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. Finished #6 of 24 on 62 points (12-26-26, 48:72). Tactical profile below is built from 39 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
L
62
points
#6 of 24 · 64 games
48:72
goals
-24 GD
12-26-26
record
W-D-L
0.97
points/game
#6 in the league
0.70
xG for/game
rank #22
1.01
xG against/game
rank #11
#14
press rank
of 24 · most aggressive
47%
field tilt
#14
Record, points, goals and league position come from full-season figures from the final league table (64 games). Every tactical metric — xG, PPDA, field tilt, progression, zone maps — is measured from the 39 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 finished #6 of 24 on 62 points (12W-26D-26L, 0.97 pts/game), scoring 48 and conceding 72 for a goal difference of -24.
On the ball they are a balanced-territory team (47% field tilt, #14 in the league); off it they defend with a moderate-press (#14 of 24 for press intensity).
Across the 39 matches of event data, they create 0.70 xG/game (#22) and concede 1.01 (#11), a net of -0.31 xG/game — the underlying performance matches 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
3
Al Ahly FC
35
22
10
3
63
28
+35
76
4
ZED FC
42
17
15
10
51
38
+13
66
5
Cleopatra FC
35
18
8
9
49
30
+19
62
6
Ghazl El Mahalla FC
64
12
26
26
48
72
-24
62
7
National Bank of Egypt
42
15
16
11
47
39
+8
61
8
Wadi Degla
39
14
17
8
48
36
+12
59
9
Petrojet
42
13
18
11
54
53
+1
57
xG Race — the season, match by match
Expected goals piling up over 38 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 (-12.3 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.
40
Build-Up
possession control from the back
52
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
11
Creation
manufacturing chances
42
Press
winning the ball high & hard
54
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Ghazl El Mahalla FC are defined most by their Solidity DNA (54/100 · average at resisting the opponent's threat), and least by their Creation DNA (11/100). Percentiles vs the 24 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
54%
Possession
46%
Field tilt
12%
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
33%
High regains
12%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
50%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
38%
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 #14 of 24 in the league — below the league mid-point, spending more of the game defending their own territory than dictating it, and their 0.92 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
922p · 39.0xT
Aash ↔ Zakaria
694p · 26.9xT
Arfaoui ↔ Mohamed
395p · 0.6xT
Salam ↔ Saïdi
356p · 2.5xT
Amoory ↔ Touré
330p · 10.6xT
Zakaria ↔ Amoory
297p · 13.2xT
Zakaria ↔ Touré
219p · 7.2xT
Mohamed ↔ Shousha
203p · 9.8xT
Shousha ↔ Shika
165p · 6.9xT
Touré ↔ Salam
127p · 0.7xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Ahmed Shousha ↔ Ahmed El Aash (922 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Abdel Rahman Shika ↔ Ahmed El Aash (0.05 xT/pass over 15 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 384 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
13751
ACTIONS
Carries
the ball moved with a player
3868
ACTIONS
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the left half-space of the middle third (11.2% 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: 32% defensive, 48% 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 (40%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.
Ghazl El Mahalla FC
40%22%37%
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 1400 this season (36.8 a match); 27% 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
382
10.1
27%
27%
Left half-space
260
6.8
19%
17%
Centre
193
5.1
14%
15%
Right half-space
251
6.6
18%
16%
Right wing
314
8.3
22%
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.
4553build-up passes attempted
70%completed
40%reach the middle third
5%go long into the final third
Pass types
1440CB · 45%
293Long Wide · 9%
60Long Central · 2%
1078Wide → FB · 34%
312Central · 10%
CB1440 · 45%
Long Wide293 · 9%
Long Central60 · 2%
Wide → FB1078 · 34%
Central312 · 10%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ghazl El Mahalla FC build predominantly down the left, with Shousha as the fulcrum (686 build-up passes). Only 45% 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 → LHS def (165×).
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. 1761 progressive passes across 39 matches (45.2/game).
Origin lane
Right wing
21%
Right half-space
20%
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
294 · 17%
Ahmed El Aash
228 · 13%
Ahmed Shousha
218 · 12%
Amer Mohamed
143 · 8%
Abdelrahim Amoory
107 · 6%
Top two — Yehia Zakaria & Ahmed El Aash — account for 30% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
45.2 prog passes/game
mostly left
→
PENETRATION
40% reach final third
15% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 60% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it.40% of progressive passes reached the final third and 15% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 30% 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.
6621progression passes attempted
76%completed
21%break into the final third
14%go backward into the defensive third
Pass types
1139CB · 23%
290Long Wide · 6%
57Long Central · 1%
2793Wide → FB · 55%
759Central · 15%
CB1139 · 23%
Long Wide290 · 6%
Long Central57 · 1%
Wide → FB2793 · 55%
Central759 · 15%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ghazl El Mahalla FC progress predominantly down the left, with Touré the busiest midfield outlet (590 progression passes). Only 21% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (64%) 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 (261×) — 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
49%
Safe / backward
31%
20% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 80% 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?
597 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (19% of 3092 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 57m. Most active carrier: Zakaria (72). Filter to one player below.
First (188)Second (158)Third (135)Fourth (116)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
14CB · 6%
22Long Wide · 9%
31Long Central · 12%
84Wide → FB · 33%
102Central · 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
CB14 · 6%
Long Wide22 · 9%
Long Central31 · 12%
Wide → FB84 · 33%
Central102 · 40%
Who creates — volume × threat
40Arfaoui
32Zakaria
18Saïdi
16Touré
14Walid
14Salah
11Shika
253key passes #16 of 24
8.1box entries/game #21 of 24
31.2final-3rd entries/game #14 of 24
0.70xG/game #22 of 24
26goals #18 of 24
-1.4finishing vs xG #16 of 24
◆ Vision AI Insight
Ghazl El Mahalla FC lean left — 41% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (104 of 253), most often from Zakaria (24). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via RW att → C att (32 key passes, most often from Etman). Arfaoui is the primary source overall. They generate 0.70 xG a game and finish it wasteful — they under-perform their xG, led by Ahmed Shousha (6G), Mahmoud Salah (4G), Mohamed Armoosha (2G).
Finishing2 sections
Shot Map
357 shots for 27.4 xG (0.70/game, #22 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.
Low-output attack. 9.2 shots/game at 0.077 xG/shot. Box entries 8/game (#21). Threat created 10.1 xT/game (#14).
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
15 · 58%
Set pieces
6 · 23%
Penalties
5 · 19%
By finish
Right foot
19 · 73%
Left foot
3 · 12%
Header
4 · 15%
Vision AI Model Insight
26 goals scored. 58% come in open play, but 23% 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
How they lose it
Incomplete pass — attacking third
1023
Failed forward pass
704
Failed take-on
288
Lost in the defensive third
1370
Their weakest zone is the right wing in the attacking third: 47% of 740 pass attempts there are lost (348 times). Separately, 26% 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.
41
Pressing Index /100 · average
Intensity28
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height42
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness67
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption21
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 64%
Mid 31%
Att 5%
Read
Ranked #14 of 24 for press intensity, this is a low block. 36% 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)
—
#14/24
lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game
92
#8/24
High-press share
9%
#19/24
def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)
28.6
#14/24
avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game
21.5
#6/24
ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share
47%
#10/24
share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed
76%
#18/24
lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed
12.2%
#20/24
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? 1957 opponent progressive passes and 433 shots faced (39.4 xG against) across the season.
Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Ghazl El Mahalla FC)
Right wing
23%
Right half-space
18%
Central
19%
Left half-space
17%
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 (300 total)
By situation
Open play
26 · 74%
Set pieces
5 · 14%
Penalties
4 · 11%
Vision AI Model Insight
35 goals conceded. 74% come in open play; set pieces account for only 14%, so dead-ball defending is not the main issue. 20% are headers — aerial defending is not where the damage comes from. Their supply line runs mainly through the right wing 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.
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
15 g · 16.3 xG
Set pieces
6 g · 5.6 xG
Penalties
5 g
23% of goals come from set pieces (6 of 26), worth 5.6 xG from 89 shots. Set pieces are a secondary threat; the danger is in open play.
Where do Ghazl El Mahalla FC's corners go?
136 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 (79)
Delivered into the box 95%Short 5%
Left side (57)
Delivered into the box 91%Short 9%
Where opponents attack Ghazl El Mahalla FC from set pieces
54 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 (25)
Shot 25Goals 1
Left flag (29)
Shot 29Goals 2
Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses
Strengths (top-third vs league)
none stand out
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
xG created /game — 0.70 (8th pct)
box entries /game — 8.13 (12th pct)
shots /game — 9.15 (12th 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.
Asyut Petroleum
82%
Ismaily
71%
El Gouna FC
69%
Pharco FC
64%
Haras El Hodoud
64%
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 (13m)
0.75
1.00
0.77
vs mid-block opponents (13m)
0.54
0.54
1.08
vs low-block opponents (13m)
0.62
1.15
0.92
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
66%
26%
38
8.3
6.5
vs mid-block opponents
72%
21%
43
9.8
6.7
vs low-block opponents
73%
20%
54
12.1
11.2
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 66% vs 73% against a low block (7pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 26% when pressed vs 20% 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 0.70 xG a game and they concede 1.01 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 92
Set Pieces by Player
Who delivers Ghazl El Mahalla FC’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 136 corners taken, most by Yehia Zakaria (36); 57 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%)
18
—
0.65
5
5/6
Yehia Zakaria
36
26 (72%)
2
—
0.05
—
—
Rached Arfaoui
29
20 (69%)
1
—
0.05
—
—
Abdelrahim Amoory
1
1 (100%)
6
1
0.65
—
—
Ahmed El Aash
1
1 (100%)
6
1
0.31
—
—
Mohamed Ashraf
16
14 (88%)
1
—
0.03
—
—
Kibou Saïdi
8
8 (100%)
3
—
0.27
—
—
Mohamed Grendo
1
1 (100%)
4
—
0.35
—
0/1
Mahmoud Salah
3
3 (100%)
3
2
0.33
—
—
Ahmed Etman
11
9 (82%)
—
—
0.00
—
—
Abdel Rahman Shika
10
9 (90%)
—
—
0.00
—
—
Bassam Walid
7
5 (71%)
1
—
0.01
—
—
Mory Touré
2
1 (50%)
2
—
0.03
—
—
Jimmy Emmanuel Mwanga
—
—
2
—
0.12
—
—
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
2404
1.50
53
23.3
Yehia Zakaria
D
3276
0.88
48
52.2
Kibou Saïdi
M
2023
0.80
21
12.8
Mahmoud Salah
M
1410
0.89
19
8.7
Ahmed El Aash
D
3510
0.18
21
54.9
Mory Touré
M
2453
0.59
12
25.9
Bassam Walid
M
672
1.88
13
14.0
Abdelrahim Amoory
D
2180
0.41
16
21.8
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
3276
50 (28%)
27 (33%)
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
3510
478
47
32
146
Ahmed Shousha
D
3225
414
36
23
132
Amer Mohamed
G
3510
340
1
0
308
Yehia Zakaria
D
3276
297
50
35
151
Abdelrahim Amoory
D
2180
266
43
33
94
Mory Touré
M
2453
259
49
22
135
Moaz Abdel Salam
M
2214
200
37
25
96
Rached Arfaoui
M
2404
171
22
15
121
Full Squad Data
Every player with 100+ minutes (36 players).
player
pos
apps
min
goals
xG
key P
prog
def
xT
Amer Mohamed
G
39
3510
0
0.0
0
143
340
28.1
Ahmed El Aash
D
39
3510
1
0.9
7
228
478
54.9
Yehia Zakaria
D
38
3276
0
0.2
32
294
297
52.2
Ahmed Shousha
D
37
3225
6
5.9
6
218
414
53.6
Mory Touré
M
33
2453
0
0.5
16
96
259
25.9
Rached Arfaoui
M
34
2404
1
0.9
40
100
171
23.3
Moaz Abdel Salam
M
38
2214
0
0.4
6
55
200
13.4
Abdelrahim Amoory
D
25
2180
2
1.7
10
107
266
21.8
Kibou Saïdi
M
33
2023
1
2.1
18
52
139
12.8
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
Mohamed Ashraf
M
19
876
0
1.0
7
31
48
6.4
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
15
672
0
0.4
14
71
48
14.0
Fares Nechat Djabri
D
7
630
0
0.1
9
42
78
9.0
Ahmed Etman
M
18
610
1
0.7
10
36
63
7.5
Abdel Rahman Shika
M
7
580
0
0.5
11
39
65
9.8
Abdi Ineza
F
13
527
1
0.6
3
2
16
0.6
Abdo Yehia
F
7
496
3
2.5
7
17
22
4.5
Ahmed Yasser
M
11
461
0
0.3
2
15
57
3.3
Ahmed Gamal
D
8
339
0
0.0
0
13
46
3.0
Hazem Mohamed
F
4
295
0
0.8
1
5
15
0.8
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
Mohamed Armoosha
M
7
234
2
0.4
2
3
15
1.9
Abdel Rahman Youssef
D
7
219
0
0.1
0
17
38
3.4
Amr Gomaa
F
6
178
1
0.4
1
3
8
0.8
Ahmed Said
M
4
164
0
0.0
1
6
10
0.9
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
Mohamed Salem Ekbad
F
3
113
0
0.1
1
4
5
0.8
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
Abdel Rahman Emad
M
3
106
1
0.7
1
3
12
1.0
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.
Amer Mohamed
Goalkeeper · Goalkeeper
minutes3510
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /903.7
key passes /900.00
def actions /908.7
pass accuracy63%
Ahmed El Aash
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes3510
goals · xG1 · 0.9
prog passes /905.8
key passes /900.18
def actions /9012.3
pass accuracy70%
Yehia Zakaria
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes3276
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /908.1
key passes /900.88
def actions /908.2
pass accuracy71%
Ahmed Shousha
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes3225
goals · xG6 · 5.9
prog passes /906.1
key passes /900.17
def actions /9011.6
pass accuracy77%
Mory Touré
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes2453
goals · xG0 · 0.5
prog passes /903.5
key passes /900.59
def actions /909.5
pass accuracy83%
Rached Arfaoui
Advanced creator · Attacking mid
minutes2404
goals · xG1 · 0.9
prog passes /903.7
key passes /901.50
def actions /906.4
pass accuracy72%
Moaz Abdel Salam
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes2214
goals · xG0 · 0.4
prog passes /902.2
key passes /900.24
def actions /908.1
pass accuracy73%
Abdelrahim Amoory
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes2180
goals · xG2 · 1.7
prog passes /904.4
key passes /900.41
def actions /9011.0
pass accuracy67%
Kibou Saïdi
Box-to-box midfielder · Midfielder
minutes2023
goals · xG1 · 2.1
prog passes /902.3
key passes /900.80
def actions /906.2
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 (8th pct)
Sign a higher-volume goalscorer or chance creator. The data flags this because the attack under-produces xG (0.70, 8th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: box entries /game (12th pct)
Sign a penetrative wide player or runner to create box entries. The data flags this because few entries into the box (8.13, 12th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: shots /game (12th pct)
Sign a shot-taking forward to raise shot volume. The data flags this because shot volume is low (9.15, 12th percentile vs the league).