Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Team reportPremier League 2026
Crystal Palace
A territorially-dominated side, aggressive high-press out of possession, with a moderate attack. Currently #17 of 20 on 7 points (2-1-5, 9:19). Tactical profile below is built from 8 matches of ball-by-ball event data, contextualised against the league.
In one read, what kind of team is Crystal Palace and how good was the season?
Read. Crystal Palace currently sit #17 of 20 on 7 points (2W-1D-5L, 0.88 pts/game), scoring 9 and conceding 19 for a goal difference of -10.
On the ball they are a territorially-dominated team (39% field tilt, #18 in the league); off it they defend with a aggressive high-press (#18 of 20 for press intensity).
Across the 8 matches of event data, they create 1.12 xG/game (#14) and concede 1.87 (#20), a net of -0.75 xG/game — the underlying performance matches the actual goal difference.
Season Context — the league table
The question
Where did Crystal Palace actually finish, and against whom?
The authoritative final table (full season), centred on Crystal Palace.
#
team
P
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
14
Tottenham
8
2
3
3
8
10
-2
9
15
Fulham
8
2
2
4
8
10
-2
8
16
Man Utd
8
1
4
3
10
13
-3
7
17
Crystal Palace
8
2
1
5
9
19
-10
7
18
Nottingham Forest
8
1
3
4
6
10
-4
6
19
Coventry
8
2
0
6
6
15
-9
6
20
Sunderland
8
1
2
5
6
14
-8
5
Match Momentum — when they create and concede danger
The question
Across a whole game, which periods does Crystal Palace actually dominate for chances — and which periods hurt them?
Net xG (created minus conceded) in each 15-minute window, summed across the whole season's matches — above the line is time they dominate for chances, below is time it hurts them. Real on-clock shot timing.
dominant (net xG for)conceding (net xG against)
Vision AI Model Insight
Crystal Palace tend to fade after a strong start — first-half net xG -2.22, second-half -3.80. Their strongest period is 0-15' (net +1.18 xG); their most dangerous period to face is 46-60' (net -2.50 xG against them).
xG Race — the season, match by match
Expected goals piling up over 8 matches: Crystal Palace 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 (-6.0 xG). Hover a point for that match.
Crystal PalaceOpponents against Crystal Palace
Tactical DNA
The football question
In five genes, what is Crystal Palace'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.
20
Build-Up
possession control from the back
15
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
17
Creation
manufacturing chances
10
Press
winning the ball high & hard
0
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Crystal Palace are defined most by their Build-Up DNA (20/100 · limited at possession control from the back), and least by their Solidity DNA (0/100). 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).
Possess
Deep buildup
39%
Possession
35%
Field tilt
30%
Disrupt
Central progression ~proxy
17%
Dribble tendency
0%
Progressive passes
43%
Finish
Final-third patience
13%
Shot quality
78%
Open-play xG
39%
Press
Forward press ~proxy
30%
High regains
26%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
43%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
35%
High line ~proxy
26%
PAdj defensive actions
57%
Crystal Palace is defined most by Finish (43% in the league) and weakest on Disrupt (20%). Percentiles vs the 23 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 Crystal Palace actually control, relative to the rest of the league?
Field tilt = share of final-third touches between the two sides across Crystal Palace'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; Crystal Palace highlighted. Hover any dot for the team.
Vision AI Model Insight
Crystal Palace post 39% field tilt, ranking #18 of 20 in the league — below the league mid-point, spending more of the game defending their own territory than dictating it, and their 0.88 points/game sits below the league-average return — territory is genuinely converting into results.
Where the time goes — how long each phase lasts
The question
When Crystal Palace has the ball, how much of that time is spent building, progressing and creating?
The share of Crystal Palace's time on the ball spent in each phase of play, in the order the phases happen. A phase is where the ball is on the pitch (own third, middle third, final third); a transition or a set piece skips the build-up and is counted on its own.
Phase
Share of the time
Build-up
32.2%
Progression
45.5%
Chance creation
19.7%
Attacking transition
2.6%
Vision AI Model Insight
Progression is where Crystal Palace spends most of its time on the ball (45% of its time on the ball).
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
Richards ↔ Canvot
81p · -0.2xT
Mitchell ↔ Canvot
74p · -0.3xT
Richards ↔ Khalaili
70p · -0.1xT
Kamada ↔ Wharton
58p · 0.7xT
Khalaili ↔ Canvot
58p · -0.2xT
Richards ↔ Wharton
52p · 0.6xT
Pino ↔ Wharton
51p · 0.9xT
Kamada ↔ Khalaili
49p · 1.5xT
Kamada ↔ Pino
45p · 1.6xT
Wharton ↔ Khalaili
45p · 1.9xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Chris Richards ↔ Jaydee Canvot (81 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Yéremy Pino ↔ Anan Khalaili (0.06 xT/pass over 37 passes) — the combination that hurts opponents most when it fires, not just the one used most.
Touch Density — where Crystal Palace had the ball
Every touch across 80 matches. Brighter means more touches.
Which Zones Do They Attack Through?
The question
Across the whole pitch, where does Crystal Palace 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
3500
ACTIONS
Carries
the ball moved with a player
784
ACTIONS
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the centre of the defensive third (13.0% 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: 35% defensive, 46% 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. Crystal Palace leaned on their left (38%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.
Crystal Palace
38%26%36%
League
39%24%37%
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. Crystal Palace made 262 this season (32.8 a match); 28% 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.
Channel
Entries
Per match
Share
League share
Left wing
63
7.9
24%
31%
Left half-space
51
6.4
19%
16%
Centre
38
4.8
15%
13%
Right half-space
36
4.5
14%
14%
Right wing
74
9.2
28%
27%
Build-up2 sections
Build-Up — the pass map
The football question
How does Crystal Palace 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.
1233build-up passes attempted
75%completed
26%reach the middle third
1%go long into the final third
Pass types
470CB · 51%
44Long Wide · 5%
13Long Central · 1%
312Wide → FB · 34%
87Central · 9%
Sequence success — build-up
90build-up sequences this season
6%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
44%turned over with nothing to show
CB470 · 51%
Long Wide44 · 5%
Long Central13 · 1%
Wide → FB312 · 34%
Central87 · 9%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Crystal Palace build predominantly down the left, with Richards as the fulcrum (162 build-up passes). Only 27% 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 C def → LHS def (73×).
Pass Explorer
Every pass of Crystal Palace’s last 8 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. 300 progressive passes across 8 matches (37.5/game).
Origin lane
Right wing
32%
Right half-space
12%
Central
19%
Left half-space
11%
Left wing
26%
Progression is right-dominant: 45% right side · 19% central · 37% left.
Who generates it
Anan Khalaili
48 · 16%
Tyrick Mitchell
36 · 12%
Chris Richards
29 · 10%
Adam Wharton
29 · 10%
Yéremy Pino
28 · 9%
Top two — Anan Khalaili & Tyrick Mitchell — account for 28% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
37.5 prog passes/game
mostly right
→
PENETRATION
26% reach final third
18% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 74% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it.26% of progressive passes reached the final third and 18% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 28% 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
Centralbalanced
Left half-spacebalanced
Left wingbalanced
Progression — the pass map
The football question
Once Crystal Palace 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.
1573progression passes attempted
84%completed
15%break into the final third
14%go backward into the defensive third
Pass types
512CB · 39%
45Long Wide · 3%
8Long Central · 1%
585Wide → FB · 44%
174Central · 13%
Sequence success — progression
142progression sequences this season
30%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
39%turned over with nothing to show
CB512 · 39%
Long Wide45 · 3%
Long Central8 · 1%
Wide → FB585 · 44%
Central174 · 13%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Crystal Palace progress predominantly down the right, with Canvot the busiest midfield outlet (170 progression passes). Only 15% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (71%) 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 C mid → LHS mid (72×) — 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)
12%
Progressive
1%
Neutral / sideways
53%
Safe / backward
34%
14% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 86% keep possession without advancing it. A control-first side — safe in build-up, reliant on a few players for the incision.
Where does Crystal Palace actually progress the ball with their feet, not a pass?
192 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (25% of 762 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 56m. Most active carrier: Canvot (40). Filter to one player below.
First (62)Second (53)Third (40)Fourth (37)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →
Chance creation4 sections
Chance creation — how the shots come
The question
Where do Crystal Palace's chances actually come from?
Every shot sorted twice. First by the kind of attack: an attacking transition (the shot came within 15 seconds of winning the ball), a settled attack (open play after the team had the ball), or a set piece. Then by how it was set up: a cross, a cut-back, a long ball, a pass into the box, or no pass at all (the player created it himself). So a cut-back from an attacking transition is counted apart from a cut-back in a settled attack.
88shots
8.9xG
0.10xG per shot
5big chances (0.3+ xG)
8goals
#17key passes / game in the league
#19box entries / game in the league
Kind of attack, then how the shot was set up
Shots
Goals
xG
xG / shot
Attacking transition27% of shots
24
2
2.77
0.12
Cross
4
0
0.55
0.14
Long ball
1
0
0.09
0.09
Pass into the box / short pass
14
1
1.68
0.12
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)
5
1
0.46
0.09
Settled attack52% of shots
46
5
4.67
0.10
Cross
7
0
0.38
0.05
Cut-back
2
0
0.25
0.13
Long ball
6
0
0.30
0.05
Pass into the box / short pass
18
3
1.28
0.07
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)
13
2
2.46
0.19
Set piece20% of shots
18
1
1.49
0.08
Corner
15
1
1.39
0.09
Free kick
3
0
0.09
0.03
Every attempt to create — and what came of it
Every pass into the box, every cut-back and every pass before a shot. Red led to a shot, gold to a goal; grey ones were tried but no shot came: solid found a team-mate, dashed lost the ball. Filter by outcome, type or player; tap an arrow for the detail.
Who sets the shots up
Player
Set-ups
xG created
Goals
Yéremy Pino
11
0.89
1
Eddie Nketiah
4
0.78
1
Anan Khalaili
6
0.65
0
Daichi Kamada
6
0.48
2
Adam Wharton
7
0.45
0
Who takes them
Player
Shots
xG
Goals
Jean-Philippe Mateta
6
1.96
0
Jørgen Strand Larsen
9
0.92
1
Anan Khalaili
11
0.84
1
Jefferson Lerma
5
0.83
1
Daichi Kamada
6
0.70
1
Vision AI Model Insight
The biggest source of Crystal Palace's chances, by xG, is settled attack (4.7 of 8.9 xG, 46 of 88 shots), mostly own creation (carry, dribble, rebound). 24 of the 88 shots (27%) came within 15 seconds of winning the ball. 18 of the 88 shots came from set pieces; 8 goals from 8.9 xG (-0.9).
Chance Creation — the pass map
The football question
How does Crystal Palace 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
5CB · 8%
6Long Wide · 10%
8Long Central · 14%
14Wide → FB · 24%
26Central · 44%
Sequence success — final-third
76final-third sequences this season
20%succeed — produce a shot
41%turned over with nothing to show
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
CB5 · 8%
Long Wide6 · 10%
Long Central8 · 14%
Wide → FB14 · 24%
Central26 · 44%
Who creates — volume × threat
12Wharton
12Pino
6Mitchell
6Kamada
4Nketiah
4Khalaili
2Osorio
59key passes #17 of 20
9.4box entries/game #19 of 20
25.9final-3rd entries/game #19 of 20
1.12xG/game #14 of 20
8goals #11 of 20
-0.9finishing vs xG #10 of 20
◆ Vision AI Insight
Crystal Palace lean left — 37% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (22 of 59), most often from Pino (7). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via RW att → C att (8 key passes, most often from Wharton). Wharton is the primary source overall. They generate 1.12 xG a game and finish it wasteful — they under-perform their xG, led by Tyrick Mitchell (2G), Yéremy Pino (1G), Anan Khalaili (1G).
Crosses & Cutbacks — squad-wide
The question
How does Crystal Palace deliver into the box from wide areas, and what comes of it?
108 crosses: 32 found a team-mate (30%), 11 led to a shot (10%). 15 cut-backs: 3 found a team-mate (20%), 2 led to a shot (13%). A cross starts wide and is aimed into the box; a cut-back starts near the byline and is squared back. Grey ones were tried but no shot came: solid found a team-mate, dashed lost the ball.
Crosses by Territory
The question
Which part of the final third does Crystal Palace actually cross from?
108 crosses this season (the same crosses as the map above), split into fifteen territories — five channels (both wings, both half-spaces and the centre) by three depths from the halfway line to the byline. 26% come from one territory, the byline left wing; 8 come from the half-spaces and 0 from the centre.
Territory
Crosses
Share
Led to a shot
byline · left wing
28
26%
2
advanced · right wing
25
23%
1
advanced · left wing
24
22%
1
byline · right wing
12
11%
4
deep · right wing
7
6%
0
deep · left wing
4
4%
0
advanced · left half-space
4
4%
1
byline · right half-space
2
2%
0
advanced · right half-space
1
1%
1
byline · left half-space
1
1%
1
Finishing3 sections
Shot Map
88 shots for 8.9 xG (1.12/game, #14 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.
Moderate attack. 11.0 shots/game at 0.101 xG/shot. Box entries 9/game (#19). Threat created 9.1 xT/game (#18).
Goal Sequences
The move behind each of Crystal Palace’s 9 goals this season, from the moment they got the ball to the finish. Pick a goal from the list, then step through it or press Play: numbered circles are passes and touches, dotted lines are carries (the ball travelling with a player), dashed grey is a pass that was lost, the star is the shot.
Each goal’s possession, rebuilt from the raw event feed — 9 goals traced.
How Do They Score?
The question
Where do the goals actually come from — open play, dead balls, which foot?
Every goal Crystal Palace scored across the loaded matches, broken down by how it was created and finished.
By situation
Open play
7 · 88%
Set pieces
1 · 12%
Penalties
0 · 0%
By finish
Right foot
3 · 38%
Left foot
4 · 50%
Header
1 · 12%
Vision AI Model Insight
8 goals scored. 88% come in open play; set pieces add 12%. 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
241
Failed forward pass
176
Failed take-on
54
Lost in the defensive third
307
Their weakest zone is the left wing in the defensive third: 40% of 188 pass attempts there are lost (76 times). Separately, 30% 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 Crystal Palace 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.
23
Pressing Index /100 · passive
Intensity10
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height5
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness28
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption52
opponent completion & progression allowed
Every defensive action & where it happens
Where they win the ball back — by lane
RW
22%
RHS
20%
C
21%
LHS
19%
LW
18%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 53%
Mid 34%
Att 13%
Read
Ranked #18 of 20 for press intensity, this is a high press. Note the tension: 53% of their raw defensive actions still occur in their own third — a possession effect, not a passive one. Dominating the ball (20% high-press share) means that when they do defend, it is often deep. Of recoveries, 50% are won high up the pitch.
Every pressing metric, ranked in the league
metric
value
rank
meaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)
—
#18/20
lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game
167
#5/20
High-press share
20%
#19/20
def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)
35.9
#19/20
avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game
19.9
#14/20
ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share
50%
#15/20
share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed
82%
#15/20
lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed
8.3%
#4/20
of opp passes, lower = better
Transition timing
This source carries per-event timestamps, so genuine transition metrics — counter-attack shots, press→shot conversions, time-to-recover — are measured; see the dedicated Transitions section below.
How long they keep it — passes and seconds until the ball is won
The question
Once the opponent has the ball, how many passes and how many seconds pass before Crystal Palace win it back with a defensive action?
Counted over the 269 opposition possessions that Crystal Palace ended with a tackle, interception, recovery or challenge. Fewer passes and seconds means the ball is won quickly (a press); more means the opponent is allowed to play before Crystal Palace step in. Crystal Palace win it after 5.9 opponent passes in the first half-hour and after 4.7 after the hour mark (sooner).
PASSES THEY GET
5.3passes
median 3 · before Crystal Palace win it
TIME THEY KEEP IT
15sec
median 6s · 33.6 wins per game
How many passes the opponent got in before the ball was won
43%
26%
15%
16%
0–2 passes3–5 passes6–9 passes10+ passes
Through the match — every 15 minutes
0–15′
6.1
18s
15–30′
5.7
16s
30–45+′
6.2
17s
45–60′
4.7
14s
60–75′
4.2
11s
75–90+′
5.0
15s
average passesaverage seconds
Attitude in each third
Every other style number here says how much Crystal Palace does. This says
how: wide or central, short or long, patient or direct. Bars are standard deviations
from the league mean for passes played from that third; a solid bar marks a dimension
where Crystal Palace are genuinely unusual, and a verdict is only written where something clears
0.85 sd — a side that is ordinary in a third is told so rather than given a label
for average play.
Build-up (own third) 1,233 passes
nothing unusual in this zone
Width of use+0.3721.76
Wide-channel share+0.480.34
Side bias-0.17-0.48
Pass length-0.1122.29
Long-ball share+0.050.23
Forward gain per pass+0.1211.98
Backward-pass share-0.470.18
Deep-pass share+0.010.29
Completion-0.580.75
Seconds between passes+0.083.38
Side used
left 28% · central 43% · right 29%
Progression (middle third) 1,573 passes
nothing unusual in this zone
Width of use-0.0425.48
Wide-channel share-0.150.39
Side bias-0.38-1.43
Pass length-0.6016.39
Long-ball share-0.530.08
Forward gain per pass-0.353.08
Backward-pass share-0.030.33
Deep-pass share-0.310.15
Completion-0.130.84
Seconds between passes-0.163.12
Side used
left 33% · central 31% · right 36%
Final third 694 passes
nothing unusual in this zone
Width of use-0.5430.28
Wide-channel share-0.480.54
Side bias+0.734.69
Pass length-0.1115.29
Long-ball share+0.130.10
Forward gain per pass+0.762.05
Backward-pass share-0.700.34
Deep-pass share+0.180.09
Completion-0.750.64
Seconds between passes-0.363.12
Side used
left 47% · central 19% · right 33%
Reference measured across roughly 3,500 match-teams
in this competition, per third, so the comparison is with Crystal Palace's own league. The means
behave as football should: width of use grows 21.0 → 25.6 → 31.6 going forward,
pass length shrinks 22.7 → 17.2 → 15.5 m, and completion is hardest in the
final third. Tempo is integer-resolution because the feed records whole seconds.
Transitions1 section
Transitions — attacking & defensive
The question
When Crystal Palace win or lose the ball, what actually happens in the seconds after?
Reconstructed from the full timestamped event stream: real possession spells (not zone-clustered), and shots that follow a regain within a fixed window. This phase of play needs ordered, per-event timestamps — which every match here carries.
Direct play share17%
#12 of 20 · reaches final third in ≤3 passes
Patient build-up share23%
#16 of 20 · spells of 6+ passes
Tempo (possession length)15.9s
#4 of 20 · shorter = faster tempo
Passes per possession4.0
#16 of 20
Counter-attack shots /game1.15
#7 of 20 · shot within 12s of a regain in own half
Press→shot /game2.50
#19 of 20 · shot within 8s of a high regain
Speed to final third after regain11.6s
#5 of 20 · lower = faster break
Sequence success — attacking transition
12attacking transition sequences this season
8%succeed — produce a shot
42%turned over with nothing to show
Sequence success — defensive transition
41defensive transition sequences this season
66%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
0%turned over with nothing to show
Vision AI Model Insight
Crystal Palace are a direct, fast-break side: 17% of possessions reach the final third in 3 passes or fewer (#12 of 20), against 23% built patiently over 6+ passes (#16 of 20). Winning the ball back leads to a shot inside 12 seconds 1.15 times a game (#7), and a high regain converts to a shot within 8 seconds 2.50 times a game (#19 of 20) — not yet a major source of chances.
Defending the box2 sections
Vulnerability Map — how opponents hurt them
The report flipped: where do opponents create their threat against Crystal Palace? 368 opponent progressive passes and 135 shots faced (14.9 xG against) across the season.
Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Crystal Palace)
Right wing
29%
Right half-space
11%
Central
17%
Left half-space
13%
Left wing
29%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the right wing (29% of the danger conceded).
How Do They Concede?
The question
Where do the goals against Crystal Palace actually come from — open play, dead balls, and who supplies them?
Every goal Crystal Palace conceded across the loaded matches — the opponent's shots in Crystal Palace'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 (89 total)
By situation
Open play
17 · 94%
Set pieces
1 · 6%
Penalties
0 · 0%
Vision AI Model Insight
18 goals conceded. 94% come in open play; set pieces account for only 6%, so dead-ball defending is not the main issue. 22% are headers — aerial defending is not where the damage comes from. Their supply line runs mainly through the centre 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
7 g · 7.4 xG
Set pieces
1 g · 1.5 xG
Penalties
0 g
12% of goals come from set pieces (1 of 8), worth 1.5 xG from 18 shots. Set pieces are a secondary threat; the danger is in open play.
Where do Crystal Palace's corners go?
29 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 (14)
Delivered into the box 100%Short 0%
Left side (15)
Delivered into the box 93%Short 7%
Where opponents attack Crystal Palace from set pieces
23 shots from opponent corners against Crystal Palace, 1 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 (11)
Shot 11Goals 0
Left flag (12)
Shot 12Goals 1
Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses
Strengths (top-third vs league)
none stand out
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
xG conceded /game — 1.87 (0th pct)
box entries /game — 9.38 (5th pct)
press intensity (PPDA) — 6.04 (10th pct)
field tilt % — 39.39 (10th pct)
threat created /game — 9.07 (10th pct)
Style Archetype & Similar Teams
Team archetype: Direct / counter high-press. Their closest stylistic matches in the league (cosine similarity on style metrics) — sides that play a similar way.
Ipswich
94%
Coventry
81%
Aston Villa
79%
Hull City
72%
Everton
65%
Performance vs Opponent Styles
The question
Not just how Crystal Palace 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 Crystal Palace's own passing behaviour to the result.
Results
opponent type
goals for/g
goals against/g
points/g
vs high-pressing opponents (2m)
1.50
1.50
1.50
vs mid-block opponents (2m)
0.50
2.00
0.50
vs low-block opponents (4m)
1.25
3.00
0.75
Behaviour — how Crystal Palace actually play against each
opponent type
retention
directness (long balls)
prog. passes/g
xT/g
box entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents
71%
17%
42
10.8
17.0
vs mid-block opponents
78%
14%
36
8.3
6.5
vs low-block opponents
79%
12%
36
8.6
7.0
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 71% vs 79% against a low block (8pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 17% when pressed vs 12% 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. Crystal Palace are territorially-dominated with a aggressive high-press.
Their attack creates 1.12 xG a game and they concede 1.87 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 Crystal Palace’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.
Threat from passingvs Newcastle · 0-2 · 2026-10-257.67avg 5.32
On-Ball Value — who moved the game
Every pass, carry, take-on, shot and ball win is worth the change it made to the chance of scoring minus the chance of conceding in the next 10 seconds. This is Crystal Palace’s last 8 matches added up: where the value came from, who produced it, and the six biggest single moves. OBV only measures what a player does with the ball: it shows who added the most on-ball value, not who was the most important player (defending off the ball, positioning and pressing are not in it).
+10.1on-ball value, 8 matches
Where the value came from
Passes3500 actions+4.77
Carries762 actions-0.19
Dribbles94 actions-0.35
Shots88 actions+3.40
Ball wins499 actions+2.52
Most on-ball value (OBV)
Actions
OBV
per 100
Adam Wharton
477
+1.46
+0.31
Anan Khalaili
472
+1.13
+0.24
Eddie Nketiah
95
+0.84
+0.89
Jørgen Strand Larsen
119
+0.78
+0.66
Walter Benítez
206
+0.66
+0.32
Chris Richards
530
+0.64
+0.12
Daichi Kamada
424
+0.61
+0.14
Axel Disasi
194
+0.60
+0.31
Biggest single moves
OBV
1 Jørgen Strand Larsen · pass
+0.389
2 Jørgen Strand Larsen · shot
+0.301
3 Eddie Nketiah · pass
+0.279
4 Daichi Kamada · shot
+0.255
5 Anan Khalaili · shot
+0.244
6 Anan Khalaili · pass
+0.226
Set Pieces by Player
Who delivers Crystal Palace’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 29 corners taken, most by Adam Wharton (15); 18 shots from corners and free kicks, 1 goals, led by Jefferson Lerma (1 goals, 0.78 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
Yéremy Pino
12
12 (100%)
3
—
0.09
3
—
Adam Wharton
15
15 (100%)
1
—
0.03
—
—
Jefferson Lerma
—
—
4
1
0.78
—
—
Chris Richards
—
—
3
—
0.16
—
—
Darío Osorio
—
—
2
—
0.06
—
—
Daichi Kamada
2
1 (50%)
1
—
0.04
—
—
Anan Khalaili
—
—
1
—
0.18
—
—
Tyrick Mitchell
—
—
1
—
0.02
—
—
Axel Disasi
—
—
1
—
0.07
—
—
Eddie Nketiah
—
—
1
—
0.05
—
—
Top Performers
Ranked by Vision AI Score — the same tactical behavioural evaluation each player's own report page shows (min 216 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
Yéremy Pino
M
554
1.95
18
7.5
Adam Wharton
M
741
1.46
11
9.1
Daichi Kamada
M
723
0.75
8
6.1
Tyrick Mitchell
M
720
0.75
5
5.2
Anan Khalaili
M
685
0.53
7
8.3
Chris Richards
D
760
0.24
6
7.2
Eddie Nketiah
M
262
1.37
4
1.3
Jørgen Strand Larsen
F
452
0.40
3
0.9
Defensive Volume Leaders
Who does the defensive work — tackles, interceptions, recoveries.
player
pos
min
def actions
tackles
intercept
recoveries
Anan Khalaili
M
685
159
27
9
39
Chris Richards
D
760
152
14
12
23
Tyrick Mitchell
M
720
118
20
6
35
Jaydee Canvot
D
665
117
17
11
26
Daichi Kamada
M
723
97
15
2
38
Adam Wharton
M
741
96
14
7
23
Yéremy Pino
M
554
77
9
3
23
Quinten Timber
M
400
72
13
3
22
Full Squad Data
Every player with 100+ minutes (18 players).
player
pos
apps
min
goals
xG
key P
prog
def
xT
Chris Richards
D
8
760
0
0.2
2
29
152
7.2
Adam Wharton
M
8
741
0
0.2
12
29
96
9.1
Daichi Kamada
M
8
723
1
0.7
6
17
97
6.1
Tyrick Mitchell
M
8
720
2
0.4
6
36
118
5.2
Anan Khalaili
M
8
685
1
0.8
4
48
159
8.3
Jaydee Canvot
D
7
665
0
0.1
1
23
117
6.5
Yéremy Pino
M
8
554
1
0.6
12
28
77
7.5
Walter Benítez
G
5
474
0
0.0
0
27
9
5.2
Jørgen Strand Larsen
F
7
452
1
0.9
2
3
63
0.9
Quinten Timber
M
5
400
0
0.4
2
6
72
2.3
Axel Disasi
D
4
309
0
0.5
1
9
67
2.1
Dean Henderson
G
3
286
0
0.0
0
6
8
1.2
Eddie Nketiah
M
7
262
0
0.6
4
6
45
1.3
Dwight McNeil
M
5
206
0
0.1
2
2
27
1.1
Takehiro Tomiyasu
D
4
202
0
0.0
1
4
43
1.7
Jefferson Lerma
D
4
173
1
0.8
0
8
54
1.9
Honest Ahanor
D
3
170
0
0.0
0
4
38
1.4
Jean-Philippe Mateta
F
3
157
0
2.0
1
1
23
0.6
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.
Chris Richards
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes760
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /903.4
key passes /900.24
def actions /9018.0
pass accuracy82%
Adam Wharton
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes741
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /903.5
key passes /901.46
def actions /9011.7
pass accuracy72%
Daichi Kamada
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes723
goals · xG1 · 0.7
prog passes /902.1
key passes /900.75
def actions /9012.1
pass accuracy84%
Tyrick Mitchell
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes720
goals · xG2 · 0.4
prog passes /904.5
key passes /900.75
def actions /9014.8
pass accuracy71%
Anan Khalaili
Deep-lying playmaker · Midfielder
minutes685
goals · xG1 · 0.8
prog passes /906.3
key passes /900.53
def actions /9020.9
pass accuracy69%
Jaydee Canvot
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes665
goals · xG0 · 0.1
prog passes /903.1
key passes /900.14
def actions /9015.8
pass accuracy88%
Yéremy Pino
Advanced creator · Attacking mid
minutes554
goals · xG1 · 0.6
prog passes /904.5
key passes /901.95
def actions /9012.5
pass accuracy71%
Walter Benítez
Goalkeeper · Goalkeeper
minutes474
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /905.1
key passes /900.00
def actions /901.7
pass accuracy58%
Jørgen Strand Larsen
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes452
goals · xG1 · 0.9
prog passes /900.6
key passes /900.40
def actions /9012.5
pass accuracy75%
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 conceded /game (0th pct)
Sign a defensive organiser / shot-suppressing centre-back. The data flags this because too much xG is conceded (1.87, 0th 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 (9.38, 5th percentile vs the league).
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 (6.04, 10th percentile vs the league).