Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Team reportEgyptian Premier League 2025/26
Ghazl El Mahalla FC
A balanced-territory side, moderate-press out of possession, with a low-output attack. Currently #11 of 21 on 38 points (6-20-7, 27:26). Tactical profile below is built from 32 matches of ball-by-ball event data, a sample of the full season, contextualised against the league.
balanced-territorymoderate-presslow-output attack
W
D
D
D
L
L
W
D
L
L
D
L
L
L
W
38
points
#11 of 21 · 33 games
27:26
goals
+1 GD
6-20-7
record
W-D-L
1.15
points/game
#11 in the league
0.71
xG for/game
rank #20
0.96
xG against/game
rank #11
#15
press rank
of 21 · most aggressive
47%
field tilt
#15
Record, points, goals and league position come from the league table as it stands today — 33 games played, season in progress. Every tactical metric — xG, PPDA, field tilt, progression, zone maps — is measured from the 32 matches of detailed event data currently loaded, so those samples may not span the whole season.
In one read, what kind of team is Ghazl El Mahalla FC and how good was the season?
Read. Ghazl El Mahalla FC currently sit #11 of 21 on 38 points (6W-20D-7L, 1.15 pts/game), scoring 27 and conceding 26 for a goal difference of +1.
On the ball they are a balanced-territory team (47% field tilt, #15 in the league); off it they defend with a moderate-press (#15 of 21 for press intensity).
Across the 32 matches of event data, they create 0.71 xG/game (#20) and concede 0.96 (#11), a net of -0.25 xG/game — the underlying performance diverges from the actual goal difference.
Season Context — the league table
The question
Where did Ghazl El Mahalla FC actually finish, and against whom?
The authoritative final table (full season), centred on Ghazl El Mahalla FC.
#
team
P
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
8
Petrojet
33
10
15
8
39
38
+1
45
9
Cleopatra FC
26
12
8
6
34
21
+13
44
10
Al-Masry
26
10
10
6
35
29
+6
40
11
Ghazl El Mahalla FC
33
6
20
7
27
26
+1
38
12
Arab Contractors FC
33
7
17
9
28
31
-3
38
13
Modern Sport FC
33
7
16
10
26
34
-8
37
14
Tala'ea El-Gaish
33
9
10
14
21
34
-13
37
xG Race — the season, match by match
Expected goals piling up over 32 matches: Ghazl El Mahalla FC 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 (-8.1 xG). Hover a point for that match.
Ghazl El Mahalla FCOpponents against Ghazl El Mahalla FC
Tactical DNA
The football question
In five genes, what is Ghazl El Mahalla FC'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.
31
Build-Up
possession control from the back
43
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
5
Creation
manufacturing chances
29
Press
winning the ball high & hard
48
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Ghazl El Mahalla FC are defined most by their Solidity DNA (48/100 · average at resisting the opponent's threat), and least by their Creation DNA (5/100). Percentiles vs the 21 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).
Possess
Deep buildup
50%
Possession
42%
Field tilt
17%
Disrupt
Central progression ~proxy
75%
Dribble tendency
71%
Progressive passes
12%
Finish
Final-third patience
4%
Shot quality
8%
Open-play xG
25%
Press
Forward press ~proxy
42%
High regains
8%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
58%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
42%
High line ~proxy
12%
PAdj defensive actions
17%
Ghazl El Mahalla FC is defined most by Disrupt (53% in the league) and weakest on Finish (12%). 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.
How much of the pitch does Ghazl El Mahalla FC actually control, relative to the rest of the league?
Field tilt = share of final-third touches between the two sides across Ghazl El Mahalla FC'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; Ghazl El Mahalla FC highlighted. Hover any dot for the team.
Vision AI Model Insight
Ghazl El Mahalla FC post 47% field tilt, ranking #15 of 21 in the league — below the league mid-point, spending more of the game defending their own territory than dictating it, and their 1.09 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.
width = passes between the paircolour = xT per pass: low → high
Top 10 combinations
Shousha ↔ Aash
890p · 37.5xT
Aash ↔ Zakaria
505p · 20.8xT
Arfaoui ↔ Mohamed
348p · 1.0xT
Amoory ↔ Touré
330p · 10.6xT
Salam ↔ Saïdi
316p · 2.5xT
Zakaria ↔ Amoory
297p · 13.2xT
Salah ↔ Salam
154p · 3.7xT
Touré ↔ Salah
152p · 1.8xT
Mohamed ↔ Shousha
127p · 6.5xT
Zakaria ↔ Touré
126p · 4.5xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Ahmed Shousha ↔ Ahmed El Aash (890 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Amer Mohamed ↔ Ahmed Shousha (0.05 xT/pass over 127 passes) — the combination that hurts opponents most when it fires, not just the one used most.
Touch Density — where Ghazl El Mahalla FC had the ball
Every touch across 314 matches. Brighter means more touches.
Which Zones Do They Attack Through?
The question
Across the whole pitch, where does Ghazl El Mahalla FC 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
11016
ACTIONS
Carries
the ball moved with a player
2239
ACTIONS
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the left half-space of the middle third (11.2% of all actions). 63% of actions run through the inside lanes (centre + both half-spaces) versus 37% down the two wings — an inside-dominant, half-space build. By third: 32% defensive, 49% 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. Ghazl El Mahalla FC leaned on their left (41%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.
Ghazl El Mahalla FC
41%23%36%
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. Ghazl El Mahalla FC made 1090 this season (34.1 a match); 28% came into the left wing. Longer, bolder arrows mean more entries. Entries by carrying the ball in count as well as completed passes; dribbles are not counted.
Channel
Entries
Per match
Share
League share
Left wing
300
9.4
28%
27%
Left half-space
204
6.4
19%
17%
Centre
156
4.9
14%
15%
Right half-space
200
6.2
18%
16%
Right wing
230
7.2
21%
25%
Build-up2 sections
Build-Up — the pass map
The football question
How does Ghazl El Mahalla FC 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.
3643build-up passes attempted
68%completed
42%reach the middle third
5%go long into the final third
Pass types
1129CB · 45%
239Long Wide · 10%
54Long Central · 2%
831Wide → FB · 33%
235Central · 9%
CB1129 · 45%
Long Wide239 · 10%
Long Central54 · 2%
Wide → FB831 · 33%
Central235 · 9%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ghazl El Mahalla FC build predominantly down the left, with Shousha as the fulcrum (546 build-up passes). Only 46% of their build-up passes actually advance a third — the rest is lateral circulation, the hallmark of a side that builds forward quickly, progressing the ball more directly. Their single most-repeated pattern is C def → RHS def (126×).
Pass Explorer
Every pass of Ghazl El Mahalla FC’s last 10 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.
From channel
To channel
From third
To third
Outcome
Minutes
Channel to channel · click a cell
Third to third · click a cell
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. 1410 progressive passes across 32 matches (44.1/game).
Origin lane
Right wing
20%
Right half-space
19%
Central
18%
Left half-space
18%
Left wing
24%
Progression is left-dominant: 40% right side · 18% central · 42% left.
Who generates it
Yehia Zakaria
246 · 17%
Ahmed El Aash
191 · 14%
Ahmed Shousha
174 · 12%
Amer Mohamed
122 · 9%
Abdelrahim Amoory
107 · 8%
Top two — Yehia Zakaria & Ahmed El Aash — account for 31% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
44.1 prog passes/game
mostly left
→
PENETRATION
40% reach final third
14% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 60% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it.40% of progressive passes reached the final third and 14% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 31% of the progression ran through two players, mostly down the left 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 wingbalanced
Right half-spacebalanced
Centralbalanced
Left half-spacebalanced
Left wingbalanced
Progression — the pass map
The football question
Once Ghazl El Mahalla FC 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.
5342progression passes attempted
75%completed
21%break into the final third
14%go backward into the defensive third
Pass types
928CB · 23%
208Long Wide · 5%
45Long Central · 1%
2206Wide → FB · 55%
610Central · 15%
CB928 · 23%
Long Wide208 · 5%
Long Central45 · 1%
Wide → FB2206 · 55%
Central610 · 15%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ghazl El Mahalla FC progress predominantly down the left, with Zakaria the busiest midfield outlet (426 progression passes). Only 21% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (65%) is recycled back into midfield or (14%) played backward, the hallmark of a side that carries progression itself through midfield rather than just passing through it. Their most-repeated pattern is LW mid → LHS mid (203×) — 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)
19%
Progressive
1%
Neutral / sideways
50%
Safe / backward
31%
19% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 81% keep possession without advancing it. A control-first side — safe in build-up, reliant on a few players for the incision.
Where does Ghazl El Mahalla FC actually progress the ball with their feet, not a pass?
414 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (19% of 2178 tracked carries total), grouped into up to 4 spatial patterns by where each carry starts and ends together — not just its origin zone. Median 16m, longest 57m. Most active carrier: Zakaria (57). Filter to one player below.
First (135)Second (120)Third (86)Fourth (73)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 Ghazl El Mahalla FC 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
12CB · 6%
14Long Wide · 7%
22Long Central · 11%
70Wide → FB · 36%
78Central · 40%
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
CB12 · 6%
Long Wide14 · 7%
Long Central22 · 11%
Wide → FB70 · 36%
Central78 · 40%
Who creates — volume × threat
35Arfaoui
27Zakaria
16Saïdi
14Salah
14Walid
11Touré
10Amoory
196key passes #17 of 21
7.5box entries/game #20 of 21
30.0final-3rd entries/game #14 of 21
0.71xG/game #20 of 21
23goals #16 of 21
+0.4finishing vs xG #11 of 21
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ghazl El Mahalla FC lean left — 42% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (83 of 196), most often from Zakaria (20). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via RW att → C att (22 key passes, most often from Arfaoui). Arfaoui is the primary source overall. They generate 0.71 xG a game and finish it clinical — they beat their xG, led by Ahmed Shousha (6G), Mahmoud Salah (4G), Mohamed Armoosha (2G).
Finishing2 sections
Shot Map
280 shots for 22.6 xG (0.71/game, #20 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.
Low-output attack. 8.8 shots/game at 0.081 xG/shot. Box entries 8/game (#20). Threat created 9.7 xT/game (#15).
How Do They Score?
The question
Where do the goals actually come from — open play, dead balls, which foot?
Every goal Ghazl El Mahalla FC scored across the loaded matches, broken down by how it was created and finished.
By situation
Open play
13 · 57%
Set pieces
5 · 22%
Penalties
5 · 22%
By finish
Right foot
18 · 78%
Left foot
3 · 13%
Header
2 · 9%
Vision AI Model Insight
23 goals scored. 57% come in open play; set pieces add 22%. Open play is clearly their main route to goal.
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
How they lose it
Incomplete pass — attacking third
835
Failed forward pass
578
Failed take-on
241
Lost in the defensive third
1155
Their weakest zone is the right wing in the attacking third: 49% of 582 pass attempts there are lost (283 times). Separately, 25% 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.
How hard does Ghazl El Mahalla FC 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.
35
Pressing Index /100 · passive
Intensity25
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height29
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness57
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption24
opponent completion & progression allowed
Every defensive action & where it happens
Where they win the ball back — by lane
RW
14%
RHS
21%
C
31%
LHS
20%
LW
14%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 65%
Mid 31%
Att 4%
Read
Ranked #15 of 21 for press intensity, this is a low block. 35% of defensive actions happen in the middle & attacking thirds, at an average height of 28. Of recoveries, 47% are won high up the pitch.
Every pressing metric, ranked in the league
metric
value
rank
meaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)
—
#15/21
lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game
93
#6/21
High-press share
9%
#16/21
def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)
28.3
#15/21
avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game
21.3
#6/21
ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share
47%
#12/21
share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed
74%
#14/21
lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed
12.5%
#18/21
of 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 Ghazl El Mahalla FC? 1602 opponent progressive passes and 350 shots faced (30.7 xG against) across the season.
Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Ghazl El Mahalla FC)
Right wing
22%
Right half-space
18%
Central
19%
Left half-space
18%
Left wing
23%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the left wing (23% of the danger conceded).
How Do They Concede?
The question
Where do the goals against Ghazl El Mahalla FC actually come from — open play, dead balls, and who supplies them?
Every goal Ghazl El Mahalla FC conceded across the loaded matches — the opponent's shots in Ghazl El Mahalla FC'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
Every opponent key pass against them (232 total)
By situation
Open play
17 · 71%
Set pieces
4 · 17%
Penalties
3 · 12%
Vision AI Model Insight
24 goals conceded. 71% come in open play; set pieces account for only 17%, so dead-ball defending is not the main issue. 17% are headers — aerial defending is not where the damage comes from. Their supply line runs mainly through the right wing of the attacking third (19% of key passes faced) — that is the zone to shut off.
Context
Shape and tactics
Set pieces, strengths and weaknesses, and who they resemble.
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.
How much of the goal threat is manufactured from dead balls — a route to goal that bypasses their open-play mechanism entirely.
Open play
13 g · 12.5 xG
Set pieces
5 g · 4.5 xG
Penalties
5 g
22% of goals come from set pieces (5 of 23), worth 4.5 xG from 71 shots. Set pieces are a secondary threat; the danger is in open play.
Where do Ghazl El Mahalla FC's corners go?
109 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 (63)
Delivered into the box 94%Short 6%
Left side (46)
Delivered into the box 91%Short 9%
Where opponents attack Ghazl El Mahalla FC from set pieces
45 shots from opponent corners against Ghazl El Mahalla FC, 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 (19)
Shot 19Goals 1
Left flag (26)
Shot 26Goals 2
Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses
Strengths (top-third vs league)
none stand out
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
xG created /game — 0.71 (5th pct)
box entries /game — 7.50 (5th pct)
shots /game — 8.75 (5th pct)
press intensity (PPDA) — 13.77 (29th pct)
field tilt % — 46.94 (29th 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.
El Gouna FC
84%
Ismaily
82%
Haras El Hodoud
77%
Pharco FC
75%
Smouha
69%
Performance vs Opponent Styles
The question
Not just how Ghazl El Mahalla FC 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 Ghazl El Mahalla FC's own passing behaviour to the result.
Results
opponent type
goals for/g
goals against/g
points/g
vs high-pressing opponents (10m)
0.90
1.10
0.90
vs mid-block opponents (10m)
0.70
0.60
1.20
vs low-block opponents (12m)
0.58
0.58
1.17
Behaviour — how Ghazl El Mahalla FC actually play against each
opponent type
retention
directness (long balls)
prog. passes/g
xT/g
box entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents
64%
28%
36
7.9
5.7
vs mid-block opponents
72%
21%
40
9.2
5.8
vs low-block opponents
71%
21%
54
11.7
10.4
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 64% vs 71% against a low block (7pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 28% when pressed vs 21% against a low block — a real style switch: they go noticeably more direct when pressed rather than trying to play through it.
Scouting Summary — the team in brief
In brief. Ghazl El Mahalla FC are balanced-territory with a moderate-press.
Their attack creates 0.71 xG a game and they concede 0.96 a game.
[Event-data based — no tracking, so off-ball structure and marking scheme need video.]
For each of ten match numbers, the one match this season that departed furthest from Ghazl El Mahalla FC’s own average, the eight biggest swings first. Bar right of centre means more than usual, left means less. It shows how much the way they play moves from game to game, and which opponent moved it.
Defensive actionsat Haras El Hodoud · 0-0 · 2025-10-25128avg 93
Set Pieces by Player
Who delivers Ghazl El Mahalla FC’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 109 corners taken, most by Yehia Zakaria (34); 46 shots from corners and free kicks, 5 goals, led by Mahmoud Salah (2 goals, 0.33 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.
Player
Corners taken
Into the box
Set-piece shots
Goals
xG
Free-kick shots
Penalties
Ahmed Shousha
1
1 (100%)
13
—
0.44
5
5/6
Yehia Zakaria
34
24 (71%)
1
—
0.03
—
—
Rached Arfaoui
27
19 (70%)
1
—
0.05
—
—
Abdelrahim Amoory
1
1 (100%)
6
1
0.65
—
—
Ahmed El Aash
1
1 (100%)
5
1
0.30
—
—
Mohamed Grendo
1
1 (100%)
4
—
0.35
—
0/1
Kibou Saïdi
8
8 (100%)
2
—
0.26
—
—
Mahmoud Salah
3
3 (100%)
3
2
0.33
—
—
Mohamed Ashraf
9
8 (89%)
1
—
0.03
—
—
Bassam Walid
7
5 (71%)
1
—
0.01
—
—
Ahmed Etman
8
6 (75%)
—
—
0.00
—
—
Mory Touré
2
1 (50%)
2
—
0.03
—
—
Jimmy Emmanuel Mwanga
—
—
2
—
0.12
—
—
Ahmed Yasser
—
—
2
—
0.03
—
—
Top Performers
Ranked by Vision AI Score — the same tactical behavioural evaluation each player's own report page shows (min 300 minutes). Coloured chips are that player's strongest capability blocks.
Chance creation leaders — key passes /90 and box entries.
player
pos
min
key P /90
box entries
xT
Rached Arfaoui
M
2260
1.39
48
22.1
Yehia Zakaria
D
2706
0.90
43
44.1
Kibou Saïdi
M
1729
0.83
17
10.9
Mahmoud Salah
M
1410
0.89
19
8.7
Bassam Walid
M
661
1.91
13
13.7
Abdelrahim Amoory
D
2180
0.41
16
21.8
Ahmed El Aash
D
2880
0.16
16
44.3
Ahmed Etman
M
463
1.56
11
5.7
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.
player
pos
min
crosses (completed)
cutbacks (completed)
Yehia Zakaria
FB
2706
46 (24%)
21 (38%)
Abdelrahim Amoory
FB
2180
25 (20%)
16 (12%)
Defensive Volume Leaders
Who does the defensive work — tackles, interceptions, recoveries.
player
pos
min
def actions
tackles
intercept
recoveries
Ahmed El Aash
D
2880
402
36
25
118
Ahmed Shousha
D
2700
363
33
17
115
Amer Mohamed
G
2880
289
1
0
262
Abdelrahim Amoory
D
2180
266
43
33
94
Yehia Zakaria
D
2706
246
39
28
128
Mory Touré
M
1829
182
27
18
94
Moaz Abdel Salam
M
1959
182
36
22
87
Rached Arfaoui
M
2260
158
18
14
114
Full Squad Data
Every player with 100+ minutes (30 players).
player
pos
apps
min
goals
xG
key P
prog
def
xT
Ahmed El Aash
D
32
2880
1
0.8
5
191
402
44.3
Amer Mohamed
G
32
2880
0
0.0
0
122
289
23.8
Yehia Zakaria
D
31
2706
0
0.2
27
246
246
44.1
Ahmed Shousha
D
30
2700
6
5.7
6
174
363
42.5
Rached Arfaoui
M
29
2260
1
0.7
35
93
158
22.1
Abdelrahim Amoory
D
25
2180
2
1.7
10
107
266
21.8
Moaz Abdel Salam
M
31
1959
0
0.3
6
53
182
12.1
Mory Touré
M
26
1829
0
0.3
11
59
182
16.4
Kibou Saïdi
M
28
1729
1
1.7
16
44
118
10.9
Mahmoud Salah
M
22
1410
4
2.0
14
32
98
8.7
Mohamed Grendo
F
17
1176
1
3.2
7
17
61
4.1
Jimmy Emmanuel Mwanga
F
18
1006
2
1.5
4
4
29
1.6
Mahmoud Bolbol Nabil
M
17
934
0
0.1
8
36
83
9.0
Mahmoud Magdy
M
17
722
0
0.0
2
19
71
3.5
Sunday Williams
M
11
675
1
1.0
3
6
30
1.4
Bassam Walid
M
14
661
0
0.4
14
70
48
13.7
Mohamed Ashraf
M
13
531
0
0.7
3
19
36
3.5
Abdi Ineza
F
13
527
1
0.6
3
2
16
0.6
Ahmed Etman
M
14
463
1
0.4
8
27
47
5.7
Ahmed Yasser
M
8
331
0
0.1
2
13
37
2.6
Ahmed Gamal
D
6
300
0
0.0
0
12
41
2.6
Youssef El Azab
F
11
253
0
0.0
3
9
25
2.5
Solomon Alade
F
5
247
0
0.1
0
5
12
0.8
Abdel Rahman Youssef
D
7
219
0
0.1
0
17
38
3.4
Ahmed Said
M
4
164
0
0.0
1
6
10
0.9
Mohamed Armoosha
M
5
156
2
0.3
1
2
13
1.4
Ashraf Magdy
M
9
148
0
0.2
2
5
7
1.2
Atef Al Hakim
F
4
117
0
0.0
0
1
1
0.0
Ahmed El Sheikh
M
5
113
1
1.1
0
1
9
0.5
Mostafa Medhat Oufa
D
3
113
0
0.0
1
5
11
1.2
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.
Ahmed El Aash
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes2880
goals · xG1 · 0.8
prog passes /906.0
key passes /900.16
def actions /9012.6
pass accuracy68%
Amer Mohamed
Goalkeeper · Goalkeeper
minutes2880
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /903.8
key passes /900.00
def actions /909.0
pass accuracy62%
Yehia Zakaria
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes2706
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /908.2
key passes /900.90
def actions /908.2
pass accuracy70%
Ahmed Shousha
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes2700
goals · xG6 · 5.7
prog passes /905.8
key passes /900.20
def actions /9012.1
pass accuracy76%
Rached Arfaoui
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes2260
goals · xG1 · 0.7
prog passes /903.7
key passes /901.39
def actions /906.3
pass accuracy71%
Abdelrahim Amoory
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes2180
goals · xG2 · 1.7
prog passes /904.4
key passes /900.41
def actions /9011.0
pass accuracy67%
Moaz Abdel Salam
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes1959
goals · xG0 · 0.3
prog passes /902.4
key passes /900.28
def actions /908.4
pass accuracy71%
Mory Touré
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes1829
goals · xG0 · 0.3
prog passes /902.9
key passes /900.54
def actions /909.0
pass accuracy81%
Kibou Saïdi
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes1729
goals · xG1 · 1.7
prog passes /902.3
key passes /900.83
def actions /906.1
pass accuracy63%
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: xG created /game (5th pct)
Sign a higher-volume goalscorer or chance creator. The data flags this because the attack under-produces xG (0.71, 5th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: box entries /game (5th pct)
Sign a penetrative wide player or runner to create box entries. The data flags this because few entries into the box (7.50, 5th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: shots /game (5th pct)
Sign a shot-taking forward to raise shot volume. The data flags this because shot volume is low (8.75, 5th percentile vs the league).