Vision AI ← BACK TO SEARCHSeason2025/262026 · this seasonAll seasons
Building the full report
Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Team reportSerie A 2026

Udinese

A balanced-territory side, aggressive high-press out of possession, with a moderate attack. Currently #17 of 20 on 4 points (1-1-6, 9:18). Tactical profile below is built from 8 matches of ball-by-ball event data, contextualised against the league.

balanced-territoryaggressive high-pressmoderate attack
W
L
D
W
W
L
L
D
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
4
points
#17 of 20 · 8 games
9:18
goals
-9 GD
1-1-6
record
W-D-L
0.50
points/game
#17 in the league
1.02
xG for/game
rank #18
1.90
xG against/game
rank #18
#16
press rank
of 20 · most aggressive
53%
field tilt
#7
Udinese
League average
Expected goals for / game
1.021.43
Expected goals against / game
1.901.43
Field tilt
53%50%
Pass retention
83%83%
Overview

The team

Who they are and how the season went.

Who Are They? — Identity

The question
In one read, what kind of team is Udinese and how good was the season?
Read. Udinese currently sit #17 of 20 on 4 points (1W-1D-6L, 0.50 pts/game), scoring 9 and conceding 18 for a goal difference of -9. On the ball they are a balanced-territory team (53% field tilt, #7 in the league); off it they defend with a aggressive high-press (#16 of 20 for press intensity). Across the 8 matches of event data, they create 1.02 xG/game (#18) and concede 1.90 (#18), a net of -0.88 xG/game — the underlying performance matches the actual goal difference.

Season Context — the league table

The question
Where did Udinese actually finish, and against whom?

The authoritative final table (full season), centred on Udinese.

#teamPWDLGFGAGDPts
14Sassuolo92251422-88
15Monza82151518-37
16Genoa8215613-77
17Udinese8116918-94
18Fiorentina8116919-104
19Parma Calcio 19138116515-104
20Venezia8107617-113

Match Momentum — when they create and concede danger

The question
Across a whole game, which periods does Udinese 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)
even0-15'16-30'31-45'46-60'61-75'76-90+'+0.14-2.81
Vision AI Model Insight
Udinese tend to come alive after the break — first-half net xG -3.72, second-half -3.31. Their strongest period is 46-60' (net +0.14 xG); their most dangerous period to face is 31-45' (net -2.81 xG against them).

xG Race — the season, match by match

Expected goals piling up over 8 matches: Udinese 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 (-7.0 xG). Hover a point for that match.

0511168.215.2Como (H) 1-1 · xG 1.54 to 1.73Monza (A) 3-2 · xG 1.01 to 1.51Lazio (H) 1-2 · xG 0.94 to 1.82Inter (A) 3-5 · xG 0.66 to 2.43Cagliari (H) 0-1 · xG 1.91 to 0.43Torino (A) 1-2 · xG 0.81 to 1.52Lecce (H) 0-3 · xG 0.60 to 2.93AC Milan (H) 0-2 · xG 0.68 to 2.81M1M2M3M4M5M6M7M8
UdineseOpponents against Udinese

Tactical DNA

The football question
In five genes, what is Udinese'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.

50
Build-Up
possession control from the back
48
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
32
Creation
manufacturing chances
42
Press
winning the ball high & hard
10
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Udinese are defined most by their Build-Up DNA (50/100 · average at possession control from the back), and least by their Solidity DNA (10/100). 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).

Possess42Disrupt58Finish26Press41Defend42
Possess
Deep buildup
48%
Possession
39%
Field tilt
39%
Disrupt
Central progression ~proxy
70%
Dribble tendency
87%
Progressive passes
17%
Finish
Final-third patience
39%
Shot quality
9%
Open-play xG
30%
Press
Forward press ~proxy
39%
High regains
35%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
48%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
43%
High line ~proxy
39%
PAdj defensive actions
43%
Udinese is defined most by Disrupt (58% in the league) and weakest on Finish (26%). 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.

Keeping the ball6 sections

Field Tilt — Territorial Control

The question
How much of the pitch does Udinese actually control, relative to the rest of the league?

Field tilt = share of final-third touches between the two sides across Udinese'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; Udinese highlighted. Hover any dot for the team.

Lazio: 56% tilt, 2.78 pts/gInter: 69% tilt, 2.75 pts/gRoma: 64% tilt, 2.33 pts/gAC Milan: 52% tilt, 2.25 pts/gComo: 62% tilt, 2.22 pts/gJuventus: 65% tilt, 1.75 pts/gFrosinone: 50% tilt, 1.75 pts/gTorino: 40% tilt, 1.44 pts/gCagliari: 33% tilt, 1.44 pts/gNapoli: 51% tilt, 1.38 pts/gAtalanta: 47% tilt, 1.25 pts/gLecce: 44% tilt, 1.12 pts/gBologna: 45% tilt, 1.00 pts/gSassuolo: 47% tilt, 0.89 pts/gGenoa: 39% tilt, 0.88 pts/gMonza: 48% tilt, 0.88 pts/gParma Calcio 1913: 34% tilt, 0.50 pts/gFiorentina: 50% tilt, 0.50 pts/gUdinese: 53% tilt, 0.50 pts/gVenezia: 54% tilt, 0.38 pts/gUdinese33%45%57%69%0.41.22.02.8FIELD TILT %POINTS / GAME
Vision AI Model Insight
Udinese post 53% field tilt, ranking #7 of 20 in the league — comfortably above the league mid-point for territorial control, and their 0.50 points/game sits below the league-average return — a real disconnect: their territorial control isn't showing up on the scoreboard the way it should.

Where the time goes — how long each phase lasts

The question
When Udinese has the ball, how much of that time is spent building, progressing and creating?

The share of Udinese'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.

Build-up: 24.0% of the time on the ball24%Progression: 47.5% of the time on the ball47%Chance creation: 25.3% of the time on the ball25%Attacking transition: 3.2% of the time on the ball47%PROGRESSION
PhaseShare of the time
Build-up24.0%
Progression47.5%
Chance creation25.3%
Attacking transition3.2%
Vision AI Model Insight
Progression is where Udinese spends most of its time on the ball (47% 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.

Hassane Kamara ↔ Enzo Ebosse: 114 passes, -0.6 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ James Abankwah: 104 passes, -0.5 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Jesper Karlström: 90 passes, 1.2 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Maduka Okoye: 82 passes, -0.2 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Oumar Solet: 66 passes, -0.1 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Jesper Karlström: 61 passes, -0.1 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 56 passes, 0.3 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ James Abankwah: 53 passes, 0.2 combined xTOumar Solet ↔ Maduka Okoye: 45 passes, -0.3 combined xTMaduka Okoye ↔ James Abankwah: 45 passes, -0.3 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ Oumar Solet: 43 passes, 0.0 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Oumar Solet: 37 passes, 0.0 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 36 passes, 0.2 combined xTJurgen Ekkelenkamp ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 36 passes, 0.2 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Lennon Miller: 33 passes, 0.4 combined xTHassane Kamara ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 33 passes, 1.2 combined xTHassane Kamara ↔ Oumar Solet: 32 passes, -0.1 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 30 passes, 0.3 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 28 passes, 0.4 combined xTHassane Kamara ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 27 passes, 0.4 combined xTOumar Solet ↔ James Abankwah: 27 passes, 0.0 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 26 passes, -0.0 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Jakub Piotrowski: 25 passes, 0.8 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Keinan Davis: 24 passes, 1.0 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda — isolate this player's connectionsVojvodaHassane Kamara — isolate this player's connectionsKamaraJesper Karlström — isolate this player's connectionsKarlströmJurgen Ekkelenkamp — isolate this player's connectionsEkkelenkamMaduka Okoye — isolate this player's connectionsOkoyeKeinan Davis — isolate this player's connectionsDavisEnzo Ebosse — isolate this player's connectionsEbosseJames Abankwah — isolate this player's connectionsAbankwahLennon Miller — isolate this player's connectionsMillerUnai Gómez — isolate this player's connectionsGómezOumar Solet — isolate this player's connectionsSoletArthur Atta — isolate this player's connectionsAttaGiorgi Chakvetadze — isolate this player's connectionsChakvetadzJakub Piotrowski — isolate this player's connectionsPiotrowskiOier Zarraga — isolate this player's connectionsZarragaNicolò Bertola — isolate this player's connectionsBertola
width = passes between the paircolour = xT per pass: low → high

Top 10 combinations

Kamara ↔ Ebosse
114p · -0.6xT
Vojvoda ↔ Abankwah
104p · -0.5xT
Vojvoda ↔ Karlström
90p · 1.2xT
Ebosse ↔ Okoye
82p · -0.2xT
Ebosse ↔ Solet
66p · -0.1xT
Ebosse ↔ Karlström
61p · -0.1xT
Vojvoda ↔ Ekkelenkamp
56p · 0.3xT
Karlström ↔ Abankwah
53p · 0.2xT
Solet ↔ Okoye
45p · -0.3xT
Okoye ↔ Abankwah
45p · -0.3xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Hassane Kamara ↔ Enzo Ebosse (114 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Mërgim Vojvoda ↔ Keinan Davis (0.04 xT/pass over 24 passes) — the combination that hurts opponents most when it fires, not just the one used most.

Touch Density — where Udinese had the ball

Every touch across 83 matches. Brighter means more touches.

Which Zones Do They Attack Through?

The question
Across the whole pitch, where does Udinese 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
4014
ACTIONS
4%5%10%4%3%9%11%12%10%9%8%4%2%4%6%PASSES
Carries
the ball moved with a player
1119
ACTIONS
4%4%10%5%3%10%11%12%10%10%8%3%2%3%7%CARRIES
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the centre of the middle third (11.8% of all actions). 61% of actions run through the inside lanes (centre + both half-spaces) versus 39% down the two wings — an inside-dominant, half-space build. By third: 26% defensive, 51% middle, 23% 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. Udinese leaned on their right (40%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.

36%Left side23%Middle40%Right sideATTACKING →
Udinese
36%23%40%
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. Udinese made 356 this season (44.5 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.

Left wing: 100 entries (28%)10028%LEFT WINGLeft half-space: 63 entries (18%)6318%LEFT HALF-SPACECentre: 39 entries (11%)3911%CENTRERight half-space: 53 entries (15%)5315%RIGHT HALF-SPACERight wing: 101 entries (28%)10128%RIGHT WINGATTACKING ↑
ChannelEntriesPer matchShareLeague share
Left wing10012.528%29%
Left half-space637.918%15%
Centre394.911%13%
Right half-space536.615%16%
Right wing10112.628%28%
Build-up2 sections

Build-Up — the pass map

The football question
How does Udinese 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.

1057build-up passes attempted
83%completed
27%reach the middle third
2%go long into the final third

Pass types

419CB · 48%
50Long Wide · 6%
23Long Central · 3%
284Wide → FB · 32%
98Central · 11%

Sequence success — build-up

70build-up sequences this season
16%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
46%turned over with nothing to show
CB419 · 48%
right: 227 passes, most from Abankwah227left: 192 passes, most from Ebosse192
Long Wide50 · 6%
right: 34 passes, most from Okoye34left: 16 passes, most from Okoye16
Long Central23 · 3%
right: 17 passes, most from Okoye17left: 6 passes, most from Okoye6
Wide → FB284 · 32%
right: 148 passes, most from Okoye148left: 136 passes, most from Okoye136
Central98 · 11%
right: 52 passes, most from Okoye52left: 46 passes, most from Okoye46
◆ Vision AI Insight
Udinese build predominantly down the right, with Okoye as the fulcrum (215 build-up passes). Only 28% 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 (64×).

Pass Explorer

Every pass of Udinese’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.

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. 350 progressive passes across 8 matches (43.8/game).

Origin lane

Right wing
32%
Right half-space
15%
Central
16%
Left half-space
9%
Left wing
28%
Progression is right-dominant: 47% right side · 16% central · 37% left.

Who generates it

Mërgim Vojvoda
82 · 23%
Maduka Okoye
46 · 13%
Hassane Kamara
34 · 10%
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp
25 · 7%
Enzo Ebosse
24 · 7%
Top two — Mërgim Vojvoda & Maduka Okoye — account for 37% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
43.8 prog passes/game
mostly right
→
PENETRATION
26% reach final third
20% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 74% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it. 26% of progressive passes reached the final third and 20% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 37% of the progression ran through two players, mostly down the right side.

Which lanes actually create the threat

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

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

Progression — the pass map

The football question
Once Udinese 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.

2008progression passes attempted
86%completed
14%break into the final third
10%go backward into the defensive third

Pass types

680CB · 39%
54Long Wide · 3%
9Long Central · 1%
768Wide → FB · 44%
222Central · 13%

Sequence success — progression

182progression sequences this season
32%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
40%turned over with nothing to show
CB680 · 39%
left: 390 passes, most from Ebosse390right: 290 passes, most from Abankwah290
Long Wide54 · 3%
left: 28 passes, most from Kamara28right: 26 passes, most from Vojvoda26
Long Central9 · 1%
left: 5 passes, most from Ekkelenkamp5right: 4 passes, most from Ekkelenkamp4
Wide → FB768 · 44%
right: 408 passes, most from Vojvoda408left: 360 passes, most from Kamara360
Central222 · 13%
left: 118 passes, most from Karlström118right: 104 passes, most from Vojvoda104
◆ Vision AI Insight
Udinese progress predominantly down the right, with Karlström the busiest midfield outlet (228 progression passes). Only 14% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (76%) is recycled back into midfield or (10%) played backward, the hallmark of a side that carries progression itself through midfield rather than just passing through it. Their most-repeated pattern is LHS mid → LW mid (110×) — 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
50%
Safe / backward
37%
13% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 87% keep possession without advancing it. A control-first side — safe in build-up, reliant on a few players for the incision.

Carries Map — progressive ball-carries, squad-wide

The question
Where does Udinese actually progress the ball with their feet, not a pass?

254 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (23% of 1098 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 61m. Most active carrier: Kamara (29). Filter to one player below.

First (83)Second (73)Third (50)Fourth (48)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 Udinese'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.

112shots
8.2xG
0.07xG per shot
1big chances (0.3+ xG)
9goals
#13key passes / game in the league
#11box entries / game in the league
Attacking transition: 24 shots (21%)21%24Settled attack: 74 shots (66%)66%74Set piece: 14 shots (12%)12%14112SHOTS
Kind of attack, then how the shot was set upShotsGoalsxGxG / shot
Attacking transition 21% of shots2432.110.09
Cross210.160.08
Long ball100.070.07
Pass into the box / short pass1621.450.09
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)500.430.09
Settled attack 66% of shots7435.040.07
Cross1201.160.10
Cut-back300.390.13
Long ball300.210.07
Pass into the box / short pass4122.490.06
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)1510.800.05
Set piece 12% of shots1431.010.07
Corner1331.000.08
Free kick100.010.01

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

PlayerSet-upsxG createdGoals
Mërgim Vojvoda140.860
Keinan Davis60.833
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp70.731
Nicolò Zaniolo60.580
Enzo Ebosse70.441

Who takes them

PlayerShotsxGGoals
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp211.353
Keinan Davis111.040
Idrissa Gueye100.921
Hassane Kamara120.772
Vakoun Bayo40.590
Vision AI Model Insight
The biggest source of Udinese's chances, by xG, is settled attack (5.0 of 8.2 xG, 74 of 112 shots), mostly pass into the box / short pass. 24 of the 112 shots (21%) came within 15 seconds of winning the ball. 14 of the 112 shots came from set pieces; 9 goals from 8.2 xG (+0.8).

Chance Creation — the pass map

The football question
How does Udinese 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 · 18%
3Long Wide · 4%
4Long Central · 5%
28Wide → FB · 35%
30Central · 38%

Sequence success — final-third

116final-third sequences this season
28%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
CB14 · 18%
left: 10 passes, most from Solet10right: 4 passes, most from Ebosse4
Long Wide3 · 4%
right: 2 passes, most from Piotrowski2
Long Central4 · 5%
left: 2 passes, most from Miller2right: 2 passes, most from Zarraga2
Wide → FB28 · 35%
left: 16 passes, most from Karlström16right: 12 passes, most from Vojvoda12
Central30 · 38%
left: 15 passes, most from Chakvetadze15right: 15 passes, most from Vojvoda15

Who creates — volume × threat

15Vojvoda
7Ekkelenkamp
6Ebosse
5Karlström
5Davis
5Miller
5Chakvetadze
79key passes #13 of 20
12.6box entries/game #11 of 20
32.5final-3rd entries/game #7 of 20
1.02xG/game #18 of 20
9goals #13 of 20
+0.8finishing vs xG #10 of 20
◆ Vision AI Insight
Udinese lean left — 43% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (34 of 79), most often from Ebosse (6). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via LHS att → C att (13 key passes, most often from Ebosse). Vojvoda is the primary source overall. They generate 1.02 xG a game and finish it clinical — they beat their xG, led by Jurgen Ekkelenkamp (3G), Hassane Kamara (2G), Jesper Karlström (1G).

Crosses & Cutbacks — squad-wide

The question
How does Udinese deliver into the box from wide areas, and what comes of it?

133 crosses: 37 found a team-mate (28%), 11 led to a shot (8%). 19 cut-backs: 9 found a team-mate (47%), 4 led to a shot (21%). 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 Udinese actually cross from?

133 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. 24% come from one territory, the advanced right wing; 10 come from the half-spaces and 0 from the centre.

deep right wing: 7 crosses (5%)5%7deep right half-space: 0 crosses (0%)deep centre: 0 crosses (0%)deep left half-space: 1 crosses (1%)1%1deep left wing: 11 crosses (8%)8%11advanced right wing: 32 crosses (24%)24%32advanced right half-space: 3 crosses (2%)2%3advanced centre: 0 crosses (0%)advanced left half-space: 3 crosses (2%)2%3advanced left wing: 15 crosses (11%)11%15byline right wing: 31 crosses (23%)23%31byline right half-space: 0 crosses (0%)byline centre: 0 crosses (0%)byline left half-space: 3 crosses (2%)2%3byline left wing: 27 crosses (20%)20%27
TerritoryCrossesShareLed to a shot
advanced · right wing3224%1
byline · right wing3123%3
byline · left wing2720%3
advanced · left wing1511%1
deep · left wing118%0
deep · right wing75%0
advanced · right half-space32%1
advanced · left half-space32%1
byline · left half-space32%1
deep · left half-space11%0
Finishing3 sections

Shot Map

112 shots for 8.2 xG (1.02/game, #18 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.

Moderate attack. 14.0 shots/game at 0.073 xG/shot. Box entries 13/game (#11). Threat created 10.6 xT/game (#10).

Goal Sequences

The move behind each of Udinese’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 Udinese scored across the loaded matches, broken down by how it was created and finished.

By situation

Open play
6 · 67%
Set pieces
3 · 33%
Penalties
0 · 0%

By finish

Right foot
4 · 44%
Left foot
4 · 44%
Header
1 · 11%
Vision AI Model Insight
9 goals scored. 67% come in open play, but 33% from set pieces — a genuine dead-ball weapon that bypasses the open-play build-up.
When they lose it1 section

Ball-Loss Map — where attacks die

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

Loss rate by zone

34 of 152 pass attempts lost here (22%).22%34/152Vojvoda29 of 194 pass attempts lost here (15%).15%29/194Okoye60 of 419 pass attempts lost here (14%).14%60/419Okoye23 of 160 pass attempts lost here (14%).14%23/160Okoye37 of 132 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%37/132Ebosse76 of 365 pass attempts lost here (21%).21%76/365Vojvoda60 of 432 pass attempts lost here (14%).14%60/432Karlström60 of 467 pass attempts lost here (13%).13%60/467Karlström35 of 394 pass attempts lost here (9%).9%35/394Ebosse44 of 350 pass attempts lost here (13%).13%44/350Ebosse75 of 304 pass attempts lost here (25%).25%75/304Vojvoda41 of 154 pass attempts lost here (27%).27%41/154Vojvoda18 of 95 pass attempts lost here (19%).19%18/95Davis50 of 169 pass attempts lost here (30%).30%50/169Ekkelenkam60 of 227 pass attempts lost here (26%).26%60/227Kamaraattacking →

How they lose it

Incomplete pass — attacking third
244
Failed forward pass
162
Failed take-on
71
Lost in the defensive third
183
Their weakest zone is the left half-space in the attacking third: 30% of 169 pass attempts there are lost (50 times). Separately, 35% 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.

Pressing2 sections

Pressing — the full picture

The football question
How hard does Udinese 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.

58
Pressing Index
/100 · average
Intensity37
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height70
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness70
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption62
opponent completion & progression allowed

Every defensive action & where it happens

Where they win the ball back — by lane

RW
21%
RHS
17%
C
30%
LHS
16%
LW
16%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 43%
Mid 44%
Att 14%
Read
Ranked #16 of 20 for press intensity, this is a high press. 57% of defensive actions happen in the middle & attacking thirds, at an average height of 40. Of recoveries, 57% are won high up the pitch.

Every pressing metric, ranked in the league

metricvaluerankmeaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)—#16/20lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game143#11/20
High-press share22%#10/20def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)39.8#6/20avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game24.1#6/20ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share57%#6/20share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed84%#14/20lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed7.5%#1/20of 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 Udinese win it back with a defensive action?

Counted over the 255 opposition possessions that Udinese 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 Udinese step in. Udinese win it after 5.6 opponent passes in the first half-hour and after 4.5 after the hour mark (sooner).

PASSES THEY GET
5.0passes
median 3 · before Udinese win it
TIME THEY KEEP IT
13sec
median 6s · 31.9 wins per game
How many passes the opponent got in before the ball was won
44%
27%
14%
15%
0–2 passes3–5 passes6–9 passes10+ passes
Through the match — every 15 minutes
0–15′
4.6
11s
15–30′
6.4
16s
30–45+′
5.1
14s
45–60′
4.7
14s
60–75′
5.6
15s
75–90+′
3.8
10s
average passesaverage seconds

Attitude in each third

Every other style number here says how much Udinese 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 Udinese 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) 1,057 passes

nothing unusual in this zone

Width of use-0.4320.11
Wide-channel share-0.450.28
Side bias-0.55-1.91
Pass length-0.0122.65
Long-ball share-0.160.21
Forward gain per pass-0.1810.67
Backward-pass share+0.400.22
Deep-pass share-0.100.28
Completion+0.390.83
Seconds between passes+0.083.38
Side used

left 23% · central 48% · right 29%

Progression (middle third) 2,008 passes

nothing unusual in this zone

Width of use-0.4024.73
Wide-channel share-0.350.38
Side bias-0.22-0.82
Pass length-0.1517.01
Long-ball share-0.090.10
Forward gain per pass-0.353.08
Backward-pass share-0.060.33
Deep-pass share-0.590.13
Completion+0.200.86
Seconds between passes+0.693.50
Side used

left 33% · central 32% · right 35%

Final third 949 passes

nothing unusual in this zone

Width of use-0.2531.00
Wide-channel share-0.160.57
Side bias-0.37-3.08
Pass length+0.3716.04
Long-ball share-0.000.10
Forward gain per pass-0.050.97
Backward-pass share+0.290.41
Deep-pass share+0.510.11
Completion+0.340.72
Seconds between passes+0.303.62
Side used

left 39% · central 16% · right 45%

Reference measured across roughly 3,500 match-teams in this competition, per third, so the comparison is with Udinese'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 Udinese 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 share18%
#4 of 20 · reaches final third in ≤3 passes
Patient build-up share25%
#14 of 20 · spells of 6+ passes
Tempo (possession length)17.9s
#7 of 20 · shorter = faster tempo
Passes per possession4.2
#14 of 20
Counter-attack shots /game1.00
#11 of 20 · shot within 12s of a regain in own half
Press→shot /game2.96
#11 of 20 · shot within 8s of a high regain
Speed to final third after regain11.7s
#5 of 20 · lower = faster break

Sequence success — attacking transition

14attacking transition sequences this season
21%succeed — produce a shot
57%turned over with nothing to show

Sequence success — defensive transition

42defensive transition sequences this season
62%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
7%turned over with nothing to show
Vision AI Model Insight
Udinese are a direct, fast-break side: 18% of possessions reach the final third in 3 passes or fewer (#4 of 20), against 25% built patiently over 6+ passes (#14 of 20). Winning the ball back leads to a shot inside 12 seconds 1.00 times a game (#11), and a high regain converts to a shot within 8 seconds 2.96 times a game (#11 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 Udinese? 308 opponent progressive passes and 134 shots faced (15.2 xG against) across the season.

Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Udinese)

Right wing
25%
Right half-space
16%
Central
23%
Left half-space
11%
Left wing
25%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the left wing (25% of the danger conceded).

How Do They Concede?

The question
Where do the goals against Udinese actually come from — open play, dead balls, and who supplies them?

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

Where the goals go in

← opponent shot at own goal

Every opponent key pass against them (91 total)

2%3%3%4%3%5%19%23%11%16%9%Yan CoutoJean ButezLuis MillaLuis MillaLucas da CunhaNico PazLuis MillaJacobo RamónAssane DiaoÁlex ValleYan CoutoMattia LiberaliAssane DiaoLuis MillaManga Foe OndoaEddy KouadioRicardo MangasRicardo MangasAndrea ColpaniOmari ForsonMichael FolorunshoDany MotaRicardo MangasLuis MillaMattia ZaccagniPatrick CutroneRicardo MangasPatrick CutroneAndrea ColpaniEbenezer AkinsanmiroKenneth TaylorKenneth TaylorReda BelahyaneMatteo CancellieriDanilho DoekhiMatteo CancellieriNuno TavaresMatteo CancellieriNuno TavaresMattia ZaccagniRomano Floriani MussoliniDanilho DoekhiMatteo CancellieriAlbert GudmundssonNicolò BarellaAndy DioufMarcus ThuramMarcus ThuramCarlos AugustoHenrikh MkhitaryanAndy DioufNicolò BarellaMarcus ThuramNicolò BarellaHenrikh MkhitaryanNicolò BarellaAndy DioufPiotr ZielinskiFederico DimarcoNicolò BarellaFederico DimarcoAntonino GalloKialonda GasparKonan N’DriDanilo VeigaDanilo VeigaTiago GabrielAmar FatahDanilo VeigaKonan N’DriSantiago PierottiJoël MonteiroDaniel MaldiniYukinari SugawaraRafik BelghaliRolando MandragoraNikola VlasicEmirhan IlkhanGvidas GineitisLuka ModricChristian PulisicFikayo TomoriChristian PulisicDavide BartesaghiDavide BartesaghiOmari HutchinsonArdon JashariLuka ModricStrahinja PavlovicChristian PulisicFrancesco Camarda← own goal

By situation

Open play
14 · 78%
Set pieces
4 · 22%
Penalties
0 · 0%
Vision AI Model Insight
18 goals conceded. 78% come in open play; set pieces account for only 22%, 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 half-space of the attacking third (23% of key passes faced) — that is the zone to shut off.
Context

Shape and tactics

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

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

Set-Piece Threat

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

Open play
6 g · 7.1 xG
Set pieces
3 g · 1.0 xG
Penalties
0 g
33% of goals come from set pieces (3 of 9), worth 1.0 xG from 14 shots. A genuine set-piece weapon — defend the box seriously.

Where do Udinese's corners go?

33 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 (19)

11%5%37%11%5%21%5%5%
Delivered into the box 100%Short 0%

Left side (14)

14%7%29%7%14%7%
Delivered into the box 79%Short 21%

Where opponents attack Udinese from set pieces

31 shots from opponent corners against Udinese, 4 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 (12)

25%17%8%25%8%17%
Shot 12Goals 1

Left flag (19)

5%11%42%16%21%5%
Shot 19Goals 3

Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses

Strengths (top-third vs league)
  • field tilt % — 53.11 (65th pct)
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
  • xG created /game — 1.02 (10th pct)
  • xG conceded /game — 1.90 (10th pct)
  • press intensity (PPDA) — 6.31 (20th pct)
  • pass retention % — 82.51 (35th 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.

Venezia
61%
Atalanta
59%
Fiorentina
44%
Sassuolo
43%
Cagliari
39%

Performance vs Opponent Styles

The question
Not just how Udinese 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 Udinese's own passing behaviour to the result.

Results

opponent typegoals for/ggoals against/gpoints/g
vs high-pressing opponents (2m)0.002.500.00
vs mid-block opponents (2m)2.003.000.50
vs low-block opponents (4m)1.251.750.75

Behaviour — how Udinese actually play against each

opponent typeretentiondirectness (long balls)prog. passes/gxT/gbox entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents80%10%369.610.0
vs mid-block opponents80%17%368.310.0
vs low-block opponents84%13%5212.315.2
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 80% vs 84% against a low block (4pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 10% when pressed vs 13% against a low block — their passing style barely changes regardless of how the opponent sets up, for better or worse.

Scouting Summary — the team in brief

In brief. Udinese are balanced-territory with a aggressive high-press. Their attack creates 1.02 xG a game and they concede 1.90 a game. [Event-data based — no tracking, so off-ball structure and marking scheme need video.]
Squad

Players

Who drives the numbers.

Against Their Own Norm

For each of ten match numbers, the one match this season that departed furthest from Udinese’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.

Udinese
across 8 matches this season
PPDAat Inter · 3-5 · 2026-09-1414.5avg 6.3
Progressive passesvs Cagliari · 0-1 · 2026-09-1966avg 44
Expected goalsvs Cagliari · 0-1 · 2026-09-191.91avg 1.02
Pass accuracyat Torino · 1-2 · 2026-10-1289%avg 82%
Field tiltvs Cagliari · 0-1 · 2026-09-1990%avg 53%
Final-third entriesat Torino · 1-2 · 2026-10-1273avg 44
Defensive actionsvs AC Milan · 0-2 · 2026-10-25186avg 143
Threat from passingvs Cagliari · 0-1 · 2026-09-197.58avg 5.15

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 Udinese’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).

+9.2on-ball value, 8 matches
Where the value came from
Passes4014 actions+3.83
Carries1098 actions+0.49
Dribbles119 actions-0.17
Shots112 actions+2.92
Ball wins479 actions+2.14
Most on-ball value (OBV)ActionsOBVper 100
Mërgim Vojvoda676+0.78+0.12
Hassane Kamara444+0.78+0.18
Maduka Okoye345+0.78+0.22
Enzo Ebosse571+0.69+0.12
Christian Kabasele186+0.68+0.37
Unai Gómez131+0.68+0.52
Keinan Davis180+0.62+0.35
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp450+0.59+0.13
123456
Biggest single movesOBV
1  Christian Kabasele · shot+0.404
2  Unai Gómez · pass+0.260
3  Keinan Davis · shot+0.242
4  Unai Gómez · pass+0.210
5  James Abankwah · shot+0.209
6  Idrissa Gueye · shot+0.209

Set Pieces by Player

Who delivers Udinese’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 33 corners taken, most by Lennon Miller (8); 14 shots from corners and free kicks, 3 goals, led by James Abankwah (1 goals, 0.18 xG). “Into the box” counts corners that landed inside the penalty area; free-kick takers are the players who shot from one, because this feed does not mark who delivers the others.

PlayerCorners takenInto the boxSet-piece shotsGoalsxGFree-kick shotsPenalties
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp21 (50%)410.111—
Lennon Miller88 (100%)——0.00——
Mërgim Vojvoda73 (43%)——0.00——
James Abankwah——210.18——
Christian Kabasele——2—0.36——
Unai Gómez54 (80%)——0.00——
Nicolò Zaniolo44 (100%)——0.00——
Oier Zarraga32 (67%)——0.00——
Hassane Kamara——110.02——
Jakub Piotrowski——1—0.11——
Idrissa Gueye——1—0.08——
Enzo Ebosse——1—0.05——
Oumar Solet——1—0.06——
Keinan Davis——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.

playerposminVision AI Scorecapability blocks
Maduka OkoyeGK7527.7Shot-Stopping 77%
Keinan DavisST4565.8Ball-Carrying 75%Finishing 51%Box Threat 38%Aerial Threat 0%
Hassane KamaraCM6365.4Ball-Carrying 66%Successful Dribble 64%Progression 52%Chance Creation 38%
Jurgen EkkelenkampAM7265.1Box Threat 77%Ball-Carrying 48%Chance Creation 28%
Mërgim VojvodaCM6664.6Progression 71%Ball-Carrying 67%Successful Dribble 65%Chance Creation 48%
Jesper KarlströmCM7412.9Ball-Carrying 34%Successful Dribble 31%Progression 27%Chance Creation 10%
James AbankwahCB6032.7Ball-Carrying 60%Progression 37%Ball-Winning 33%Aerial & Box Defending 20%
Enzo EbosseCB5572.5Ball-Carrying 94%Progression 66%Aerial & Box Defending 16%Ball-Winning 15%

Top Creators

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

playerposminkey P /90box entriesxT
Mërgim VojvodaM6662.031714.5
Jurgen EkkelenkampM7260.87106.3
Enzo EbosseD5570.9788.5
Keinan DavisF4560.9981.2
Lennon MillerM3171.4283.4
Jesper KarlströmM7410.6155.8
Giorgi ChakvetadzeM3211.4053.2
Hassane KamaraM6360.2876.4

Wide Delivery Leaders

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

playerposmincrosses (completed)cutbacks (completed)
Unai GómezW3133 (0%)1 (0%)

Defensive Volume Leaders

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

playerposmindef actionstacklesinterceptrecoveries
James AbankwahD6031048626
Jesper KarlströmM74110213545
Mërgim VojvodaM6669613829
Jurgen EkkelenkampM7268911537
Enzo EbosseD557879624
Hassane KamaraM6368415424
Oumar SoletD414826823
Christian KabaseleD31565348

Full Squad Data

Every player with 100+ minutes (21 players).

playerposappsmingoalsxGkey PprogdefxT
Maduka OkoyeG875200.00462610.2
Jesper KarlströmM874110.35171025.8
Jurgen EkkelenkampM872631.4725896.3
Mërgim VojvodaM866600.315829614.5
Hassane KamaraM863620.8234846.4
James AbankwahD760310.22151044.8
Enzo EbosseD755700.1624878.5
Keinan DavisF745601.054611.2
Oumar SoletD541400.1414824.9
Giorgi ChakvetadzeM532100.3512313.2
Lennon MillerM631700.1514503.4
Christian KabaseleD431500.413651.7
Unai GómezM731300.539351.8
Jakub PiotrowskiM523610.549362.4
Idrissa GueyeF418910.930420.4
Matteo PalmaD318600.103401.5
Oier ZarragaM517700.026161.6
Nicolò ZanioloM316500.446200.9
Vakoun BayoF411200.602200.4
Nicolò BertolaD410400.001200.5
Juan ArizalaM410300.119161.2

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.

Maduka Okoye
Goalkeeper · Goalkeeper
minutes752
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /905.5
key passes /900.00
def actions /903.1
pass accuracy77%
Jesper Karlström
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes741
goals · xG1 · 0.3
prog passes /902.1
key passes /900.61
def actions /9012.4
pass accuracy83%
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes726
goals · xG3 · 1.4
prog passes /903.1
key passes /900.87
def actions /9011.0
pass accuracy81%
Mërgim Vojvoda
Advanced creator · Attacking mid
minutes666
goals · xG0 · 0.3
prog passes /9011.1
key passes /902.03
def actions /9013.0
pass accuracy76%
Hassane Kamara
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes636
goals · xG2 · 0.8
prog passes /904.8
key passes /900.28
def actions /9011.9
pass accuracy79%
James Abankwah
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes603
goals · xG1 · 0.2
prog passes /902.2
key passes /900.30
def actions /9015.5
pass accuracy88%
Enzo Ebosse
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes557
goals · xG0 · 0.1
prog passes /903.9
key passes /900.97
def actions /9014.1
pass accuracy88%
Keinan Davis
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes456
goals · xG0 · 1.0
prog passes /900.8
key passes /900.99
def actions /9012.0
pass accuracy75%
Oumar Solet
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes414
goals · xG0 · 0.1
prog passes /903.0
key passes /900.87
def actions /9017.8
pass accuracy90%

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 (10th pct)
Sign a higher-volume goalscorer or chance creator. The data flags this because the attack under-produces xG (1.02, 10th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: xG conceded /game (10th pct)
Sign a defensive organiser / shot-suppressing centre-back. The data flags this because too much xG is conceded (1.90, 10th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: press intensity (PPDA) (20th pct)
Sign a high-energy presser to lift defensive intensity. The data flags this because the press is passive (6.31, 20th percentile vs the league).
Vision AI · building report