Vision AI ← BACK TO SEARCHSeason681472025/262026 · this seasonAll seasons
Building the full report
Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Team reportEgyptian Premier League 2026

Tala'ea El-Gaish

A balanced-territory side, passive / low-block out of possession, with a low-output attack. Currently #15 of 20 on 7 points (2-1-4, 6:12). Tactical profile below is built from 7 matches of ball-by-ball event data, contextualised against the league.

balanced-territorypassive / low-blocklow-output attack
L
L
D
D
W
L
W
L
W
W
L
D
L
L
L
7
points
#15 of 20 · 7 games
6:12
goals
-6 GD
2-1-4
record
W-D-L
1.00
points/game
#15 in the league
0.91
xG for/game
rank #15
1.02
xG against/game
rank #9
#18
press rank
of 20 · most aggressive
46%
field tilt
#15
Tala'ea El-Gaish
League average
Expected goals for / game
0.911.11
Expected goals against / game
1.021.11
Field tilt
46%50%
Pass retention
73%75%
Overview

The team

Who they are and how the season went.

Who Are They? — Identity

The question
In one read, what kind of team is Tala'ea El-Gaish and how good was the season?
Read. Tala'ea El-Gaish currently sit #15 of 20 on 7 points (2W-1D-4L, 1.00 pts/game), scoring 6 and conceding 12 for a goal difference of -6. On the ball they are a balanced-territory team (46% field tilt, #15 in the league); off it they defend with a passive / low-block (#18 of 20 for press intensity). Across the 7 matches of event data, they create 0.91 xG/game (#15) and concede 1.02 (#9), a net of -0.10 xG/game — the underlying performance matches the actual goal difference.

Season Context — the league table

The question
Where did Tala'ea El-Gaish actually finish, and against whom?

The authoritative final table (full season), centred on Tala'ea El-Gaish.

#teamPWDLGFGAGDPts
12Petrojet72231012-28
13Al-Masry722379-28
14Wadi Degla714278-17
15Tala'ea El-Gaish7214612-67
16Asyut Petroleum712437-45
17ENPPI7115815-74
18Abu Qir Fertilizers SC7115311-84

xG Race — the season, match by match

Expected goals piling up over 7 matches: Tala'ea El-Gaish against what their opponents created. A line pulling away upwards is a side creating more than it gives away; the gap at the end is the season’s balance (-0.7 xG). Hover a point for that match.

03586.47.1Arab Contractors FC (H) 1-0 · xG 0.93 to 0.35Petrojet (A) 3-2 · xG 0.29 to 1.13ZED FC (H) 0-1 · xG 0.84 to 1.17Canal SC (A) 1-1 · xG 1.18 to 0.54Smouha (H) 0-1 · xG 0.47 to 1.00National Bank of Egypt (A) 0-3 · xG 1.51 to 0.51Pyramids FC (H) 1-4 · xG 1.17 to 2.42M1M2M3M4M5M6M7
Tala'ea El-GaishOpponents against Tala'ea El-Gaish

Tactical DNA

The football question
In five genes, what is Tala'ea El-Gaish's footballing identity?

Each gene is a 0–100 score — the team's league percentile across the metrics that define that phase of play. It distils the whole report into an identity fingerprint: the taller the gene, the more that trait defines them.

30
Build-Up
possession control from the back
35
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
45
Creation
manufacturing chances
18
Press
winning the ball high & hard
55
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Tala'ea El-Gaish are defined most by their Solidity DNA (55/100 · average at resisting the opponent's threat), and least by their Press DNA (18/100). Percentiles vs the 20 teams in the league.

The Playstyle Wheel

Fifteen style metrics across five domains — Possess, Disrupt, Finish, Press, Defend — each a percentile against the rest of the league. Metrics marked ~proxy use the closest available event-data signal where the standard definition needs data this feed doesn't carry (explicit pressure events, offside/keeper-sweep incidents).

Possess65Disrupt40Finish35Press43Defend56
Possess
Deep buildup
62%
Possession
67%
Field tilt
67%
Disrupt
Central progression ~proxy
17%
Dribble tendency
50%
Progressive passes
54%
Finish
Final-third patience
50%
Shot quality
17%
Open-play xG
38%
Press
Forward press ~proxy
46%
High regains
38%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
46%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
54%
High line ~proxy
62%
PAdj defensive actions
50%
Tala'ea El-Gaish is defined most by Possess (65% in the league) and weakest on Finish (35%). Percentiles vs the 24 teams in the league this season.
In possession

In possession

How they keep the ball, build up, progress, create and finish, and where their attacks die.

Keeping the ball5 sections

Field Tilt — Territorial Control

The question
How much of the pitch does Tala'ea El-Gaish actually control, relative to the rest of the league?

Field tilt = share of final-third touches between the two sides across Tala'ea El-Gaish's matches, the standard proxy for territorial dominance. Plotted against points per game for every side in the league — the real question isn't just who controls territory, it's whether that control actually converts into results. Dashed lines mark the league average on each axis; Tala'ea El-Gaish highlighted. Hover any dot for the team.

Pyramids FC: 57% tilt, 3.00 pts/gAl Ahly FC: 62% tilt, 2.43 pts/gZamalek SC: 53% tilt, 2.29 pts/gCleopatra FC: 56% tilt, 2.14 pts/gAl-Ittihad Alexandria: 47% tilt, 1.86 pts/gModern Sport FC: 46% tilt, 1.86 pts/gArab Contractors FC: 41% tilt, 1.57 pts/gZED FC: 50% tilt, 1.57 pts/gNational Bank of Egypt: 57% tilt, 1.43 pts/gSmouha: 51% tilt, 1.43 pts/gCanal SC: 38% tilt, 1.14 pts/gAl-Masry: 61% tilt, 1.14 pts/gPetrojet: 58% tilt, 1.14 pts/gWadi Degla: 51% tilt, 1.00 pts/gTala'ea El-Gaish: 46% tilt, 1.00 pts/gAsyut Petroleum: 37% tilt, 0.71 pts/gAbu Qir Fertilizers SC: 39% tilt, 0.57 pts/gENPPI: 49% tilt, 0.57 pts/gGhazl El Mahalla FC: 49% tilt, 0.57 pts/gEl Gouna FC: 50% tilt, 0.29 pts/gTala'ea El-Gaish37%46%54%62%0.31.22.13.0FIELD TILT %POINTS / GAME
Vision AI Model Insight
Tala'ea El-Gaish post 46% field tilt, ranking #15 of 20 in the league — below the league mid-point, spending more of the game defending their own territory than dictating it, and their 1.00 points/game sits below the league-average return — territory is genuinely converting into results.

Passing Network

The question
Who actually plays with whom — the real on-pitch connections, not just average positions?

Every pass linked to its likely receiver (the next same-team touch), aggregated into player-pair combinations at each player's average position. Line width = how often the pair combines; colour = threat generated per pass (blue low → red high). Hover a line for the pair, or click a player to isolate their connections.

Khaled Stouhi ↔ Mohamed Camacho: 69 passes, 3.2 combined xTIslam Mohareb ↔ Karim Tarek: 34 passes, -0.5 combined xTMohamed Camacho ↔ Mohamed Atef: 32 passes, 0.9 combined xTAhmed Abdel Rahman Zola ↔ Mohamed Camacho: 30 passes, 1.1 combined xTKarim Tarek ↔ Ahmed Abdel Rahman Zola: 28 passes, 1.2 combined xTMohamed Camacho ↔ Ismail Ouro-Agoro: 24 passes, 0.2 combined xTKhaled Stouhi ↔ Mostafa Khawaga: 20 passes, -0.3 combined xTIsmail Ouro-Agoro ↔ Mostafa Khawaga: 16 passes, 0.0 combined xTAhmed Abdel Rahman Zola ↔ Khaled Stouhi: 13 passes, 0.2 combined xTKarim Tarek ↔ Mostafa Khawaga: 11 passes, -0.0 combined xTMohamed Camacho ↔ Mostafa Khawaga: 11 passes, 0.4 combined xTAhmed Abdel Rahman Zola ↔ Mohamed Atef: 10 passes, 0.4 combined xTIslam Mohareb ↔ Yehia Mostafa: 10 passes, -0.3 combined xTArnaud Komlavi ↔ Yehia Mostafa: 7 passes, 0.2 combined xTMohamed Camacho ↔ Yehia Mostafa: 5 passes, 0.0 combined xTMostafa Khawaga ↔ Yehia Mostafa: 5 passes, 0.2 combined xTKarim Tarek ↔ Yehia Mostafa: 4 passes, 0.0 combined xTKhaled Stouhi ↔ Yehia Mostafa: 3 passes, 0.4 combined xTMostafa Khawaga ↔ Arnaud Komlavi: 3 passes, -0.0 combined xTAhmed Abdel Rahman Zola ↔ Yehia Mostafa: 3 passes, -0.0 combined xTIslam Mohareb ↔ Arnaud Komlavi: 2 passes, 0.0 combined xTKarim Tarek ↔ Mohamed Atef: 2 passes, 0.0 combined xTAhmed Abdel Rahman Zola ↔ Arnaud Komlavi: 2 passes, 0.1 combined xTIslam Mohareb ↔ Mohamed Atef: 1 passes, -0.0 combined xTIslam Mohareb — isolate this player's connectionsMoharebKarim Tarek — isolate this player's connectionsTarekAhmed Abdel Rahman Zola — isolate this player's connectionsZolaMohamed Shaaban — isolate this player's connectionsShaabanMohamed Camacho — isolate this player's connectionsCamachoAhmed Meteb — isolate this player's connectionsMetebGodwin Okwara — isolate this player's connectionsOkwaraAli Hamdy — isolate this player's connectionsHamdyYoussry Wahid — isolate this player's connectionsWahidMohamed Atef — isolate this player's connectionsAtefArnaud Komlavi — isolate this player's connectionsKomlaviAhmed Khaled — isolate this player's connectionsKhaledYehia Mostafa — isolate this player's connectionsMostafaMostafa Khawaga — isolate this player's connectionsKhawagaIsmail Ouro-Agoro — isolate this player's connectionsOuro-AgoroKhaled Stouhi — isolate this player's connectionsStouhi
width = passes between the paircolour = xT per pass: low → high

Top 10 combinations

Stouhi ↔ Camacho
69p · 3.2xT
Mohareb ↔ Tarek
34p · -0.5xT
Camacho ↔ Atef
32p · 0.9xT
Zola ↔ Camacho
30p · 1.1xT
Tarek ↔ Zola
28p · 1.2xT
Camacho ↔ Ouro-Agoro
24p · 0.2xT
Stouhi ↔ Khawaga
20p · -0.3xT
Ouro-Agoro ↔ Khawaga
16p · 0.0xT
Zola ↔ Stouhi
13p · 0.2xT
Tarek ↔ Khawaga
11p · -0.0xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Khaled Stouhi ↔ Mohamed Camacho (69 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Khaled Stouhi ↔ Mohamed Camacho (0.05 xT/pass over 69 passes) — the combination that hurts opponents most when it fires, not just the one used most.

Touch Density — where Tala'ea El-Gaish had the ball

Every touch across 70 matches. Brighter means more touches.

Which Zones Do They Attack Through?

The question
Across the whole pitch, where does Tala'ea El-Gaish actually do its on-ball work?

Passes on one map, carries (the ball travelling with a player) on the other. Each is binned into the 15 pitch zones (three thirds × five vertical lanes) and shaded by its share of that kind of action; the arrows are the real actions.

Passes
the ball moved by a pass
2552
ACTIONS
5%7%13%7%5%9%10%12%9%6%6%3%2%2%4%PASSES
Carries
the ball moved with a player
786
ACTIONS
5%5%10%5%3%11%12%9%8%8%7%3%5%3%6%CARRIES
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the centre of the defensive third (12.0% of all actions). 64% of actions run through the inside lanes (centre + both half-spaces) versus 36% down the two wings — an inside-dominant, half-space build. By third: 34% defensive, 47% middle, 19% attacking.

Attack Sides

Which channel they attacked through this season: the share of every action made in the opponent’s half, down the left, through the middle and down the right. Tala'ea El-Gaish leaned on their right (46%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.

31%Left side24%Middle46%Right sideATTACKING →
Tala'ea El-Gaish
31%24%46%
League
38%24%38%

Final-Third Entries

Every completed pass or carry that took the ball from outside the final third into it, by the channel it arrived in. Tala'ea El-Gaish made 242 this season (34.6 a match); 31% came into the right wing. Longer, bolder arrows mean more entries. Entries by carrying the ball in count as well as completed passes; dribbles are not counted.

Left wing: 53 entries (22%)5322%LEFT WINGLeft half-space: 30 entries (12%)3012%LEFT HALF-SPACECentre: 33 entries (14%)3314%CENTRERight half-space: 52 entries (21%)5221%RIGHT HALF-SPACERight wing: 74 entries (31%)7431%RIGHT WINGATTACKING ↑
ChannelEntriesPer matchShareLeague share
Left wing537.622%27%
Left half-space304.312%17%
Centre334.714%15%
Right half-space527.421%16%
Right wing7410.631%26%
Build-up2 sections

Build-Up — the pass map

The football question
How does Tala'ea El-Gaish progress possession from defence into attack — and who runs it?

Build-up passes grouped into 5 real categories — not the old zone grid, not raw individual lines: CB (passer is a centre-back), Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top passer.

921build-up passes attempted
71%completed
34%reach the middle third
4%go long into the final third

Pass types

324CB · 50%
41Long Wide · 6%
13Long Central · 2%
205Wide → FB · 31%
70Central · 11%
CB324 · 50%
right: 178 passes, most from Camacho178left: 146 passes, most from Camacho146
Long Wide41 · 6%
right: 25 passes, most from El-Sayed25left: 16 passes, most from El-Sayed16
Long Central13 · 2%
left: 8 passes, most from El-Sayed8right: 5 passes, most from El-Sayed5
Wide → FB205 · 31%
right: 122 passes, most from Zola122left: 83 passes, most from Mostafa83
Central70 · 11%
left: 37 passes, most from Radwan37right: 33 passes, most from Zola33
◆ Vision AI Insight
Tala'ea El-Gaish build predominantly down the right, with Camacho as the fulcrum (136 build-up passes). Only 37% of their build-up passes actually advance a third — the rest is lateral circulation, the hallmark of a possession-controlling side that circulates patiently in midfield before progressing. Their single most-repeated pattern is RHS def → C def (29×).

Pass Explorer

Every pass of Tala'ea El-Gaish’s last 7 matches as an arrow, theirs first and the opponents’ with other team, each side attacking left to right (solid = completed, dashed grey = failed). Eight families per team — click any map to open it wide, then filter by channel or third, from one to another (or click a cell of the flow grids), by outcome, half, minute and passer. Channels: right wing, right half-space, centre, left half-space, left wing.

Progression4 sections

How They Progress — the mechanism

Not just how many progressive passes, but where they start, who plays them, and whether they actually penetrate. 291 progressive passes across 7 matches (41.6/game).

Origin lane

Right wing
33%
Right half-space
16%
Central
16%
Left half-space
14%
Left wing
21%
Progression is right-dominant: 49% right side · 16% central · 35% left.

Who generates it

Khaled Stouhi
38 · 13%
Ahmed Abdel Rahman Zola
37 · 13%
Mohamed Camacho
32 · 11%
Mohamed Atef
28 · 10%
Emad El-Sayed
24 · 8%
Top two — Khaled Stouhi & Ahmed Abdel Rahman Zola — account for 26% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
41.6 prog passes/game
mostly right
→
PENETRATION
35% reach final third
23% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 65% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it. 35% of progressive passes reached the final third and 23% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 26% of the progression ran through two players, mostly down the right side.

Which lanes actually create the threat

Share of passes played from each lane against its share of the threat (xT) they add. Efficient = more threat than volume, sterile = lots of the ball, little damage.

Per lane — volume vs threat
Right wingefficient
Right half-spacebalanced
Centralsterile
Left half-spacebalanced
Left wingbalanced

Progression — the pass map

The football question
Once Tala'ea El-Gaish have the ball in midfield, how do they actually break into the final third — and who carries that job?

Progression passes grouped into 5 real categories: CB, Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top passer.

1179progression passes attempted
78%completed
19%break into the final third
13%go backward into the defensive third

Pass types

291CB · 32%
43Long Wide · 5%
4Long Central · 0%
451Wide → FB · 49%
131Central · 14%
CB291 · 32%
left: 148 passes, most from Camacho148right: 143 passes, most from Stouhi143
Long Wide43 · 5%
right: 24 passes, most from Khawaga24left: 19 passes, most from Khawaga19
Long Central4 · 0%
left: 2 passes, most from Zola2right: 2 passes, most from Mohareb2
Wide → FB451 · 49%
right: 254 passes, most from Zola254left: 197 passes, most from Mohareb197
Central131 · 14%
right: 71 passes, most from Atef71left: 60 passes, most from Mohareb60
◆ Vision AI Insight
Tala'ea El-Gaish progress predominantly down the right, with Mostafa the busiest midfield outlet (98 progression passes). Only 19% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (68%) is recycled back into midfield or (13%) played backward, the hallmark of a side that carries progression itself through midfield rather than just passing through it. Their most-repeated pattern is RHS mid → RW mid (51×) — press that lane and midfield progression stalls.

Decision Quality — not all completed passes are equal

A 90% pass completion can hide a sideways habit. Grading every pass by the threat it adds separates value creation from safe circulation.

Excellent (high xT gain)
17%
Progressive
1%
Neutral / sideways
50%
Safe / backward
31%
18% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 82% keep possession without advancing it. A control-first side — safe in build-up, reliant on a few players for the incision.

Carries Map — progressive ball-carries, squad-wide

The question
Where does Tala'ea El-Gaish actually progress the ball with their feet, not a pass?

133 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (17% of 786 tracked carries total), grouped into up to 4 spatial patterns by where each carry starts and ends together — not just its origin zone. Median 15m, longest 54m. Most active carrier: Tarek (19). Filter to one player below.

First (63)Second (28)Third (21)Fourth (21)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →
Chance creation1 section

Chance Creation — the pass map

The football question
How does Tala'ea El-Gaish consistently create dangerous chances — from which zones, and who creates them?

Key passes (the pass immediately before a shot) grouped into 5 real categories: CB, Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top creator.

Pass types

15CB · 24%
3Long Wide · 5%
11Long Central · 18%
16Wide → FB · 26%
17Central · 27%

Danger Funnel — which service carries threat

Every key pass pooled by where it was played FROM, then drawn with its arrow width set by total xT rather than by count. A zone that produces a lot of cheap balls shrinks; one that produces a few decisive ones dominates. Where this disagrees with the volume map, the volume map is the misleading one.

0 key passes shown● low threat● mid● high threatarrow width = total xT, not count
CB15 · 24%
right: 10 passes, most from Gabry10left: 5 passes, most from Gabry5
Long Wide3 · 5%
left: 2 passes, most from Mohareb2
Long Central11 · 18%
right: 6 passes, most from Zola6left: 5 passes, most from Atef5
Wide → FB16 · 26%
right: 9 passes, most from Zola9left: 7 passes, most from Atef7
Central17 · 27%
right: 11 passes, most from Atef11left: 6 passes, most from Tarek6

Who creates — volume × threat

11Zola
11Atef
7Gabry
5Ouro-Agoro
4Mohareb
4Tarek
4Mostafa
62key passes #9 of 20
10.6box entries/game #11 of 20
28.9final-3rd entries/game #17 of 20
0.91xG/game #15 of 20
6goals #15 of 20
-0.4finishing vs xG #10 of 20
◆ Vision AI Insight
Tala'ea El-Gaish lean right — 44% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (27 of 62), most often from Zola (10). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via RW att → C att (11 key passes, most often from Zola). Zola is the primary source overall. They generate 0.91 xG a game and finish it wasteful — they under-perform their xG, led by Islam Mohareb (2G), Ahmed Alaa Eldin (1G), Karim Tarek (1G).
Finishing2 sections

Shot Map

94 shots for 6.4 xG (0.91/game, #15 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.

Low-output attack. 13.4 shots/game at 0.068 xG/shot. Box entries 11/game (#11). Threat created 10.1 xT/game (#13).

How Do They Score?

The question
Where do the goals actually come from — open play, dead balls, which foot?

Every goal Tala'ea El-Gaish scored across the loaded matches, broken down by how it was created and finished.

By situation

Open play
4 · 67%
Set pieces
2 · 33%
Penalties
0 · 0%

By finish

Right foot
2 · 33%
Left foot
2 · 33%
Header
2 · 33%
Vision AI Model Insight
6 goals scored. 67% come in open play, but 33% from set pieces — a genuine dead-ball weapon that bypasses the open-play build-up.
When they lose it1 section

Ball-Loss Map — where attacks die

Every turnover has a location and a cause. This is a rate, not a raw count — the share of pass attempts from each zone that end in a turnover, so a zone they simply play through more often doesn't automatically look riskier. Grey cells are real zones with too few attempts to trust a rate.

Loss rate by zone

39 of 137 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%39/137Zola40 of 169 pass attempts lost here (24%).24%40/169Stouhi102 of 322 pass attempts lost here (32%).32%102/322El-Sayed47 of 175 pass attempts lost here (27%).27%47/175Camacho40 of 118 pass attempts lost here (34%).34%40/118Camacho61 of 228 pass attempts lost here (27%).27%61/228Atef61 of 259 pass attempts lost here (24%).24%61/259Stouhi64 of 312 pass attempts lost here (21%).21%64/312Mostafa41 of 232 pass attempts lost here (18%).18%41/232Mohareb32 of 148 pass attempts lost here (22%).22%32/148Tarek56 of 153 pass attempts lost here (37%).37%56/153Zola26 of 79 pass attempts lost here (33%).33%26/79Ouro-Agoro17 of 53 pass attempts lost here (32%).32%17/53Mohareb16 of 58 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%16/58Komlavi52 of 112 pass attempts lost here (46%).46%52/112Tarekattacking →

How they lose it

Incomplete pass — attacking third
167
Failed forward pass
107
Failed take-on
42
Lost in the defensive third
268
Their weakest zone is the left wing in the attacking third: 46% of 112 pass attempts there are lost (52 times). Separately, 24% of all losses happen in the attacking third — a fair share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Out of possession

Out of possession

How they press, where they win the ball back, and how they concede.

Pressing1 section

Pressing — the full picture

The football question
How hard does Tala'ea El-Gaish press, where, and does it actually work — beyond a single PPDA number?

A composite Pressing Index built from four event-derived dimensions, each ranked against the league. Not one metric — intensity, height, effectiveness and opponent disruption together. The pitch shows every defensive action (the only five events this data records); the white line is the average height that feeds the score. Toggle by action type below, hover any dot for the player.

17
Pressing Index
/100 · passive
Intensity10
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height20
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness8
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption40
opponent completion & progression allowed

Every defensive action & where it happens

Where they win the ball back — by lane

RW
11%
RHS
21%
C
35%
LHS
21%
LW
13%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 70%
Mid 27%
Att 4%
Read
Ranked #18 of 20 for press intensity, this is a low block. 30% of defensive actions happen in the middle & attacking thirds, at an average height of 27. Of recoveries, 39% are won high up the pitch.

Every pressing metric, ranked in the league

metricvaluerankmeaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)—#18/20lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game82#17/20
High-press share9%#18/20def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)26.8#16/20avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game15.7#18/20ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share39%#19/20share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed73%#4/20lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed13.2%#20/20of opp passes, lower = better
Honest limit — no transition timing
This source has no cross-event clock or possession sequences, so genuine transition metrics — 5-second counterpress, time-to-recover, press→shot within 10s, and xG/xT generated after a high regain — cannot be computed and are deliberately left out rather than estimated. Every number above is a direct read of recorded defensive actions and opponent passes.
Defending the box2 sections

Vulnerability Map — how opponents hurt them

The report flipped: where do opponents create their threat against Tala'ea El-Gaish? 342 opponent progressive passes and 90 shots faced (7.1 xG against) across the season.

Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Tala'ea El-Gaish)

Right wing
28%
Right half-space
20%
Central
20%
Left half-space
11%
Left wing
21%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the right wing (28% of the danger conceded).

How Do They Concede?

The question
Where do the goals against Tala'ea El-Gaish actually come from — open play, dead balls, and who supplies them?

Every goal Tala'ea El-Gaish conceded across the loaded matches — the opponent's shots in Tala'ea El-Gaish's own matches — plus every individual opponent key pass faced, each drawn as its own real arrow (not zone-clustered) with the % share of each zone behind it.

Where the goals go in

← opponent shot at own goal

Every opponent key pass against them (65 total)

2%2%5%6%6%6%15%15%18%11%14%Omar El WahshOmar El WahshEdrisa NiangNader HeshamNader HeshamShady HusseinMohamed HamedMostafa El-BadryMostafa El-BadryKgaogelo SekgotaBadr MousaBadr MousaGodwin OkwaraAbubakar LidayAbubakar LidayAdham HamedMohamed Ibrahim DodoMohamed IbrahimMohamed IbrahimMohamed IbrahimAhmed El-SaghiriAhmed El-SaghiriAhmed El-SaghiriAhmed AdelMostafa SaadMohamed RabiaMohamed RabiaMarwane HajijMahmoud OukaMohamed AntarMohamed AntarMawuli WayoMawuli WayoMostafa HamadaHazem Abou SenaMody ShalataSamir FekriSamir FekriMohamed RagabAhmed AbdelrasoulFady FaridHesham HafezMohamed SaeedMohamed SaeedMohamed SaeedAnderson CearáAnderson CearáMostafa ShalabyHisham SalahHisham SalahKarim HamedKhaled ShefoKarim HafezKarim HafezWalid El KartiMostafa FathyMostafa FathyYoussef ObamaYoussef ObamaYoussef ObamaMohamed ChibiMohamed ChibiMohamed ChibiMohamed ChibiMahmoud Saber← own goal

By situation

Open play
8 · 67%
Set pieces
3 · 25%
Penalties
1 · 8%
Vision AI Model Insight
12 goals conceded. 67% come in open play, and 25% from set pieces — a genuine defensive frailty at dead balls to fix on the training ground. 17% are headers — aerial defending is not where the damage comes from. Their supply line runs mainly through the centre of the attacking third (18% of key passes faced) — that is the zone to shut off.
Context

Shape and tactics

Set pieces, strengths and weaknesses, and who they resemble.

Premium
Tactical Phase Read
The tactical idea behind each phase of this team's play, written from the same numbers shown above — what they do in build-up, how they progress, where they create, and how they defend it.
Subscribe →

Set-Piece Threat

How much of the goal threat is manufactured from dead balls — a route to goal that bypasses their open-play mechanism entirely.

Open play
4 g · 3.2 xG
Set pieces
2 g · 2.4 xG
Penalties
0 g
33% of goals come from set pieces (2 of 6), worth 2.4 xG from 41 shots. A genuine set-piece weapon — defend the box seriously.

Where do Tala'ea El-Gaish's corners go?

31 corners taken this season, split by which flag they were taken from — arrows from the flag, dots at the delivery point, shaded by % of that side's corners landing in each zone (same treatment as the concede map below). No swing-direction (inswinger/outswinger) data is recorded here, only a start and end point per pass, which cannot show how the ball curved — so this shows what is genuinely knowable: where it lands, and short vs actually delivered. Tap or hover a dot for who took it and the match; filter to one match below and the shading recomputes for just that game.

Right side (18)

11%17%28%17%6%11%6%
Delivered into the box 94%Short 6%

Left side (13)

8%23%38%15%8%
Delivered into the box 92%Short 8%

Where opponents attack Tala'ea El-Gaish from set pieces

13 shots from opponent corners against Tala'ea El-Gaish, 3 conceded, split by the flag the corner came from — arrows from the flag, dots where the shot was taken (gold = goal), shaded by the % of that flag's shots in each zone. Tap or hover a shot for who took it, the minute and the match; filter to one match and the shading recomputes for just that game.

Right flag (8)

12%38%50%
Shot 8Goals 1

Left flag (5)

40%20%40%
Shot 5Goals 2

Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses

Strengths (top-third vs league)
  • shots /game — 13.43 (65th pct)
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
  • press intensity (PPDA) — 15.51 (10th pct)
  • xG created /game — 0.91 (25th pct)
  • field tilt % — 45.88 (25th pct)
  • progression /game — 41.57 (35th pct)
  • threat created /game — 10.09 (35th pct)

Style Archetype & Similar Teams

Team archetype: Reactive low-block counter. Their closest stylistic matches in the league (cosine similarity on style metrics) — sides that play a similar way.

Abu Qir Fertilizers SC
86%
Asyut Petroleum
80%
Modern Sport FC
71%
Arab Contractors FC
58%
El Gouna FC
58%

Performance vs Opponent Styles

The question
Not just how Tala'ea El-Gaish results against a high press or a low block — how does their own play actually change?

Every match split into three tiers by how hard that specific opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower means a more aggressive press), matching Tala'ea El-Gaish's own passing behaviour to the result.

Results

opponent typegoals for/ggoals against/gpoints/g
vs high-pressing opponents (2m)0.502.500.00
vs mid-block opponents (2m)1.502.501.50
vs low-block opponents (3m)0.670.671.33

Behaviour — how Tala'ea El-Gaish actually play against each

opponent typeretentiondirectness (long balls)prog. passes/gxT/gbox entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents69%22%338.58.0
vs mid-block opponents74%19%429.710.0
vs low-block opponents74%19%4711.412.7
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 69% vs 74% against a low block (5pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 22% when pressed vs 19% against a low block — a mild adjustment, not a wholesale change.

Scouting Summary — the team in brief

In brief. Tala'ea El-Gaish are balanced-territory with a passive / low-block. Their attack creates 0.91 xG a game and they concede 1.02 a game. [Event-data based — no tracking, so off-ball structure and marking scheme need video.]
Squad

Players

Who drives the numbers.

Set Pieces by Player

Who delivers Tala'ea El-Gaish’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 31 corners taken, most by Ahmed Abdel Rahman Zola (11); 21 shots from corners and free kicks, 1 goals, led by Ahmed Alaa Eldin (1 goals, 0.07 xG). “Into the box” counts corners that landed inside the penalty area; free-kick takers are the players who shot from one, because this feed does not mark who delivers the others.

PlayerCorners takenInto the boxSet-piece shotsGoalsxGFree-kick shotsPenalties
Mohamed Atef98 (89%)2—0.08—0/1
Mohamed Camacho——4—0.17——
Ahmed Abdel Rahman Zola1111 (100%)——0.00——
Hamed Khaled El Gabry54 (80%)2—0.051—
Karim Tarek11 (100%)3—0.101—
Yehia Mostafa——2—0.08——
Khaled Stouhi——2—0.11——
Zaghloul Mohamed21 (50%)1—0.00——
Ahmed Alaa Eldin——110.071—
Ismail Ouro-Agoro——1—0.07——
Fares Hatem——1—0.06——
Khaled Abo Ziada——1—0.111—
Walid Benbella——1—0.03——
Ragab Omran22 (100%)——0.00——

Top Performers

Ranked by Vision AI Score — the same tactical behavioural evaluation each player's own report page shows (min 189 minutes). Coloured chips are that player's strongest capability blocks.

playerposminVision AI Scorecapability blocks
Ahmed Abdel Rahman ZolaFB5307.4Ball-Carrying 82%Ball-Winning 66%
Yehia MostafaCM4874.9Ball-Carrying 70%Successful Dribble 47%Chance Creation 45%Progression 35%
Mohamed CamachoCB6304.8Aerial & Box Defending 85%Ball-Winning 57%Progression 27%Ball-Carrying 11%
Mohamed AtefW5294.2Chance Creation 62%Ball-Carrying 39%Box Threat 24%
Islam MoharebCM5593.4Chance Creation 39%Progression 27%Successful Dribble 26%Ball-Carrying 25%

Top Creators

Chance creation leaders — key passes /90 and box entries.

playerposminkey P /90box entriesxT
Mohamed AtefM5291.87176.6
Ahmed Abdel Rahman ZolaD5301.87138.4
Hamed Khaled El GabryD2352.6894.2
Islam MoharebM5590.6453.6
Karim TarekM5460.6642.4
Yehia MostafaM4870.7434.7
Khaled StouhiD4130.6538.8
Ahmed TarekM2381.1332.5

Wide Delivery Leaders

Crosses and cutbacks — wingers and full-backs only (by real average position, not the raw D/M position code), ranked by combined volume.

playerposmincrosses (completed)cutbacks (completed)
Mohamed AtefW52914 (36%)4 (75%)
Ahmed Abdel Rahman ZolaFB53010 (50%)3 (33%)
Karim TarekW5466 (33%)4 (0%)

Defensive Volume Leaders

Who does the defensive work — tackles, interceptions, recoveries.

playerposmindef actionstacklesinterceptrecoveries
Mohamed CamachoD630794326
Islam MoharebM5595014522
Yehia MostafaM487497134
Ahmed Abdel Rahman ZolaD5304311421
Mohamed AtefM529405717
Emad El-SayedG375381033
Khaled StouhiD413374410
Zaghloul MohamedD296315512

Full Squad Data

Every player with 100+ minutes (21 players).

playerposappsmingoalsxGkey PprogdefxT
Mohamed CamachoD763000.5232797.9
Islam MoharebM755921.1416503.6
Karim TarekM754610.8410242.4
Ahmed Abdel Rahman ZolaD753000.01137438.4
Mohamed AtefM752911.31128406.6
Yehia MostafaM648700.2417494.7
Khaled StouhiD641300.2338378.8
Emad El-SayedG537500.0024385.3
Zaghloul MohamedD429600.0115312.7
Fares HatemF528700.302100.5
Amro TarekD428000.005201.3
Omar RadwanG324900.006301.3
Ahmed TarekM523810.537132.5
Hamed Khaled El GabryD523500.1719244.2
Mostafa KhawagaM622500.016222.4
Ahmed WahidM319300.028101.7
Ismail Ouro-AgoroF618000.45260.8
Arnaud KomlaviF715900.422100.6
Ahmed Alaa EldinD212310.10982.1
Khaled Abo ZiadaD312000.128202.3
Walid BenbellaM210400.10080.6

Player Role Architecture

The question
Who does what — and what tactical job does each key player actually perform?

The nine most-used players (450+ minutes), each with the role their event fingerprint points to — not just their listed position.

Mohamed Camacho
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes630
goals · xG0 · 0.5
prog passes /904.6
key passes /900.29
def actions /9011.3
pass accuracy75%
Islam Mohareb
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes559
goals · xG2 · 1.1
prog passes /902.6
key passes /900.64
def actions /908.1
pass accuracy75%
Karim Tarek
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes546
goals · xG1 · 0.8
prog passes /901.6
key passes /900.66
def actions /904.0
pass accuracy70%
Ahmed Abdel Rahman Zola
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes530
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /906.3
key passes /901.87
def actions /907.3
pass accuracy73%
Mohamed Atef
Advanced creator · Attacking mid
minutes529
goals · xG1 · 1.3
prog passes /904.8
key passes /901.87
def actions /906.8
pass accuracy71%
Yehia Mostafa
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes487
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /903.1
key passes /900.74
def actions /909.1
pass accuracy77%
Khaled Stouhi
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes413
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /908.3
key passes /900.65
def actions /908.1
pass accuracy78%
Emad El-Sayed
Goalkeeper · Goalkeeper
minutes375
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /905.8
key passes /900.00
def actions /909.1
pass accuracy57%
Zaghloul Mohamed
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes296
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /904.6
key passes /900.30
def actions /909.4
pass accuracy68%

Recruitment Intelligence — profiles to sign

The question
If you were sporting director, which player profiles would move the needle most?

Each recruitment target is derived directly from the team's weakest areas vs the league — the gap, why it shows in the data, and the profile that closes it.

Need — bottom-third: press intensity (PPDA) (10th pct)
Sign a high-energy presser to lift defensive intensity. The data flags this because the press is passive (15.51, 10th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: xG created /game (25th pct)
Sign a higher-volume goalscorer or chance creator. The data flags this because the attack under-produces xG (0.91, 25th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: field tilt % (25th pct)
Sign a possession-controlling midfielder to win the territorial battle. The data flags this because they get pinned back (45.88, 25th percentile vs the league).
Vision AI · building report