العربيةVision AI ← BACK TO SEARCH
Player reportLigue 1 2026

Joseph Nonge

Brest
Half-space creator AM
42% of actions in the half-spaces
attacking midhalf-space creatorcreationbetween the lines
263
minutes
8 apps
1
key passes
0.34/90
3
progressive passes
1.0/90
0
box entries
0.00/90
3
final-3rd entries
1.0/90
0
goals
0.15 xG
9
dribbles
22% won
75%
pass completion
88 passes
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 Half-Space, Middle third — between the lines — mostly in the middle third (55% of his 88 passes)
75% completion · 88× in 8/8 matches
↓
TURN / BEAT MAN
face forward in the pocket
22% won · 9× in 4/8 matches
↓
FINISH
arrive and shoot from central zones
0 goals · 0.15 xG · 3× in 3/8 matches
Signature: Receive → Turn / Beat Man → Finish — the only steps proven repeatable this season (3 of 4 in the full pattern). Not enough evidence yet for the rest of the chain below.
Not a pattern: create — 1× (insufficient confidence, hidden — not enough evidence yet) — 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 dangerous are his carries?

Real ball-carries

27 tracked carries (9.2/90, 7 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.

4%15%11%4%4%4%11%22%4%11%11%
progressivelateral/short% of his 27 carries originating in each zone · own goal left, attacking →
Every carry, exact path — median 10m, longest 27m
By zone — where the carry started → where it ended
9Outside → Inside
10Inside → Inside
7Outside → Outside
1Inside → Outside
First (16)Second (11)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →

Dribbles (1v1s)

Does he carry to create or drift wide? Dribbles by channel. Season rate: 3.08 dribbles attempted /90.

brighter band = more dribbles · own goal left, attacking →
INSIDE 67%
OUTSIDE 33%
Dribble location — 6 inside · 3 outside
Right Wing
1 · 11%
Right Half-Space
3 · 33%
Central
1 · 11%
Left Half-Space
2 · 22%
Left Wing
2 · 22%
Vision AI His carries cluster centrally — a central creator.
02

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
Box deliveries — key passes reaching the final third, by flank
from the left (0)from the right (1)of 1 key passes landing in the final thirdattacking ↑ toward goal
07

Where does he become vulnerable?

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

15
attacking third (cheap)
10
middle third
4
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 52% of losses are in the attacking third — he gambles where a turnover costs little.
Mistake danger (proxy): 2.51 danger-index/90 · 0.253 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
05

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 →
Where do his chances come from?
Of 1 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays straight through the right hs in the middle 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 final third: 33% of his 9 touches there are lost (3 times).
—1 touch · too few—4 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—0 touches · too few—2 touches · too few—7 touches · too few18%2/11 lost11%1/9 lost15%2/13 lost25%2/8 lost25%2/8 lost—4 touches · too few—3 touches · too few25%2/8 lost33%3/9 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 27 ball-carries, his dominant tendency is that he carries through central areas (37%). He carries from outside into the middle 9 times and out toward the touchline 1 — a genuine inside forward who cuts in with the ball.
06

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
2 · 7%
Progressive / key pass
0 · 0%
Simple pass
16 · 59%
No clean link
9 · 33%
Of 27 carries, 7% flow straight into a shot of his own, 0% into a key or progressive pass — a genuine end product to the carry, not just ball retention. 33% have no clean link to a next touch of his own close to where the carry ended.
Out of possession

Out of possession

Where and how he defends and presses.

09

How & where does he defend?

45 defensive actions across the season (15.4/90). 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 →
5
tackles · 80% won
4
interceptions · 1.4/90
11
recoveries · 3.8/90
2
clearances · 0.7/90
2
blocks
50
avg action height
7
won high (att 3rd)
27
middle third
11
own third
Vision AI A front-foot / high defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 20 proactive ball-wins (6.8/90), tackle success 80%. He defends high, stepping out to intercept — suits a high line.

Defensive work in the attacking half

Ball-wins in the attacking half only (own half vs. attacking half, a simple 2-way split, not the usual thirds) — the clearest single signal of how much he presses and recovers the ball high up the pitch.

27
attacking-half actions · 9.24/90
08

Against Different Pressing Intensities

Split by how hard the opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower = more intense press). Does Joseph Nonge keep producing when the game is tight and the press is high? Tiers of ~2-4 matches — directional evidence, not proof.

press tier
xT /90
prog /90
key P /90
dribble%
High press (PPDA 3.4, 2m)
0.27
2.4
1.20
0%
Mid press (PPDA 4.2, 2m)
0.13
0.0
0.00
33%
Low press (PPDA 6.2, 4m)
0.27
0.9
0.00
17%
Team

Team context

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

10

Impact on the Team

Insufficient sample: Joseph Nonge played nearly every Brest 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.

11

His Share of the Team

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

category
share
him / team
interceptions
1%
4 / 371
successful take-ons
1%
2 / 216
tackles
1%
5 / 646
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

12

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 294 attacking mids in the pool (min 180 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.

Half-space creator11%Advanced playmaker (8)10%
Why Half-space creator 11%: a weighted blend of final-third threat 15 (weight 30%) + creativity 11 (weight 40%) + dribbling 17 (weight 15%) + box threat 6 (weight 15%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
defensive aggression
Strong
ball-winning
Average
build-up
Weak
retention, press resistance, carrying, transition, dribbling, final-third threat, creativity, passing directness, line-breaking, territory (wide vs central), box threat, through-balls, progression, receiving zones, crossing
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Defensive aggression
92
Ball-winning
74
Build-up
67
Retention
38
Press resistance ~proxy
29
Carrying
19
Transition ~proxy
19
Dribbling
17
Final-third threat
15
Creativity
11
Passing directness
11
Line-breaking
9
Territory (wide vs central)
9
Box threat
6
Through-balls ~proxy
4
Progression
4
Receiving zones
3
Crossing
2
13

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: 184 cm / 70 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.

Gabriele Piccinini Pisa · Serie A 25/26 · 184 cm / 76 kg
90%
Driven by: crossing (16%), defensive aggression (11%), progression (10%). Different mechanism — Nonge more via ball-winning; Piccinini more via box threat, territory (wide vs central).
Daizen Maeda Ipswich · Premier League · 173 cm / 67 kg
90%
Driven by: crossing (12%), transition (10%), defensive aggression (10%). Different mechanism — Nonge more via ball-winning, build-up; Maeda more via territory (wide vs central).
Enzo Bardeli Levante · La Liga · 173 cm / 65 kg
81%
Driven by: box threat (15%), transition (13%), receiving zones (10%). Different mechanism — Nonge more via defensive aggression, ball-winning; Bardeli more via crossing, press resistance.
Brenden Aaronson Leeds · Premier League · 177 cm / 69 kg
80%
Driven by: creativity (13%), defensive aggression (13%), progression (13%). Different mechanism — Aaronson more via crossing, territory (wide vs central).
Kareem Tunde Levante · La Liga · 177 cm
79%
Driven by: creativity (13%), defensive aggression (12%), progression (11%). Different mechanism — Nonge more via build-up; Tunde more via territory (wide vs central), crossing.
Unai Gómez Udinese · Serie A · 183 cm / 75 kg
76%
Driven by: transition (12%), progression (9%), receiving zones (9%). Different mechanism — Nonge more via ball-winning, build-up; Gómez more via territory (wide vs central), box threat.
14

Summary

Joseph Nonge is a half-space creator: 0.34 key passes /90, 1.0 progressive passes, 0 goals from 0.15 xG. A between-the-lines creator. [Off-ball movement into pockets needs tracking.]

Based on 8 matches (263 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as a half-space creator — best used in a system built around that identity. His biggest room for growth is box threat — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall half-space creator 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