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 reportSerie A 2026

Ignace Van der Brempt

Sassuolo
Defensive full-back FB
12.9 defensive actions/90 · low final-third share 21%
full-backinverted full-backprogressioncrossing
266
minutes
3 apps
83%
pass completion
102 passes
10
progressive passes
3.4/90
17
final-3rd entries
5.8/90
0
box entries
0.00/90
38
defensive actions
12.9/90
9
tackles + interceptions
100% tackle win
2
dribbles
0% won
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. Ignace Van der Brempt has played 3 matches (266 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
Right Wing, Defensive third — wide or inverted — mostly in the middle third (42% of his 102 passes)
83% completion · 102× in 3/3 matches
↓
PROGRESS
carry or combine up the flank
3.4 prog/90 · 10× in 3/3 matches
↓
DRIBBLE
beat his man up the line
0% won · 2× in 2/3 matches
↓
DEFEND
1v1 and cover on his side
38 def actions · lost 57% deep · 38× in 3/3 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress → Dribble → Defend — the only steps proven repeatable this season (4 of 5 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: deliver — 0× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — omitted from the signature rather than presented as one.
12

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 →
34
passes / match
12.9
def actions / 90
29–37
pass range (matches)
12
clearances
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (29 at the low end, 37 at the high) — a measure of match-to-match involvement, not pass distance.
In possession

In possession

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

06

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

15 tracked carries (5.1/90, 8 progressive, 219m total) — the ball moving with his touches, a different signal from dribbles below (beating an opponent 1v1). even a player who rarely dribbles past a man can still carry the ball forward constantly in build-up; this is that.

27%27%27%7%7%7%
progressivelateral/short% of his 15 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 14m, longest 39m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
1Outside → Inside
2Inside → Inside
7Outside → Outside
5Inside → Outside
First (15)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Beaten in the tackle

How often an attacker gets past him in a 1v1 defensive duel — the closest signal the data has to "dribbled past" (no attacker-beat-defender field exists directly, so this counts tackles he attempted and lost).

7
tackle duels
7
won
0
beaten · 0%
brighter band = more tackle duels · own goal left, attacking →
INSIDE 29%
OUTSIDE 71%
Tackle-duel location — 2 inside · 5 outside
Right Wing
5 · 71%
Right Half-Space
1 · 14%
Central
1 · 14%
Left Half-Space
0 · 0%
Left Wing
0 · 0%
Vision AI beaten in 0 of 7 tackle duels (0% loss rate) — a solid 1v1 defensive record.
Every tackle duel, exact location
wonlost — dribbled pastown goal left, attacking →

He attempted only 2 dribbles of his own all season — dribbling is not part of this role; his ball-carrying is covered above, his defending against the dribble below.

03

How does he create chances?

1 key passes (0.34/90), 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:
100%
chance creation (1)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
07

Where does he become vulnerable?

19 times he gave the ball away. For a defender the danger is where — a loss in his own third can turn into a chance against; higher up it costs little.

5
attacking third (cheap)
3
middle third
11
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 26% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 3.04 danger-index/90 · 0.473 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
04

Where Does He Receive?

The zones where Ignace Van der Brempt 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
31%
Primary
Right Wing, Defensive third
29%
Secondary
Right Wing, Middle third
17%
Third
Right Wing, Attacking third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
05

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Ignace Van der Brempt 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:
132218291721129
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.

8%26%17%21%12%9%3%2%2%1%
own goal left, attacking →
08

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.

1Key pass
2Cutback
10Progressive
10Long ball
1Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
12Outside → Inside
13Inside → Inside
53Outside → Outside
7Inside → Outside
By direction
48Forward
21Backward
33Sideways
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 plays straight through the right wing, advancing it forward in the middle third — 3 passes worth 0.24 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 1 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the right wing toward the right hs in the final 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 defensive third: 27% of his 30 touches there are lost (8 times).
27%8/30 lost—7 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few3%1/30 lost22%2/9 lost—3 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few22%4/18 lost—3 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too fewRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

09

How & where does he defend?

38 defensive actions across the season (12.9/90). 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 →
7
tackles · 100% won
2
interceptions · 0.7/90
5
recoveries · 1.7/90
12
clearances · 4.1/90
1
blocks
30
avg action height
3
won high (att 3rd)
10
middle third
25
own third
Vision AI A deep-defending defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 14 proactive ball-wins (4.7/90), tackle success 100%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
Team

Team context

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

10

Impact on the Team

Sassuolo's output per match with Ignace Van der Brempt (3 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 (3)
WITHOUT (6)
Δ
goals against /match
2.33
2.50
-0.17
points /match
0.33
1.17
-0.83
goals for /match
1.00
1.83
-0.83
xG for /match
0.94
0.71
+0.23
11

His Share of the Team

Of everything Sassuolo produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through Ignace Van der Brempt specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.

category
share
him / team
tackles
6%
37 / 635
final-third entries
4%
58 / 1587
progressive passes
3%
63 / 1947
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

13

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 232 full-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.

Inverted full-back54%Overlapping full-back30%
Why Inverted full-back 54%: a weighted blend of build-up 67 (weight 35%) + retention 62 (weight 30%) + progression 24 (weight 25%) + press resistance 48 (weight 10%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
defensive aggression
Average
build-up, retention, ball-winning, carrying, press resistance, through-balls, territory (wide vs central), dribbling
Weak
crossing, transition, receiving zones, creativity, final-third threat, progression, line-breaking, box threat, passing directness
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Defensive aggression
74
Build-up
67
Retention
62
Ball-winning
60
Carrying
56
Press resistance ~proxy
48
Through-balls ~proxy
47
Territory (wide vs central)
47
Dribbling
42
Crossing
39
Transition ~proxy
39
Receiving zones
30
Creativity
28
Final-third threat
24
Progression
24
Line-breaking
19
Box threat
16
Passing directness
9
14

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: 187 cm / 76 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 Serie A, Bundesliga, La Liga, Ligue 1 and 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.

Buba Sangaré Elche · La Liga · 183 cm / 75 kg
77%
Driven by: box threat (16%), final-third threat (15%), creativity (13%). Different mechanism — Brempt more via defensive aggression, through-balls.
Reinildo Mandava Sunderland · Premier League · 183 cm / 73 kg
74%
Driven by: creativity (17%), box threat (16%), progression (14%). Different mechanism — Brempt more via through-balls, carrying; Mandava more via passing directness, dribbling.
Genesis Antwi Strasbourg · Ligue 1 · 189 cm
73%
Driven by: box threat (15%), progression (12%), creativity (12%). Different mechanism — Brempt more via defensive aggression, through-balls; Antwi more via dribbling, press resistance.
Jacques Ekomié Angers · Ligue 1 · 179 cm / 74 kg
65%
Driven by: final-third threat (16%), creativity (14%), progression (13%). Different mechanism — Brempt more via build-up, retention; Ekomié more via territory (wide vs central), box threat.
José Salinas Malaga · La Liga · 179 cm / 69 kg
65%
Driven by: passing directness (14%), line-breaking (12%), progression (12%). Different mechanism — Brempt more via through-balls, territory (wide vs central); Salinas more via press resistance, dribbling.
Fodé Ballo-Touré Metz · Ligue 1 25/26 · 182 cm / 70 kg
62%
Driven by: passing directness (15%), final-third threat (14%), progression (13%). Different mechanism — Brempt more via through-balls, defensive aggression; Ballo-Touré more via dribbling, press resistance.
15

Summary

Ignace Van der Brempt is an inverted full-back: 3.4 progressive passes and 0 box entries, delivering 1 key passes. Overlap-first full-back. [1v1 recovery pace and off-ball overlap timing need tracking.]

Based on 3 matches (266 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an inverted full-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 inverted full-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