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

El Hadji Malick Diouf

Brentford
Defensive full-back FB
19.1 defensive actions/90 · low final-third share 29%
full-backoverlapping full-backprogressioncrossing
184
minutes
5 apps
68%
pass completion
91 passes
14
progressive passes
6.8/90
10
final-3rd entries
4.9/90
2
box entries
0.98/90
39
defensive actions
19.1/90
8
tackles + interceptions
67% tackle win
2
dribbles
0% won
Overview

The player

Who he is and how he compares with his peers.

Thin sample this season. El Hadji Malick Diouf has played 5 matches (184 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
Left Wing, Middle third — wide or inverted — mostly in the middle third (41% of his 91 passes)
68% completion · 91× in 5/5 matches
↓
PROGRESS
carry or combine up the flank
6.8 prog/90 · 14× in 4/5 matches
↓
DEFEND
1v1 and cover on his side
39 def actions · lost 35% deep · 39× in 5/5 matches
Signature: Receive → Progress → Defend — 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: dribble — 2× (low confidence, shown as a number only, no tactical conclusion drawn); deliver — 2× (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.

04

How does he create chances?

1 key passes (0.49/90), 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
05

Where does he become vulnerable?

31 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.

10
attacking third (cheap)
10
middle third
11
own third (dangerous)
Vision AI 32% of losses are in the attacking third — a notable share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Mistake danger (proxy): 6.02 danger-index/90 · 0.397 avg/turnover. Weights each loss by threat conceded at that location. True xT-conceded needs the opponent possession model; positional proxy.
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 switches from the left hs to the right hs, advancing it forward in the middle third — 1 passes worth 0.33 xT.
Where do his chances come from?
Of 1 key passes, his busiest route is a delivery where he plays straight through the left 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 left wing in the defensive third: 42% of his 24 touches there are lost (10 times).
—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—3 touches · too few42%10/24 lost—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—4 touches · too few0%0/10 lost30%7/23 lost—0 touches · too few—0 touches · too few—1 touch · too few—6 touches · too few37%7/19 lostRWRHSCLHSLWDEFMIDATT
02

Crosses & Cutbacks

6 crosses (2.93/90, 1 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.

06

How & where does he defend?

39 defensive actions across the season (19.1/90). 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 →
6
tackles · 67% won
2
interceptions · 1.0/90
6
recoveries · 2.9/90
6
clearances · 2.9/90
1
blocks
37
avg action height
7
won high (att 3rd)
12
middle third
20
own third
Vision AI A mid-block defender. He wins the ball mainly by stepping in — tackles, interceptions & recoveries outweigh clearances. 14 proactive ball-wins (6.8/90), tackle success 67%. He defends mostly around the middle third.
Team

Team context

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

07

Impact on the Team

Brentford's output per match with El Hadji Malick Diouf (5 matches) versus without him (3 matches). Insufficient evidence — the without-sample is only 3 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 (5)
WITHOUT (3)
Δ
goals against /match
1.40
0.67
+0.73
points /match
1.20
1.67
-0.47
goals for /match
1.80
1.67
+0.13
xG for /match
1.29
0.98
+0.31
08

His Share of the Team

Of everything Brentford produced this season, the categories where the biggest share ran through El Hadji Malick Diouf specifically — his share of the team total, not a per-90 rate.

category
share
him / team
expected assists (xA)
9%
4.5 / 48.6
clearances
9%
128 / 1499
progressive passes
8%
179 / 2146
Recruitment

Style and verdict

Style profile, closest comparables, and the summary.

09

Playing-Style Profile

Not raw event counts — football style scores: weighted models scored 0–100 against the 231 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.

Overlapping full-back60%Inverted full-back32%
Why Overlapping full-back 60%: a weighted blend of crossing 58 (weight 30%) + dribbling 74 (weight 20%) + transition 57 (weight 25%) + final-third threat 47 (weight 25%). The score reflects how distinctively his profile SHAPE matches this archetype vs his peers.
Elite
territory (wide vs central)
Strong
passing directness, dribbling
Average
through-balls, crossing, creativity, transition, press resistance, final-third threat, progression, box threat, ball-winning, carrying, line-breaking
Weak
build-up, receiving zones, defensive aggression, retention
Unknown
aerial ability, marking, off-ball running — not in event data
Territory (wide vs central)
89
Passing directness
83
Dribbling
74
Through-balls ~proxy
64
Crossing
58
Creativity
57
Transition ~proxy
57
Press resistance ~proxy
52
Final-third threat
47
Progression
47
Box threat
45
Ball-winning
45
Carrying
43
Line-breaking
42
Build-up
39
Receiving zones
28
Defensive aggression
28
Retention
25
10

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: 183 cm / 69 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.

Antonino Gallo Lecce · Serie A · 183 cm / 69 kg
78%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (19%), passing directness (18%), defensive aggression (14%). Different mechanism — Diouf more via through-balls, box threat; Gallo more via final-third threat.
Aaron Wan-Bissaka Aston Villa · 183 cm / 72 kg
77%
Driven by: passing directness (19%), territory (wide vs central) (17%), defensive aggression (15%). Different mechanism — Diouf more via box threat.
Kristoffer Lund Koln · Bundesliga 25/26 · 184 cm / 65 kg
71%
Driven by: defensive aggression (19%), receiving zones (17%), retention (12%). Different mechanism — Diouf more via territory (wide vs central), passing directness; Lund more via carrying.
Omar Haktab Traoré Heidenheim · Bundesliga 25/26 · 187 cm / 77 kg
70%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (28%), defensive aggression (17%), dribbling (12%). Different mechanism — Diouf more via ball-winning, box threat; Traoré more via receiving zones.
Loïc Négo Le Havre · Ligue 1 25/26 · 181 cm / 71 kg
64%
Driven by: defensive aggression (23%), passing directness (19%), territory (wide vs central) (14%). Different mechanism — Diouf more via creativity, territory (wide vs central); Négo more via ball-winning.
Vitalii Mykolenko Everton · 180 cm / 71 kg
63%
Driven by: territory (wide vs central) (19%), passing directness (19%), retention (17%). Different mechanism — Diouf more via dribbling, press resistance; Mykolenko more via final-third threat, through-balls.
11

Summary

El Hadji Malick Diouf is an overlapping full-back: 6.8 progressive passes and 2 box entries, delivering 1 key passes. Overlap-first full-back. [1v1 recovery pace and off-ball overlap timing need tracking.]

Based on 5 matches (184 minutes) — an early read, treat with caution until more minutes are logged. He profiles as an overlapping full-back — best used in a system built around that identity. His biggest room for growth is final-third threat — even a modest improvement there would meaningfully lift his overall overlapping 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