-third threat
92
Line-breaking
90
Progression
89
Crossing
87
Retention
73
Territory (wide vs central)
63
Press resistance ~proxy
60
Carrying
60
Build-up
51
Defensive aggression
51
Dribbling
47
Transition ~proxy
37
Passing directness
23
Ball-winning
17
20

Similar Players — in style space

Closest comparables measured on the style scores above, within the same position family — so it separates how players are alike, not just how much they touch the ball. Each line explains the shared strength and the divergent mechanism. Scope: pooled across the Premier League, La Liga and the Egyptian Premier League, percentiled within each player's own league before comparing — a match from another league is marked with its league name.

Style, not quality: a high match here means two players tend to produce the ball in similar ways — it is not a ranking, a scouting recommendation, or a claim that they are equally good.

Raphinha Barcelona · La Liga
90%
Driven by: box threat (19%), creativity (14%), receiving zones (13%). Different mechanism — Zizo more via through-balls; Raphinha more via dribbling.
Achraf Bencharki Al Ahly FC
87%
Driven by: creativity (16%), receiving zones (13%), crossing (10%). Different mechanism — Zizo more via box threat, passing directness; Bencharki more via territory (wide vs central), carrying.
Lee Kang-In Atletico · La Liga
78%
Driven by: creativity (14%), crossing (14%), receiving zones (11%). Different mechanism — Zizo more via box threat, defensive aggression; Kang-In more via dribbling, press resistance.
Rayan Cherki Man City · Premier League
78%
Driven by: creativity (15%), receiving zones (13%), crossing (11%). Different mechanism — Zizo more via box threat, territory (wide vs central); Cherki more via ball-winning, dribbling.
Phil Foden Man City · Premier League
72%
Driven by: receiving zones (16%), creativity (13%), final-third threat (13%). Different mechanism — Zizo more via territory (wide vs central), box threat; Foden more via ball-winning, build-up.
Iago Aspas Celta Vigo · La Liga
70%
Driven by: creativity (21%), receiving zones (16%), final-third threat (12%). Different mechanism — Zizo more via territory (wide vs central), box threat; Aspas more via passing directness, ball-winning.
21

Summary

Zizo is an advanced playmaker (8) / half-space creator: 2.65 key passes /90, 4.0 progressive passes, 2 goals from 1.79 xG. A between-the-lines creator. [Off-ball movement into pockets needs tracking.]

Based on 4 matches (339 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an advanced playmaker (8) / half-space creator — best used in a system built around that identity. His biggest room for growth is progression — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall advanced playmaker (8) profile.
✨ This report is interactive

Click any stat card to filter its map, hover a dot for the exact match, and use the dropdowns to slice passes zone-to-zone. Nothing here is static.