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

Milos Kerkez

Liverpool
Defensive full-back FB
14.8 defensive actions/90 · low final-third share 29%
Capability Analysis
Ball-Winning38%vs 21 full-backs
"How actively does he win the ball back?"
Interceptions /900.525%
Ball recoveries /903.1843%
Tackles /901.5948%
Duels won /901.157%
Breaking Pressure
only 55 pressured-passing actions across 2 high-press matches -- not enough sample (needs 5+ matches and 12+ actions)
Wide Delivery12%vs 21 full-backs
"Does he create danger from wide areas -- crosses and cutbacks?"
Crosses /900.00%
Cross accuracy: 0.0%
Cutbacks /901.1324%
Ball-Carrying57%vs 21 full-backs
"Does he advance the ball himself when the pass isn't on?"
Progressive carries /903.7962%
Carry distance /9086.67m52%
full-backinverted full-backprogressioncrossing
683
minutes
8 apps
74%
pass completion
354 passes
31
progressive passes
4.1/90
29
final-3rd entries
3.8/90
3
box entries
0.40/90
112
defensive actions
14.8/90
18
tackles + interceptions
71% tackle win
6
dribbles
17% won
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
Left Wing, Middle third — wide or inverted — mostly in the middle third (56% of his 354 passes)
74% completion · 354× in 8/8 matches
↓
PROGRESS
carry or combine up the flank
4.1 prog/90 · 31× in 8/8 matches
↓
DRIBBLE
beat his man up the line
17% won · 6× in 5/8 matches
↓
DELIVER
cross or cut-back into the box
4 key passes · 3× in 3/8 matches
↓
DEFEND
1v1 and cover on his side
112 def actions · lost 20% deep · 112× in 8/8 matches
Signature: receive wide/inverted → progress the flank → deliver into the box → recover to defend 1v1. Attack the space behind him in transition.
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.

own goal left, attacking →
44
passes / match
14.8
def actions / 90
26–63
pass range (matches)
27
clearances
Pass range = his fewest and most passes in any single match this season (26 at the low end, 63 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.

08

How dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

39 tracked carries (5.1/90, 8 progressive, 385m 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.

5%5%13%18%36%15%8%
progressivelateral/short% of his 39 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 7m, longest 42m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
3Outside → Inside
8Inside → Inside
23Outside → Outside
5Inside → Outside
First (17)Second (17)Third (5)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).

14
tackle duels
10
won
4
beaten · 29%
brighter band = more tackle duels · own goal left, attacking →
INSIDE 36%
OUTSIDE 64%
Tackle-duel location — 5 inside · 9 outside
Right Wing
0 · 0%
Right Half-Space
0 · 0%
Central
1 · 7%
Left Half-Space
4 · 29%
Left Wing
9 · 64%
Vision AI beaten in 4 of 14 tackle duels (29% loss rate) — a solid 1v1 defensive record.
Every tackle duel, exact location
wonlost — dribbled pastown goal left, attacking →

He attempted only 6 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.

04

How does he build & move the ball?

How does he escape the first line?

24%
vertical passes
23×
1%
switches
1×
15%
carries
14×
60%
short circulation
58×
Answer: he escapes the press primarily through vertical passing — early balls past the first line; he almost never carries (14×), so pressing his passing lanes beats pressing him.

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 →RWRHSCLHSLWRW0RHS1100%1C1010%120%240%410%120%2LHS432%12%119%842%1835%15LW2090%12%536%7661%127FROM
Rows normalised: each row sums to 100% of that lane's completed passes. Grey number = passes from that lane.

Primary route: the left wing in the middle third → the left wing in the middle third — 6 progressive passes (20% of his progression) at 0.008 xT each. He keeps it in the same lane.

His progression is inward: 37% of progressive passes move the ball toward the middle versus 3% going wider — he cuts in rather than holding width.

Only 2% of his passes switch play, so his threat is same-side — contain the flank he occupies and the route closes.

Quality behind the volume: 8 line-breaking passes and 29 final-third entries, 3.0 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
0%1%1%1%1%1%1%4%10%23%31%20%6%
completedincomplete354 passes · any zone → any zone · own goal left, attacking →
354
passes
74%
completed
91
lost
Vision AIIn line with his 74% season completion rate.
09

How does he progress play?

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

31
progressive · 4.1/90
29
final-third entries · 3.8/90
3
box entries · 0.40/90
14
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.
10

How does he create chances?

4 key passes (0.53/90), 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:
75%25%
chance creation (4)assist (0)% of the selected group's key passes originating in each zone
05

Where does he become vulnerable?

96 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.

32
attacking third (cheap)
44
middle third
20
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 33% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 4.34 danger-index/90 · 0.343 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
11

What is his passing profile?

354
passes attempted
48%
mostly forward
50%
mostly short
Direction
Forward
169 · 48%
Sideways
73 · 21%
Backward
112 · 32%
Length (completed)
Short (<15m)
131 · 50%
Medium
119 · 45%
Long (>30m)
13 · 5%
12

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.

0.510.410.340.300.280.24
own goal left, attacking →
Highest-value routes (xT)
0.51
Left Wing Mid third → Left Wing Mid third
7 passes
0.41
Left Wing Att third → Left Wing Att third
3 passes
0.34
Left Wing Def third → Left Wing Mid third
6 passes
0.30
Left Half-Space Att third → Left Half-Space Att third
1 passes
0.28
Left Wing Mid third → Left Wing Att third
3 passes
0.24
Left Half-Space Mid third → Right Wing Att third
1 passes
06

Where Does He Receive?

The zones where Milos Kerkez 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
45%
Primary
Left Wing, Middle third
21%
Secondary
Left Wing, Attacking third
12%
Third
Left Wing, Defensive third
These are the zones where he collected the ball most.
07

Where Does He Operate? — Every Zone

Every on-ball touch (pass, dribble, shot) binned into a 6×3 grid — raw counts of where Milos Kerkez 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:
14368610872252245621
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.

0%1%1%1%1%1%1%4%10%23%31%20%6%
own goal left, attacking →
13

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.

4Key pass
12Cross
7Cutback
31Progressive
59Long ball
4Switch
By zone — where the pass started → where it landed
81Outside → Inside
35Inside → Inside
128Outside → Outside
19Inside → Outside
By direction
169Forward
112Backward
73Sideways
own goal left, attacking →
03

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 left wing in the middle third — 7 passes worth 0.51 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 4 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays inside from the left wing toward the left hs, playing it back 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 left wing in the defensive third: 40% of his 45 touches there are lost (18 times).
—0 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—2 touches · too few—6 touches · too few40%18/45 lost—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—7 touches · too few26%8/31 lost20%33/161 lost—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few—3 touches · too few30%7/23 lost27%20/74 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
02

Crosses & Cutbacks

12 crosses (1.58/90, 0 completed) and 7 cutbacks (0.92/90, 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.

14

How & where does he defend?

112 defensive actions across the season (14.8/90). 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 →
14
tackles · 71% won
4
interceptions · 0.5/90
22
recoveries · 2.9/90
27
clearances · 3.6/90
2
blocks
35
avg action height
11
won high (att 3rd)
44
middle third
57
own third
Vision AI A mid-block defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 40 proactive ball-wins (5.3/90), tackle success 71%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
15

Can he play under pressure?

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Can Milos Kerkez still play out when the opponent presses high? His build-up quality split by press intensity — the key question for a ball-playing defender. Tiers of ~2-4 matches — directional evidence, not proof.

press tier
completion
prog /90
line-breaks /90
xT /90
High press (PPDA 3.3, 2m)
65%
4.0
10.0
0.71
Mid press (PPDA 4.4, 2m)
75%
5.1
8.4
1.00
Low press (PPDA 6.6, 4m)
78%
3.5
6.1
1.02
Team

Team context

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

16

Impact on the Team

Insufficient sample: Milos Kerkez played nearly every Liverpool match in the loaded data, so there is no meaningful "without him" comparison yet. This section fills in as more matches (and the rest of the season) are scraped.

17

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
clearances
10%
106 / 1046
tackles
9%
55 / 581
final-third entries
8%
172 / 2195
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

19

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-back35%Overlapping full-back28%
Why Inverted full-back 35%: a weighted blend of retention 50 (weight 30%) + build-up 40 (weight 35%) + progression 28 (weight 25%) + press resistance 47 (weight 10%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
—
Strong
territory (wide vs central)
Average
carrying, retention, defensive aggression, press resistance, dribbling, final-third threat, receiving zones, transition, box threat
Weak
build-up, creativity, ball-winning, progression, line-breaking, passing directness, through-balls, crossing
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Territory (wide vs central)
72
Carrying
52
Retention
50
Defensive aggression
48
Press resistance ~proxy
47
Dribbling
45
Final-third threat
44
Receiving zones
42
Transition ~proxy
42
Box threat
42
Build-up
40
Creativity
34
Ball-winning
30
Progression
28
Line-breaking
26
Passing directness
26
Through-balls ~proxy
21
Crossing
18
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. A light physical-profile term (height / weight; this player: 180 cm / 71 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.

Iñigo Arguibide Osasuna · La Liga · 178 cm / 70 kg
82%
Driven by: crossing (19%), ball-winning (12%), through-balls (11%). Different mechanism — Kerkez more via retention, receiving zones; Arguibide more via territory (wide vs central), passing directness.
Lewie Coyle Hull City · 173 cm / 67 kg
78%
Driven by: crossing (28%), progression (13%), ball-winning (12%). Different mechanism — Kerkez more via carrying, final-third threat; Coyle more via passing directness.
Simone Cinquegrano Sassuolo · Serie A · 192 cm
76%
Driven by: crossing (23%), progression (12%), through-balls (10%). Different mechanism — Kerkez more via carrying, transition; Cinquegrano more via box threat, dribbling.
Thibault De Smet Paris FC · Ligue 1 · 183 cm / 65 kg
76%
Driven by: crossing (25%), ball-winning (13%), passing directness (11%). Different mechanism — Kerkez more via carrying, box threat; Smet more via build-up, retention.
Rico Henry Brentford · 170 cm / 67 kg
73%
Driven by: crossing (30%), progression (13%), line-breaking (10%). Different mechanism — Kerkez more via final-third threat, receiving zones; Henry more via dribbling, passing directness.
José Salinas Malaga · La Liga · 179 cm / 69 kg
71%
Driven by: crossing (25%), through-balls (12%), progression (11%). Different mechanism — Kerkez more via territory (wide vs central), receiving zones; Salinas more via retention, press resistance.
21

Summary

Milos Kerkez is an inverted full-back: 4.1 progressive passes and 3 box entries, delivering 4 key passes. Overlap-first full-back. [1v1 recovery pace and off-ball overlap timing need tracking.]

Based on 8 matches (683 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