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 5 points (1-2-6, 9:18). Tactical profile below is built from 9 matches of ball-by-ball event data, contextualised against the league.

balanced-territoryaggressive high-pressmoderate attack
L
D
W
W
L
L
D
W
L
L
L
L
L
L
D
5
points
#17 of 20 · 9 games
9:18
goals
-9 GD
1-2-6
record
W-D-L
0.56
points/game
#17 in the league
1.07
xG for/game
rank #17
1.82
xG against/game
rank #17
#15
press rank
of 20 · most aggressive
54%
field tilt
#6
Udinese
League average
Expected goals for / game
1.071.42
Expected goals against / game
1.821.43
Field tilt
54%50%
Pass retention
82%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 5 points (1W-2D-6L, 0.56 pts/game), scoring 9 and conceding 18 for a goal difference of -9. On the ball they are a balanced-territory team (54% field tilt, #6 in the league); off it they defend with a aggressive high-press (#15 of 20 for press intensity). Across the 9 matches of event data, they create 1.07 xG/game (#17) and concede 1.82 (#17), a net of -0.75 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
14Lecce8305914-59
15Sassuolo92251422-88
16Monza92161622-67
17Udinese9126918-95
18Parma Calcio 19139126515-105
19Fiorentina8116919-104
20Venezia9108619-133

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+'+0.23-3.30
Vision AI Model Insight
Udinese tend to fade after a strong start — first-half net xG -2.93, second-half -3.83. Their strongest period is 46-60' (net +0.23 xG); their most dangerous period to face is 61-75' (net -3.30 xG against them).

xG Race — the season, match by match

Expected goals piling up over 9 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 (-6.8 xG). Hover a point for that match.

0612189.616.4Como (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 2.81Parma Calcio 1913 (A) 0-0 · xG 1.48 to 1.22M1M2M3M4M5M6M7M8M9
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.

52
Build-Up
possession control from the back
48
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
43
Creation
manufacturing chances
48
Press
winning the ball high & hard
15
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Udinese are defined most by their Build-Up DNA (52/100 · average at possession control from the back), and least by their Solidity DNA (15/100). 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).

Possess45Disrupt58Finish26Press43Defend43
Possess
Deep buildup
48%
Possession
43%
Field tilt
43%
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
43%
High regains
39%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
48%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
48%
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, 2.78 pts/gRoma: 64% tilt, 2.33 pts/gComo: 62% tilt, 2.22 pts/gAC Milan: 52% tilt, 2.00 pts/gFrosinone: 50% tilt, 1.75 pts/gNapoli: 52% tilt, 1.56 pts/gJuventus: 65% tilt, 1.56 pts/gTorino: 40% tilt, 1.44 pts/gCagliari: 33% tilt, 1.44 pts/gAtalanta: 47% tilt, 1.25 pts/gBologna: 45% tilt, 1.22 pts/gLecce: 44% tilt, 1.12 pts/gGenoa: 38% tilt, 1.11 pts/gSassuolo: 47% tilt, 0.89 pts/gMonza: 47% tilt, 0.78 pts/gParma Calcio 1913: 34% tilt, 0.56 pts/gUdinese: 54% tilt, 0.56 pts/gFiorentina: 50% tilt, 0.50 pts/gVenezia: 51% tilt, 0.33 pts/gUdinese33%45%57%69%0.31.12.02.8FIELD TILT %POINTS / GAME
Vision AI Model Insight
Udinese post 54% field tilt, ranking #6 of 20 in the league — comfortably above the league mid-point for territorial control, and their 0.56 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: 23.0% of the time on the ball23%Progression: 48.4% of the time on the ball48%Chance creation: 25.6% of the time on the ball26%Attacking transition: 3.0% of the time on the ball48%PROGRESSION
PhaseShare of the time
Build-up23.0%
Progression48.4%
Chance creation25.6%
Attacking transition3.0%
Vision AI Model Insight
Progression is where Udinese spends most of its time on the ball (48% 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.

Mërgim Vojvoda ↔ James Abankwah: 115 passes, -0.5 combined xTHassane Kamara ↔ Enzo Ebosse: 114 passes, -0.6 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Jesper Karlström: 90 passes, 1.2 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Maduka Okoye: 83 passes, -0.2 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Jesper Karlström: 61 passes, -0.1 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 58 passes, 0.3 combined xTChristian Kabasele ↔ James Abankwah: 57 passes, -0.2 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ James Abankwah: 56 passes, 0.1 combined xTMaduka Okoye ↔ James Abankwah: 49 passes, -0.4 combined xTChristian Kabasele ↔ Enzo Ebosse: 46 passes, 0.0 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 46 passes, 0.6 combined xTJurgen Ekkelenkamp ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 46 passes, 0.1 combined xTHassane Kamara ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 37 passes, 1.1 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 35 passes, 0.4 combined xTHassane Kamara ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 34 passes, 0.3 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Lennon Miller: 33 passes, 0.4 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Giorgi Chakvetadze: 30 passes, 0.1 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Jurgen Ekkelenkamp: 29 passes, 0.4 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Jakub Piotrowski: 28 passes, 1.3 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Keinan Davis: 25 passes, 1.0 combined xTEnzo Ebosse ↔ Lennon Miller: 23 passes, 0.0 combined xTJesper Karlström ↔ Lennon Miller: 23 passes, 0.2 combined xTMërgim Vojvoda ↔ Maduka Okoye: 22 passes, 0.2 combined xTHassane Kamara ↔ Keinan Davis: 22 passes, 1.5 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 connectionsAbankwahUnai Gómez — isolate this player's connectionsGómezLennon Miller — isolate this player's connectionsMillerGiorgi Chakvetadze — isolate this player's connectionsChakvetadzJakub Piotrowski — isolate this player's connectionsPiotrowskiNicolò Bertola — isolate this player's connectionsBertolaKingsley Ehizibue — isolate this player's connectionsEhizibueChristian Kabasele — isolate this player's connectionsKabaseleArthur Atta — isolate this player's connectionsAtta
width = passes between the paircolour = xT per pass: low → high

Top 10 combinations

Vojvoda ↔ Abankwah
115p · -0.5xT
Kamara ↔ Ebosse
114p · -0.6xT
Vojvoda ↔ Karlström
90p · 1.2xT
Ebosse ↔ Okoye
83p · -0.2xT
Ebosse ↔ Karlström
61p · -0.1xT
Vojvoda ↔ Ekkelenkamp
58p · 0.3xT
Kabasele ↔ Abankwah
57p · -0.2xT
Karlström ↔ Abankwah
56p · 0.1xT
Okoye ↔ Abankwah
49p · -0.4xT
Kabasele ↔ Ebosse
46p · 0.0xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Mërgim Vojvoda ↔ James Abankwah (115 passes). Most dangerous per pass: Hassane Kamara ↔ Keinan Davis (0.07 xT/pass over 22 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 88 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
4511
ACTIONS
4%5%10%4%3%9%11%12%10%9%8%4%3%4%6%PASSES
Carries
the ball moved with a player
1247
ACTIONS
4%4%10%5%3%10%10%13%11%10%7%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: 25% defensive, 51% middle, 24% 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.

37%Left side24%Middle40%Right sideATTACKING →
Udinese
37%24%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 406 this season (45.1 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: 113 entries (28%)11328%LEFT WINGLeft half-space: 69 entries (17%)6917%LEFT HALF-SPACECentre: 52 entries (13%)5213%CENTRERight half-space: 57 entries (14%)5714%RIGHT HALF-SPACERight wing: 115 entries (28%)11528%RIGHT WINGATTACKING ↑
ChannelEntriesPer matchShareLeague share
Left wing11312.628%29%
Left half-space697.717%15%
Centre525.813%13%
Right half-space576.314%15%
Right wing11512.828%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.

1153build-up passes attempted
82%completed
27%reach the middle third
2%go long into the final third

Pass types

457CB · 48%
57Long Wide · 6%
25Long Central · 3%
307Wide → FB · 32%
102Central · 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
CB457 · 48%
right: 247 passes, most from Abankwah247left: 210 passes, most from Ebosse210
Long Wide57 · 6%
right: 37 passes, most from Okoye37left: 20 passes, most from Okoye20
Long Central25 · 3%
right: 18 passes, most from Okoye18left: 7 passes, most from Okoye7
Wide → FB307 · 32%
left: 155 passes, most from Okoye155right: 152 passes, most from Okoye152
Central102 · 11%
right: 54 passes, most from Okoye54left: 48 passes, most from Okoye48
◆ Vision AI Insight
Udinese build predominantly down the right, with Okoye as the fulcrum (234 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 (73×).

Pass Explorer

Every pass of Udinese’s last 9 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. 395 progressive passes across 9 matches (43.9/game).

Origin lane

Right wing
32%
Right half-space
15%
Central
15%
Left half-space
10%
Left wing
28%
Progression is right-dominant: 47% right side · 15% central · 38% left.

Who generates it

Mërgim Vojvoda
84 · 21%
Maduka Okoye
50 · 13%
Hassane Kamara
39 · 10%
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp
27 · 7%
Enzo Ebosse
27 · 7%
Top two — Mërgim Vojvoda & Maduka Okoye — account for 34% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
43.9 prog passes/game
mostly right
→
PENETRATION
25% reach final third
20% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 75% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it. 25% of progressive passes reached the final third and 20% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 34% 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 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.

2265progression passes attempted
86%completed
14%break into the final third
10%go backward into the defensive third

Pass types

799CB · 41%
61Long Wide · 3%
11Long Central · 1%
830Wide → FB · 43%
250Central · 13%

Sequence success — progression

182progression sequences this season
32%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
40%turned over with nothing to show
CB799 · 41%
left: 455 passes, most from Ebosse455right: 344 passes, most from Abankwah344
Long Wide61 · 3%
left: 32 passes, most from Kamara32right: 29 passes, most from Vojvoda29
Long Central11 · 1%
left: 6 passes, most from Kamara6right: 5 passes, most from Vojvoda5
Wide → FB830 · 43%
right: 436 passes, most from Vojvoda436left: 394 passes, most from Kamara394
Central250 · 13%
left: 130 passes, most from Karlström130right: 120 passes, most from Vojvoda120
◆ Vision AI Insight
Udinese progress predominantly down the left, with Karlström the busiest midfield outlet (242 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 (127×) — 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?

287 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (24% of 1217 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 (37). Filter to one player below.

First (93)Second (84)Third (55)Fourth (55)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.

132shots
9.6xG
0.07xG per shot
1big chances (0.3+ xG)
9goals
#9key passes / game in the league
#9box entries / game in the league
Attacking transition: 27 shots (20%)20%27Settled attack: 88 shots (67%)67%88Set piece: 17 shots (13%)13%17132SHOTS
Kind of attack, then how the shot was set upShotsGoalsxGxG / shot
Attacking transition 20% of shots2732.400.09
Cross210.160.08
Cut-back200.150.08
Long ball100.070.07
Pass into the box / short pass1721.590.09
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)500.430.09
Settled attack 67% of shots8835.950.07
Cross1701.600.09
Cut-back300.390.13
Long ball300.210.07
Pass into the box / short pass5022.960.06
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)1510.800.05
Set piece 13% of shots1731.280.08
Corner1631.270.08
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
Keinan Davis91.153
Mërgim Vojvoda160.980
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp80.851
Nicolò Zaniolo80.730
Giorgi Chakvetadze100.580

Who takes them

PlayerShotsxGGoals
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp231.493
Keinan Davis161.440
Idrissa Gueye100.921
Hassane Kamara130.912
Unai Gómez70.610
Vision AI Model Insight
The biggest source of Udinese's chances, by xG, is settled attack (6.0 of 9.6 xG, 88 of 132 shots), mostly pass into the box / short pass. 27 of the 132 shots (20%) came within 15 seconds of winning the ball. 17 of the 132 shots came from set pieces; 9 goals from 9.6 xG (-0.6).

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 · 14%
3Long Wide · 3%
5Long Central · 5%
35Wide → FB · 36%
40Central · 41%

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 · 14%
left: 10 passes, most from Solet10right: 4 passes, most from Ebosse4
Long Wide3 · 3%
right: 2 passes, most from Piotrowski2
Long Central5 · 5%
right: 3 passes, most from Kamara3left: 2 passes, most from Miller2
Wide → FB35 · 36%
left: 18 passes, most from Karlström18right: 17 passes, most from Vojvoda17
Central40 · 41%
left: 20 passes, most from Chakvetadze20right: 20 passes, most from Vojvoda20

Who creates — volume × threat

17Vojvoda
10Chakvetadze
8Ekkelenkamp
8Davis
7Karlström
7Zaniolo
6Ebosse
97key passes #9 of 20
13.3box entries/game #9 of 20
32.7final-3rd entries/game #7 of 20
1.07xG/game #17 of 20
9goals #14 of 20
-0.6finishing vs xG #14 of 20
◆ Vision AI Insight
Udinese lean right — 42% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (41 of 97), most often from Vojvoda (11). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via LHS att → C att (14 key passes, most often from Chakvetadze). Vojvoda is the primary source overall. They generate 1.07 xG a game and finish it wasteful — they under-perform 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?

151 crosses: 46 found a team-mate (30%), 17 led to a shot (11%). 23 cut-backs: 13 found a team-mate (57%), 6 led to a shot (26%). 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?

151 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 advanced right wing; 11 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 (7%)7%11advanced right wing: 39 crosses (26%)26%39advanced right half-space: 3 crosses (2%)2%3advanced centre: 0 crosses (0%)advanced left half-space: 3 crosses (2%)2%3advanced left wing: 19 crosses (13%)13%19byline right wing: 32 crosses (21%)21%32byline right half-space: 1 crosses (1%)1%1byline centre: 0 crosses (0%)byline left half-space: 3 crosses (2%)2%3byline left wing: 32 crosses (21%)21%32
TerritoryCrossesShareLed to a shot
advanced · right wing3926%4
byline · right wing3221%3
byline · left wing3221%4
advanced · left wing1913%2
deep · left wing117%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
byline · right half-space11%1
Finishing3 sections

Shot Map

132 shots for 9.6 xG (1.07/game, #17 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.

Moderate attack. 14.7 shots/game at 0.073 xG/shot. Box entries 13/game (#9). Threat created 10.7 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

35 of 164 pass attempts lost here (21%).21%35/164Vojvoda31 of 206 pass attempts lost here (15%).15%31/206Okoye70 of 459 pass attempts lost here (15%).15%70/459Okoye26 of 174 pass attempts lost here (15%).15%26/174Okoye43 of 150 pass attempts lost here (29%).29%43/150Kamara86 of 420 pass attempts lost here (20%).20%86/420Vojvoda69 of 477 pass attempts lost here (14%).14%69/477Karlström66 of 521 pass attempts lost here (13%).13%66/521Karlström39 of 444 pass attempts lost here (9%).9%39/444Ebosse54 of 403 pass attempts lost here (13%).13%54/403Ebosse86 of 341 pass attempts lost here (25%).25%86/341Vojvoda49 of 181 pass attempts lost here (27%).27%49/181Vojvoda22 of 119 pass attempts lost here (18%).18%22/119Davis54 of 191 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%54/191Ekkelenkam72 of 261 pass attempts lost here (28%).28%72/261Kamaraattacking →

How they lose it

Incomplete pass — attacking third
283
Failed forward pass
191
Failed take-on
77
Lost in the defensive third
205
Their weakest zone is the left wing in the defensive third: 29% of 150 pass attempts there are lost (43 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.

65
Pressing Index
/100 · strong
Intensity40
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height75
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness78
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption75
opponent completion & progression allowed

Every defensive action & where it happens

Where they win the ball back — by lane

RW
20%
RHS
18%
C
30%
LHS
16%
LW
16%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 42%
Mid 44%
Att 14%
Read
Ranked #15 of 20 for press intensity, this is a high press. 58% of defensive actions happen in the middle & attacking thirds, at an average height of 40. Of recoveries, 59% are won high up the pitch.

Every pressing metric, ranked in the league

metricvaluerankmeaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)—#15/20lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game144#11/20
High-press share22%#10/20def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)39.9#5/20avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game24.4#5/20ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share59%#4/20share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed83%#8/20lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed7.6%#2/20of 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 279 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 5.4 opponent passes in the first half-hour and after 4.4 after the hour mark (sooner).

PASSES THEY GET
4.8passes
median 3 · before Udinese win it
TIME THEY KEEP IT
13sec
median 6s · 31.0 wins per game
How many passes the opponent got in before the ball was won
45%
27%
14%
14%
0–2 passes3–5 passes6–9 passes10+ passes
Through the match — every 15 minutes
0–15′
4.5
11s
15–30′
6.2
16s
30–45+′
4.8
13s
45–60′
4.7
14s
60–75′
5.1
14s
75–90+′
3.9
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) 1,153 passes

nothing unusual in this zone

Width of use-0.3920.19
Wide-channel share-0.370.28
Side bias-0.41-1.40
Pass length+0.0622.93
Long-ball share-0.040.23
Forward gain per pass-0.0911.04
Backward-pass share+0.250.21
Deep-pass share-0.060.28
Completion+0.310.82
Seconds between passes+0.013.33
Side used

left 24% · central 47% · right 28%

Progression (middle third) 2,265 passes

nothing unusual in this zone

Width of use-0.3124.91
Wide-channel share-0.250.39
Side bias-0.21-0.78
Pass length-0.1217.05
Long-ball share-0.080.10
Forward gain per pass-0.293.17
Backward-pass share-0.130.33
Deep-pass share-0.580.13
Completion+0.190.86
Seconds between passes+0.813.56
Side used

left 33% · central 31% · right 35%

Final third 1,093 passes

nothing unusual in this zone

Width of use-0.3630.73
Wide-channel share-0.220.57
Side bias-0.34-2.87
Pass length+0.3516.01
Long-ball share+0.030.10
Forward gain per pass+0.021.07
Backward-pass share+0.230.40
Deep-pass share+0.530.11
Completion+0.340.72
Seconds between passes+0.213.56
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
#8 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 /game2.91
#12 of 20 · shot within 8s of a high regain
Speed to final third after regain11.8s
#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 2.91 times a game (#12 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? 340 opponent progressive passes and 142 shots faced (16.4 xG against) across the season.

Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Udinese)

Right wing
26%
Right half-space
16%
Central
23%
Left half-space
11%
Left wing
24%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the right wing (26% 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 (97 total)

2%3%3%4%4%5%20%23%11%16%8%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 GineitisSascha BritschgiLuka ModricChristian PulisicFikayo TomoriChristian PulisicDavide BartesaghiDavide BartesaghiOmari HutchinsonArdon JashariLuka ModricStrahinja PavlovicChristian PulisicFrancesco CamardaDavid RomeroVincent SierroEnrico DelpratoDominik DrobnicSascha Britschgi← 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 · 8.4 xG
Set pieces
3 g · 1.3 xG
Penalties
0 g
33% of goals come from set pieces (3 of 9), worth 1.3 xG from 17 shots. A genuine set-piece weapon — defend the box seriously.

Where do Udinese's corners go?

39 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 (22)

9%5%32%9%5%23%14%5%
Delivered into the box 100%Short 0%

Left side (17)

12%6%24%12%18%12%
Delivered into the box 82%Short 18%

Where opponents attack Udinese from set pieces

33 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 (21)

10%10%38%19%19%5%
Shot 21Goals 3

Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses

Strengths (top-third vs league)
  • field tilt % — 54.30 (70th pct)
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
  • xG created /game — 1.07 (15th pct)
  • xG conceded /game — 1.82 (15th pct)
  • press intensity (PPDA) — 6.00 (25th pct)
  • pass retention % — 82.22 (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
67%
Fiorentina
48%
Atalanta
44%
Frosinone
33%
Parma Calcio 1913
31%

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 (3m)1.003.330.00
vs mid-block opponents (3m)0.671.000.67
vs low-block opponents (3m)1.331.671.00

Behaviour — how Udinese actually play against each

opponent typeretentiondirectness (long balls)prog. passes/gxT/gbox entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents80%13%348.79.3
vs mid-block opponents79%16%4610.815.0
vs low-block opponents85%11%5212.615.7
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 80% vs 85% against a low block (5pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 13% when pressed vs 11% against a low block — a mild adjustment, not a wholesale change.

Scouting Summary — the team in brief

In brief. Udinese are balanced-territory with a aggressive high-press. Their attack creates 1.07 xG a game and they concede 1.82 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 9 matches this season
PPDAat Inter · 3-5 · 2026-09-1414.5avg 6.0
Progressive passesvs Cagliari · 0-1 · 2026-09-1966avg 44
Pass accuracyat Torino · 1-2 · 2026-10-1289%avg 82%
Expected goalsvs Cagliari · 0-1 · 2026-09-191.91avg 1.07
Field tiltvs Cagliari · 0-1 · 2026-09-1990%avg 54%
Final-third entriesat Torino · 1-2 · 2026-10-1273avg 45
Defensive actionsvs AC Milan · 0-2 · 2026-10-25186avg 144
Passesat Torino · 1-2 · 2026-10-12680avg 501

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 9 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).

+10.7on-ball value, 9 matches
Where the value came from
Passes4511 actions+4.87
Carries1217 actions+0.30
Dribbles130 actions-0.21
Shots132 actions+3.30
Ball wins537 actions+2.48
Most on-ball value (OBV)ActionsOBVper 100
Hassane Kamara510+1.07+0.21
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp504+0.86+0.17
Maduka Okoye387+0.84+0.22
Mërgim Vojvoda705+0.79+0.11
Keinan Davis207+0.73+0.35
Christian Kabasele238+0.71+0.30
Nicolò Zaniolo164+0.69+0.42
Enzo Ebosse592+0.69+0.12
123456
Biggest single movesOBV
1  Christian Kabasele · shot+0.404
2  Unai Gómez · pass+0.260
3  Enzo Ebosse · pass+0.259
4  Keinan Davis · shot+0.242
5  Unai Gómez · pass+0.210
6  James Abankwah · shot+0.209

Set Pieces by Player

Who delivers Udinese’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 39 corners taken, most by Lennon Miller (8); 17 shots from corners and free kicks, 3 goals, led by James Abankwah (1 goals, 0.38 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%)510.131—
James Abankwah——310.38——
Lennon Miller88 (100%)——0.00——
Mërgim Vojvoda73 (43%)——0.00——
Nicolò Zaniolo77 (100%)——0.00——
Christian Kabasele——2—0.36——
Jesper Karlström20 (0%)1—0.05——
Unai Gómez54 (80%)——0.00——
Giorgi Chakvetadze54 (80%)——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——

Top Performers

Ranked by Vision AI Score — the same tactical behavioural evaluation each player's own report page shows (min 243 minutes). Coloured chips are that player's strongest capability blocks.

playerposminVision AI Scorecapability blocks
Maduka OkoyeGK8458.0Shot-Stopping 80%
Mërgim VojvodaCM6976.2Progression 72%Ball-Carrying 66%Successful Dribble 62%Chance Creation 50%
Hassane KamaraCM7065.7Ball-Carrying 68%Successful Dribble 66%Progression 55%Chance Creation 40%
Jurgen EkkelenkampAM8195.2Box Threat 78%Ball-Carrying 47%Chance Creation 30%
Enzo EbosseCB5804.8Ball-Carrying 94%Progression 65%Aerial & Box Defending 18%Ball-Winning 14%
Keinan DavisST5494.0Ball-Carrying 72%Finishing 51%Box Threat 38%Aerial Threat 0%
James AbankwahCB6963.8Ball-Carrying 53%Ball-Winning 46%Progression 34%Aerial & Box Defending 20%
Jesper KarlströmCM8112.6Ball-Carrying 35%Successful Dribble 32%Progression 29%Chance Creation 10%

Top Creators

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

playerposminkey P /90box entriesxT
Mërgim VojvodaM6972.201815.2
Jurgen EkkelenkampM8190.88136.8
Giorgi ChakvetadzeM4032.2384.5
Keinan DavisF5491.31101.6
Nicolò ZanioloM2482.5482.3
Enzo EbosseD5800.9399.4
Jesper KarlströmM8110.7867.0
Lennon MillerM3281.3783.4

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 GómezW3233 (0%)1 (0%)

Defensive Volume Leaders

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

playerposmindef actionstacklesinterceptrecoveries
James AbankwahD69613191130
Jesper KarlströmM81111113549
Mërgim VojvodaM69710313832
Jurgen EkkelenkampM8199714640
Hassane KamaraM7069515428
Enzo EbosseD5808910624
Oumar SoletD414826823
Christian KabaseleD40878359

Full Squad Data

Every player with 100+ minutes (21 players).

playerposappsmingoalsxGkey PprogdefxT
Maduka OkoyeG984500.00503211.2
Jurgen EkkelenkampM981931.5827976.8
Jesper KarlströmM981110.57211117.0
Hassane KamaraM970620.9339957.3
Mërgim VojvodaM969700.3178410315.2
James AbankwahD869610.42161315.3
Enzo EbosseD858000.1627899.4
Keinan DavisF854901.485701.6
Oumar SoletD541400.1414824.9
Christian KabaseleD540800.414782.3
Giorgi ChakvetadzeM640300.31018434.5
Lennon MillerM732800.1514503.4
Unai GómezM832300.649361.8
Matteo PalmaD427900.108562.6
Jakub PiotrowskiM625910.6411392.6
Nicolò ZanioloM424800.5711342.3
Idrissa GueyeF418910.930420.4
Oier ZarragaM517700.026161.6
Nicolò BertolaD516600.105321.4
Vakoun BayoF411200.602200.4
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
minutes845
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /905.3
key passes /900.00
def actions /903.4
pass accuracy75%
Jurgen Ekkelenkamp
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes819
goals · xG3 · 1.5
prog passes /903.0
key passes /900.88
def actions /9010.7
pass accuracy81%
Jesper Karlström
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes811
goals · xG1 · 0.5
prog passes /902.3
key passes /900.78
def actions /9012.3
pass accuracy83%
Hassane Kamara
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes706
goals · xG2 · 0.9
prog passes /905.0
key passes /900.38
def actions /9012.1
pass accuracy78%
Mërgim Vojvoda
Advanced creator · Attacking mid
minutes697
goals · xG0 · 0.3
prog passes /9010.8
key passes /902.20
def actions /9013.3
pass accuracy76%
James Abankwah
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes696
goals · xG1 · 0.4
prog passes /902.1
key passes /900.26
def actions /9016.9
pass accuracy88%
Enzo Ebosse
Stopper / marker · Defender
minutes580
goals · xG0 · 0.1
prog passes /904.2
key passes /900.93
def actions /9013.8
pass accuracy88%
Keinan Davis
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes549
goals · xG0 · 1.4
prog passes /900.8
key passes /901.31
def actions /9011.5
pass accuracy77%
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 (15th pct)
Sign a higher-volume goalscorer or chance creator. The data flags this because the attack under-produces xG (1.07, 15th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: xG conceded /game (15th pct)
Sign a defensive organiser / shot-suppressing centre-back. The data flags this because too much xG is conceded (1.82, 15th percentile vs the league).
Need — bottom-third: press intensity (PPDA) (25th pct)
Sign a high-energy presser to lift defensive intensity. The data flags this because the press is passive (6.00, 25th percentile vs the league).
Vision AI · building report