العربيةSeason2025/262026 · this seasonAll seasons
Building the full report
Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Vision AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Player reportPremier League 2026

Sepp van den Berg

Brentford
Stopper centre-back CB
17.1 defensive actions/90 · 4.4 progressive/90 — defends first
centre-backball-playing centre-backbuild-upline-breaking
163
minutes
2 apps
73
passes
88% completed
88%
pass completion
73 passes
8
progressive passes
4.4/90
5
line-breaking passes
2.8/90
31
defensive actions
17.1/90
1
tackles + interceptions
0% tackle win
12
clearances
6.6/90
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Sepp van den Berg has played 2 matches (163 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 →
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
in the first line of build-up — mostly in the defensive third (47% of his 73 passes)
88% completion · 73× in 2/2 matches
↓
BREAK A LINE
vertical pass past the opponent midfield
4.4 prog/90 · 5× in 2/2 matches
↓
PROGRESS
entries into the final third
2.8/90 · 5× in 2/2 matches
Signature: Receive → Break A Line → Progress — the only steps proven repeatable this season (3 of 5 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: carry out — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet); switch play — 1× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
In possession

In possession

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

03

How does he create chances?

0 key passes (0.00/90), 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:
chance creation (0)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
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 plays inside from the right wing toward the right hs, advancing it forward in the middle third — 1 passes worth 0.19 xT.
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 central in the defensive third: 22% of his 9 touches there are lost (2 times).
—4 touches · too few6%1/17 lost22%2/9 lost—1 touch · too few—3 touches · too few13%2/15 lost9%1/11 lost—5 touches · too few—3 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—2 touches · too few—2 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too fewRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

04

How & where does he defend?

31 defensive actions across the season (17.1/90). 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 →
0
tackles · 0% won
1
interceptions · 0.6/90
8
recoveries · 4.4/90
12
clearances · 6.6/90
1
blocks
29
avg action height
2
won high (att 3rd)
7
middle third
22
own third
Vision AI A deep-defending defender. He wins the ball mainly by clearing and blocking — a reactive, protect-the-box profile. 9 proactive ball-wins (5.0/90), tackle success 0%. He defends deep, protecting his box — a last-line stopper.
Team

Team context

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

05

Impact on the Team

Brentford's output per match with Sepp van den Berg (2 matches) versus without him (6 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 6 matches; treat every Δ below as noise until more games exist. What his own defending should move — goals conceded and results — leads; attacking output (largely out of a defender's hands) is shown after, for context. A proper on-off model needs many more minutes.

WITH (2)
WITHOUT (6)
Δ
goals against /match
1.50
1.00
+0.50
points /match
0.50
1.67
-1.17
goals for /match
1.00
2.00
-1.00
xG for /match
1.36
0.21
+1.16
06

His Share of the Team

Of everything Brentford produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Sepp van den Berg specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.

category
share
him / team
clearances
14%
207 / 1457
interceptions
6%
30 / 478
ball recoveries
5%
117 / 2334
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

07

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 515 centre-backs 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.

Ball-playing centre-back67%Stopper centre-back52%
Why Ball-playing centre-back 67%: a weighted blend of retention 80 (weight 30%) + build-up 65 (weight 30%) + press resistance 72 (weight 15%) + progression 30 (weight 25%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
retention, box threat, press resistance
Average
defensive aggression, build-up, territory (wide vs central), dribbling, transition
Weak
carrying, creativity, line-breaking, ball-winning, crossing, progression, final-third threat, passing directness, through-balls, receiving zones
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Retention
80
Box threat
77
Press resistance ~proxy
72
Defensive aggression
65
Build-up
65
Territory (wide vs central)
49
Dribbling
46
Transition ~proxy
44
Carrying
40
Creativity
37
Line-breaking
36
Ball-winning
32
Crossing
31
Progression
30
Final-third threat
24
Passing directness
24
Through-balls ~proxy
24
Receiving zones
21
08

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: 189 cm / 74 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 Premier League, Bundesliga, La Liga, Ligue 1 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.

Luka Lochoshvili Koln · Bundesliga · 191 cm / 84 kg
80%
Driven by: receiving zones (13%), retention (12%), press resistance (10%). Different mechanism — Berg more via line-breaking, territory (wide vs central); Lochoshvili more via passing directness, build-up.
Patrick Mainka Heidenheim · Bundesliga 25/26 · 194 cm / 86 kg
78%
Driven by: final-third threat (12%), progression (11%), through-balls (10%). Different mechanism — Berg more via line-breaking, crossing; Mainka more via passing directness.
Micky van de Ven Tottenham · 193 cm / 81 kg
74%
Driven by: retention (12%), receiving zones (10%), creativity (9%). Different mechanism — Berg more via defensive aggression, line-breaking; Ven more via carrying, dribbling.
Francisco Sierralta Auxerre · Ligue 1 25/26 · 190 cm / 83 kg
74%
Driven by: progression (11%), press resistance (10%), final-third threat (10%). Different mechanism — Berg more via territory (wide vs central), transition; Sierralta more via dribbling, receiving zones.
Nobel Mendy Hull City · 187 cm / 78 kg
73%
Driven by: receiving zones (14%), final-third threat (13%), creativity (10%). Different mechanism — Berg more via creativity, defensive aggression.
Tanguy Nianzou Lille · Ligue 1 · 191 cm / 83 kg
73%
Driven by: box threat (15%), ball-winning (14%), receiving zones (13%). Different mechanism — Berg more via press resistance, territory (wide vs central); Nianzou more via through-balls.
09

Summary

Sepp van den Berg is a ball-playing centre-back: 88% pass completion, 5 line-breaking passes and 4.4 progressive passes /90. A build-and-progress centre-back whose value is in beating the first line with the pass, not in raw defensive volume. [Aerial duels, marking, line-height and 1v1 recovery need aerial-event + tracking data, absent here.]

Based on 2 matches (163 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a ball-playing centre-back — 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 ball-playing centre-back 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