العربيةVision AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Player reportPremier League 2026

Angel Gomes

Marseille
Half-space creator CM
42% of actions in the half-spaces
central midadvanced playmaker (8)progressionbox-to-box
491
minutes
12 apps
21
progressive passes
3.8/90
82%
pass completion
199 passes
6
key passes
1.10/90
6
box entries
1.10/90
20
final-3rd entries
3.7/90
6
dribbles
67% won
38
possessions lost
2.21 danger/90
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with 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
Central, Middle third — mostly in the middle third (53% of his 199 passes)
82% completion · 199× in 12/12 matches
↓
PROGRESS
drive or pass into the final third
3.8 prog/90 · 21× in 9/12 matches
↓
ARRIVE
get into the box late
6 key passes · 6× in 4/12 matches
↓
CREATE / FINISH
cut-back or shot from inside
1.10 key passes /90 · 0 goals · 12× in 4/12 matches
Signature: receive → progress → arrive in the box → create or finish. A box-to-box midfielder judged across every phase.
20

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.

own goal left, attacking →
17
passes / match
1.2
dribbles / match
3–38
pass range (matches)
1–2
dribble range (matches)
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (3 at the low end, 38 at the high) — a measure of match-to-match involvement, not pass distance. Dribble range works the same way, for dribbles/carries per match.
In possession

In possession

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

10

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

39 tracked carries (7.1/90, 3 progressive, 308m 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.

5%5%8%3%13%10%5%10%8%8%15%10%
progressivelateral/short% of his 39 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 6m, longest 21m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
5Outside → Inside
26Inside → Inside
6Outside → Outside
2Inside → Outside
First (15)Second (14)Third (10)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Dribbles (1v1s)

Only 6 dribbles attempted this season — too little volume to map a location pattern.

06

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 →RWRHSCLHSLWRW1527%453%813%27%1RHS2737%1030%822%64%17%2C508%422%1144%2222%114%2LHS442%111%532%1441%1814%6LW274%133%963%17FROM
Rows normalised: each row sums to 100% of that lane's completed passes. Grey number = passes from that lane.

Primary route: the right half-space in the middle third → the right half-space in the final third — 2 progressive passes (12% of his progression) at 0.172 xT each. He keeps it in the same lane.

His progression is inward: 56% of progressive passes move the ball toward the middle versus 12% going wider — he cuts in rather than holding width.

Only 7% of his passes switch play, so his threat is same-side — contain the flank he occupies and the route closes.

Quality behind the volume: 11 line-breaking passes and 20 final-third entries, 1.9 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
5%3%10%7%2%11%10%13%4%2%7%9%8%11%2%
completedincomplete199 passes · any zone → any zone · own goal left, attacking →
199
passes
82%
completed
36
lost
Vision AIIn line with his 82% season completion rate.
05

How does he progress play?

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

21
progressive · 3.8/90
20
final-third entries · 3.7/90
6
box entries · 1.10/90
13
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.
03

How does he create chances?

6 key passes (1.10/90), 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:
17%17%17%17%17%17%
chance creation (6)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
12

Where does he become vulnerable?

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

14
attacking third (cheap)
14
middle third
10
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 37% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.21 danger-index/90 · 0.317 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?

199
passes attempted
38%
mostly forward
53%
mostly short
Direction
Forward
76 · 38%
Sideways
58 · 29%
Backward
65 · 33%
Length (completed)
Short (<15m)
87 · 53%
Medium
62 · 38%
Long (>30m)
14 · 9%
07

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.

0.300.290.290.270.210.20
own goal left, attacking →
Highest-value routes (xT)
0.30
Left Half-Space Att third → Right Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.29
Right Half-Space Mid third → Right Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.29
Right Wing Att third → Right Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.27
Central Mid third → Central Att third
1 passes
0.21
Left Wing Att third → Left Wing Att third
2 passes
0.20
Right Wing Mid third → Central Att third
1 passes
08

Where Does He Receive?

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

123
1 = primary, 2 = secondary, 3 = third · own goal left, attacking →
His collection zones
17%
Primary
Central, Middle third
13%
Secondary
Left Half-Space, Middle third
10%
Third
Right Half-Space, Middle third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
09

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Angel Gomes 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:
31417172332320261319619143
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.

5%3%10%7%2%11%10%13%4%2%7%9%8%11%2%
own goal left, attacking →
14

Every Pass This Season — completed vs incomplete

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

6Key pass
7Cross
21Progressive
17Long ball
11Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
21Outside → Inside
96Inside → Inside
21Outside → Outside
25Inside → Outside
By direction
76Forward
65Backward
58Sideways
own goal left, attacking →
02

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 switches from the left hs to the right hs in the final third — 1 passes worth 0.30 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 6 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he switches it out from the central to the right hs, advancing it forward in the defensive third — 1 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: 50% of his 14 touches there are lost (7 times).
—4 touches · too few—5 touches · too few22%4/18 lost20%3/15 lost—3 touches · too few—7 touches · too few10%2/20 lost9%3/35 lost12%3/26 lost18%3/17 lost50%7/14 lost—5 touches · too few—6 touches · too few10%1/10 lost21%3/14 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
04

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 39 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he carries through central areas (67%). He carries from outside into the middle 5 times and out toward the touchline 2 — a genuine inside forward who cuts in with the ball.
11

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
3 · 8%
Progressive / key pass
2 · 5%
Simple pass
30 · 77%
No clean link
4 · 10%
Of 39 carries, 8% flow straight into a shot of his own, 5% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 10% have no clean link to a next touch of his own close to where the carry ended.
15

Crosses & Cutbacks

7 crosses (1.28/90, 2 completed) and 0 cutbacks (0.00/90, 0 completed) — two separate wide-delivery patterns into the box, each its own map with a completed/failed filter. Neither is a tagged event, 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
Cutbacks — close-up on the final third
completedfailed (dashed)close-up on the box — attacking ↑ toward goal
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

17

How & where does he defend?

42 defensive actions across the season (7.7/90). Where he wins the ball, and how — the core question for a defender. Aerial duels are not recorded for this competition, so aerial dominance is not measured here.

click a card to isolate that action type · own goal left, attacking →
10
tackles · 60% won
0
interceptions · 0.0/90
17
recoveries · 3.1/90
4
clearances · 0.7/90
3
blocks
42
avg action height
4
won high (att 3rd)
22
middle third
16
own third
Vision AI A mid-block defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 27 proactive ball-wins (4.9/90), tackle success 60%. He defends high, stepping out to intercept — suits a high line.
16

Against Different Pressing Intensities

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Angel Gomes keep producing when the game is tight and the press is high? Tiers of ~4-4 matches — directional evidence, not proof.

press tier
xT /90
prog /90
key P /90
dribble%
High press (PPDA 3.8, 4m)
0.79
4.4
1.75
100%
Mid press (PPDA 4.8, 4m)
0.49
1.5
0.49
0%
Low press (PPDA 6.1, 4m)
1.42
5.7
1.32
100%
Team

Team context

How much of the team runs through him, and what changes without him.

18

Impact on the Team

Marseille's output per match with Angel Gomes (12 matches) versus without him (26 matches). A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.

WITH (12)
WITHOUT (26)
Δ
goals for /match
0.92
0.62
+0.30
xG for /match
1.06
0.06
+1.00
goals against /match
1.75
1.81
-0.06
points /match
0.92
0.35
+0.57
19

His Share of the Team

Of everything Marseille produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Angel Gomes specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.

category
share
him / team
zone-14 entries
19%
29 / 155
half-space entries
12%
84 / 680
expected goals (xG)
8%
2.6 / 30.6
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

21

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 382 central mids in the pool (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)70%Tempo controller70%Deep-lying playmaker63%Transition runner33%
Why Advanced playmaker (8) 70%: a weighted blend of creativity 82 (weight 35%) + final-third threat 67 (weight 25%) + progression 43 (weight 25%) + box threat 63 (weight 15%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
receiving zones
Strong
retention, creativity, press resistance
Average
final-third threat, box threat, dribbling, line-breaking, defensive aggression, build-up, through-balls, progression, crossing
Weak
carrying, passing directness, transition, ball-winning, territory (wide vs central)
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Receiving zones
91
Retention
83
Creativity
82
Press resistance ~proxy
75
Final-third threat
67
Box threat
63
Dribbling
63
Line-breaking
55
Defensive aggression
52
Build-up
51
Through-balls ~proxy
50
Progression
43
Crossing
42
Carrying
33
Passing directness
27
Transition ~proxy
19
Ball-winning
14
Territory (wide vs central)
9
22

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. A light physical-profile term (height / weight; this player: 168 cm / 62 kg) is included at a quarter of one style axis's weight — enough to break ties between stylistic twins, not to override style. Scope: pooled across the Ligue 1, Bundesliga, La Liga, Premier League and Serie A, 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.

Kenneth Taylor Lazio · Serie A · 182 cm / 75 kg
65%
Driven by: receiving zones (23%), transition (20%), retention (14%). Different mechanism — Gomes more via dribbling, press resistance; Taylor more via territory (wide vs central), ball-winning.
Wesley Saïd Lens 25/26 · 171 cm / 72 kg
62%
Driven by: ball-winning (38%), transition (15%), press resistance (11%). Different mechanism — Gomes more via receiving zones, retention; Saïd more via territory (wide vs central), box threat.
Kian Fitz-Jim Torino · Serie A · 174 cm / 70 kg
61%
Driven by: press resistance (17%), ball-winning (15%), creativity (11%). Different mechanism — Gomes more via box threat, crossing; Fitz-Jim more via carrying, dribbling.
Dro Fernández PSG · 182 cm / 68 kg
61%
Driven by: receiving zones (21%), retention (15%), press resistance (14%). Different mechanism — Gomes more via final-third threat, passing directness; Fernández more via ball-winning, territory (wide vs central).
Giovanni Reyna Strasbourg · 185 cm / 79 kg
60%
Driven by: ball-winning (18%), press resistance (14%), receiving zones (13%). Different mechanism — Reyna more via territory (wide vs central), crossing.
Nikolas Nartey Stuttgart · Bundesliga · 187 cm / 82 kg
59%
Driven by: ball-winning (24%), press resistance (18%), transition (16%). Different mechanism — Gomes more via creativity, receiving zones; Nartey more via territory (wide vs central), dribbling.
23

Summary

Angel Gomes is an advanced playmaker (8) / tempo controller: 3.8 progressive passes, 1.10 key passes /90, 6 box entries, 0 goals from 0.22 xG. A box-to-box contributor across every phase.

Based on 12 matches (491 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an advanced playmaker (8) / tempo controller — 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.

Vision AI · building report