Soccer predictions: actual data vs predicted data
Slate 20260620 · 4 match(es)
How to read this report. Each match shows the model's headline prediction, the stage-by-stage lambda (goal-rate) build, both teams' standing/form inputs, and every starter's projected line next to their real season baseline. A moderate / large deviation badge flags a projection that strays far from the player's season form — a quick way to spot when the inputs look right but a projection does not. When the real result is known an actual-vs-predicted banner appears.
All matches overview
| Match | Score | Winner | H / D / A | O2.5 | BTTS | Conf | λ H/A | Actual | Result |
|---|
| Germany vs Côte d'Ivoire FIFA World Cup | 3-0 | Draw | 88.1% / 8.0% / 3.9% | 79.5% | 49.1% | 0.92 | 3.54 / 0.70 | - | pending |
| Ecuador vs Curaçao FIFA World Cup | 1-1 | Draw | 46.2% / 26.5% / 27.3% | 45.6% | 49.8% | 0.73 | 1.45 / 1.05 | - | pending |
| Tunisia vs Japan FIFA World Cup | 1-1 | Draw | 33.5% / 30.3% / 36.2% | 34.8% | 42.2% | 0.7 | 1.02 / 1.07 | - | pending |
| Netherlands vs Sweden FIFA World Cup | 1-1 | Draw | 50.9% / 24.8% / 24.3% | 50.2% | 52.4% | 0.75 | 1.63 / 1.05 | - | pending |
Match detail
Germany vs Côte d'Ivoire
FIFA World Cup · 20260620 · 4-2-3-1 vs 4-4-2
Predicted 3-0Winner: DrawConfidence 0.92λ home/away 3.54 / 0.70Most-likely P 10.6%
Actual vs predicted: result not available yet (upcoming fixture).
Lambda decomposition (how the goal rates were built)
| Stage | Germany λ | Côte d'Ivoire λ |
|---|
| Pre-calibration | 3.539 | 0.705 |
| Final λ | 3.539 | 0.705 |
competition calibration scale 1.0competition observed total goals 0.0quality gap applied Truemismatch score pressure applied Falsecompetitive underdog floor applied Falsestage discount 1.0
Scoreline distribution & markets
| Top 5 scorelines | P |
|---|
| 3-0 | 10.6% |
| 4-0 | 9.4% |
| 2-0 | 9.0% |
| 3-1 | 7.5% |
| 5-0 | 6.7% |
| Home win | 88.1% |
| Draw | 8.0% |
| Away win | 3.9% |
| Over 2.5 | 79.5% |
| BTTS yes | 49.1% |
Pregame fair line — favorite Germany (88.1%), fair total 4.24, fair spread 2.83
Projected players vs season baseline
Proj = projected for this match · Season = this season's per-game average from match data · deviation badge compares projected xG to the player's season xG/game.
Germany — projected line vs season baseline (4-2-3-1)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Kai Havertz | F | 76 | 2 | 0.78 | 0.23 | 243% | 2 | 1.0 | 90.3 | 44.3 | 16 |
| Jamal Musiala | M | 64 | 0 | 0.27 | 0.17 | 65% | 2 | 1.4 | 95.8 | 52.4 | 14 |
| Leroy Sané | M | 87 | 1 | 0.72 | 0.14 | 424% | 2 | 1.1 | 88.5 | 46.6 | 10 |
| Aleksandar Pavlović | M | 88 | 0 | 0.34 | 0.11 | 200% | 1 | 0.6 | 86.7 | 51.0 | 14 |
| Felix Nmecha | M | 69 | 0 | 0.27 | 0.10 | 172% | 3 | 1.4 | 90.2 | 50.6 | 7 |
| Nathaniel Brown | D | 74 | 0 | 0.43 | 0.07 | 551% | 2 | 0.5 | 84.6 | 42.8 | 8 |
| Nico Schlotterbeck | D | 91 | 0 | 0.39 | 0.08 | 379% | 2 | 0.3 | 93.4 | 51.4 | 9 |
| Jonathan Tah | D | 76 | 0 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 666% | 0 | 0.1 | 94.1 | 58.6 | 14 |
| Joshua Kimmich | M | 85 | 0 | 0.06 | 0.06 | ok | 0 | 0.6 | 97.2 | 51.9 | 16 |
| Florian Wirtz | M | 85 | 0 | 0.19 | 0.17 | ok | 3 | 1.3 | 96.6 | 42.5 | 15 |
| Manuel Neuer | G | 88 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 90.5 | 46.0 | 12 |
| Team totals | 3 | 3.54 | | 18 | | 91.6 | |
Côte d'Ivoire — projected line vs season baseline (4-4-2)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Franck Kessié | M | 82 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.11 | 100% | 1 | 0.7 | 87.2 | 71.0 | 6 |
| Seko Fofana | M | 74 | 0 | 0.11 | 0.07 | 57% | 1 | 1.0 | 83.8 | 48.6 | 11 |
| Amad Diallo | M | 52 | 0 | 0.09 | 0.13 | ok | 2 | 1.2 | 95.2 | 46.9 | 11 |
| Ghislain Konan | D | 89 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.04 | ok | 1 | 0.9 | 79.1 | 58.3 | 7 |
| Emmanuel Agbadou | D | 86 | 0 | 0.01 | 0.02 | ok | 0 | 0.5 | 86.5 | 61.6 | 8 |
| Wilfried Singo | D | 87 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.03 | ok | 1 | 0.6 | 87.5 | 44.7 | 9 |
| Guéla Doué | D | 90 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 100% | 0 | 0.1 | 84.4 | 68.7 | 7 |
| Yahia Fofana | G | 90 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 82.5 | 67.9 | 7 |
| Yan Diomande | F | 92 | 0 | 0.06 | 0.07 | ok | 2 | 0.6 | 74.0 | 35.9 | 14 |
| Nicolas Pépé | F | 77 | 0 | 0.10 | 0.10 | ok | 1 | 0.9 | 86.7 | 39.1 | 13 |
| Elye Wahi | F | 59 | 0 | 0.23 | 0.14 | 65% | 2 | 1.9 | 81.5 | 57.9 | 7 |
| Team totals | 0 | 0.70 | | 11 | | 84.4 | |
Antagonist / tactical summary
Home midfield dominates with ~53% possession expected (Jamal Musiala vs Amad Diallo). Total antagonist xG — Home: 2.23, Away: 0.59. Home danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle. Away danger zone: Left Mid vs Right Back — Wide Channel.
Midfield — possession 53.4% / 46.6%, dominance ratio 0.59, key duel: Jamal Musiala vs Amad Diallo
Jamal Musiala xG 0.34Leroy Sané xG 0.66Florian Wirtz xG 0.20Yan Diomande xG 0.11Seko Fofana xG 0.20Nicolas Pépé xG 0.19
Summary
Antagonist matchup analysis for Germany vs Côte d'Ivoire. Most likely scoreline: 3-0. Lambdas derived from 5 home and 4 away individual player duels.
4-2-3-1 creates structural superiority against 4-4-2. Home team should exploit wider spaces and numerical advantages in transition. Home midfield dominates with ~53% possession expected (Jamal Musiala vs Amad Diallo). Total antagonist xG — Home: 2.23, Away: 0.59. Home danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle. Away danger zone: Left Mid vs Right Back — Wide Channel.
Ecuador vs Curaçao
FIFA World Cup · 20260620 · 4-4-2 vs 4-3-3
Predicted 1-1Winner: DrawConfidence 0.73λ home/away 1.45 / 1.05Most-likely P 12.6%
Actual vs predicted: result not available yet (upcoming fixture).
Lambda decomposition (how the goal rates were built)
| Stage | Ecuador λ | Curaçao λ |
|---|
| Pre-mismatch | 1.319 | 0.677 |
| Pre-competitive-floor | 1.450 | 0.658 |
| Pre-calibration | 1.319 | 0.677 |
| Final λ | 1.450 | 1.050 |
competition calibration scale 1.0competition observed total goals 0.0quality gap applied Truemismatch score pressure applied Truecompetitive underdog floor applied Truestage discount 1.0
Scoreline distribution & markets
| Top 5 scorelines | P |
|---|
| 1-1 | 12.6% |
| 1-0 | 11.8% |
| 2-1 | 9.1% |
| 2-0 | 8.6% |
| 0-1 | 8.5% |
| Home win | 46.2% |
| Draw | 26.5% |
| Away win | 27.3% |
| Over 2.5 | 45.6% |
| BTTS yes | 49.8% |
Pregame fair line — favorite Ecuador (46.2%), fair total 2.50, fair spread 0.40
Projected players vs season baseline
Proj = projected for this match · Season = this season's per-game average from match data · deviation badge compares projected xG to the player's season xG/game.
Ecuador — projected line vs season baseline (4-4-2)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Hernán Galíndez | G | 89 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 80.9 | 49.9 | 7 |
| Pedro Vite | M | 90 | 0 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 306% | 2 | 0.5 | 93.2 | 71.7 | 11 |
| Gonzalo Plata | M | 90 | 0 | 0.10 | 0.11 | ok | 2 | 0.8 | 88.9 | 30.1 | 14 |
| Alan Franco | M | 66 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 1 | 0.0 | 85.0 | 35.7 | 15 |
| Moisés Caicedo | M | 92 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 55% | 1 | 0.5 | 94.1 | 52.8 | 11 |
| John Yeboah | F | 63 | 0 | 0.14 | 0.06 | 110% | 2 | 1.1 | 76.6 | 40.1 | 7 |
| Piero Hincapié | D | 90 | 1 | 0.28 | 0.05 | 467% | 1 | 0.5 | 89.7 | 53.1 | 14 |
| Joel Ordóñez | D | 90 | 0 | 0.45 | 0.03 | 1712% | 1 | 0.2 | 82.0 | 59.5 | 8 |
| Willian Pacho | D | 92 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 100% | 0 | 0.1 | 92.8 | 68.0 | 10 |
| Ángelo Preciado | M | 40 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 81.2 | 17.2 | 15 |
| Enner Valencia | F | 75 | 0 | 0.10 | 0.34 | 70% | 1 | 2.2 | 82.6 | 67.0 | 9 |
| Team totals | 1 | 1.45 | | 11 | | 86.1 | |
Curaçao — projected line vs season baseline (4-3-3)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Juninho Bacuna | M | 87 | 0 | 0.05 | 0.07 | ok | 1 | 1.5 | 75.8 | 67.5 | 6 |
| Leandro Bacuna | M | 89 | 0 | 0.24 | 0.13 | 87% | 2 | 2.0 | 86.4 | 66.3 | 3 |
| Livano Comenencia | D | 69 | 0 | 0.10 | 0.03 | 183% | 1 | 0.7 | 69.0 | 39.1 | 7 |
| Deveron Fonville | D | 89 | 0 | 0.19 | 0.03 | 615% | 0 | 0.2 | 87.4 | 65.0 | 5 |
| Riechedly Bazoer | D | 84 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 100% | 0 | 0.2 | 79.4 | 40.5 | 6 |
| Armando Obispo | D | 90 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 78.8 | 38.4 | 5 |
| Sherel Constancio Floranus | D | 89 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 100% | 0 | 0.5 | 87.4 | 66.5 | 4 |
| Eloy Room | G | 89 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 87.0 | 72.0 | 3 |
| Tahith Chong | M | 83 | 0 | 0.07 | 0.04 | 81% | 2 | 1.3 | 77.5 | 66.3 | 3 |
| Jürgen Locadia | F | 65 | 1 | 0.30 | 0.04 | 730% | 2 | 0.3 | 85.6 | 64.7 | 3 |
| Jeremy Antonisse | M | 58 | 0 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 860% | 0 | 0.1 | 88.8 | 29.0 | 7 |
| Team totals | 1 | 1.05 | | 8 | | 82.1 | |
Antagonist / tactical summary
Home midfield dominates with ~51% possession expected (Moisés Caicedo vs Tahith Chong). Total antagonist xG — Home: 0.24, Away: 0.60. Home danger zone: CM vs CDM + CM. Away danger zone: Left Wing vs Right Back — Flank Battle.
Midfield — possession 51.1% / 48.9%, dominance ratio 0.58, key duel: Moisés Caicedo vs Tahith Chong
John Yeboah xG 0.06Pedro Vite xG 0.04Gonzalo Plata xG 0.05Jürgen Locadia xG 0.21Riechedly Bazoer xG 0.16Tahith Chong xG 0.03
Summary
Antagonist matchup analysis for Ecuador vs Curaçao. Most likely scoreline: 1-1. Lambdas derived from 4 home and 5 away individual player duels.
Tactical parity between 4-4-2 and 4-3-3. Match outcome driven primarily by individual player quality. Home midfield dominates with ~51% possession expected (Moisés Caicedo vs Tahith Chong). Total antagonist xG — Home: 0.24, Away: 0.60. Home danger zone: CM vs CDM + CM. Away danger zone: Left Wing vs Right Back — Flank Battle.
Tunisia vs Japan
FIFA World Cup · 20260620 · 4-2-3-1 vs 3-5-2
Predicted 1-1Winner: DrawConfidence 0.7λ home/away 1.02 / 1.07Most-likely P 13.6%
Actual vs predicted: result not available yet (upcoming fixture).
Lambda decomposition (how the goal rates were built)
| Stage | Tunisia λ | Japan λ |
|---|
| Pre-competitive-floor | 0.728 | 1.073 |
| Pre-calibration | 0.728 | 1.073 |
| Final λ | 1.020 | 1.073 |
competition calibration scale 1.0competition observed total goals 0.0quality gap applied Truemismatch score pressure applied Falsecompetitive underdog floor applied Truestage discount 1.0
Scoreline distribution & markets
| Top 5 scorelines | P |
|---|
| 1-1 | 13.6% |
| 0-1 | 13.1% |
| 0-0 | 12.5% |
| 1-0 | 12.4% |
| 1-2 | 7.2% |
| Home win | 33.5% |
| Draw | 30.3% |
| Away win | 36.2% |
| Over 2.5 | 34.8% |
| BTTS yes | 42.2% |
Projected players vs season baseline
Proj = projected for this match · Season = this season's per-game average from match data · deviation badge compares projected xG to the player's season xG/game.
Tunisia — projected line vs season baseline (4-2-3-1)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Aymen Dahmen | G | 90 | 0 | - | - | n/a | | 0.0 | 90.7 | 42.7 | 3 |
| Montassar Talbi | D | 90 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.04 | ok | 0 | 0.4 | 80.1 | 66.2 | 5 |
| Ali Abdi | D | 58 | 0 | 0.18 | 0.10 | 81% | 1 | 1.0 | 82.4 | 56.6 | 8 |
| Yan Valery | D | 88 | 0 | 0.05 | 0.04 | ok | 1 | 0.2 | 77.6 | 56.2 | 8 |
| Adem Arous | D | 88 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 566% | 0 | 0.2 | 89.7 | 33.8 | 6 |
| Hannibal Mejbri | M | 79 | 0 | 0.04 | 0.05 | ok | 2 | 1.0 | 92.0 | 59.6 | 7 |
| Sebastian Tounekti | M | 73 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 437% | 2 | 0.2 | 75.4 | 38.3 | 10 |
| Ellyes Skhiri | M | 89 | 0 | 0.01 | 0.01 | ok | 1 | 0.1 | 86.7 | 56.7 | 7 |
| Ismael Gharbi | M | 90 | 0 | 0.07 | 0.05 | 46% | 2 | 0.6 | 79.7 | 38.6 | 5 |
| Elias Achouri | M | 90 | 0 | 0.08 | 0.03 | 152% | 1 | 1.0 | 78.7 | 43.3 | 3 |
| Elias Saad | F | 90 | 1 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 977% | 2 | 0.3 | 78.7 | 42.7 | 3 |
| Team totals | 1 | 1.02 | | 15 | | 82.9 | |
Japan — projected line vs season baseline (3-5-2)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Zion Suzuki | G | 94 | 0 | - | - | n/a | | 0.0 | 81.7 | 43.5 | 10 |
| Hiroki Itō | D | 76 | 0 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 365% | 0 | 0.2 | 85.2 | 39.2 | 12 |
| Tsuyoshi Watanabe | D | 90 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 472% | 1 | 0.2 | 82.4 | 40.2 | 5 |
| Ko Itakura | D | 90 | 0 | 0.01 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 84.7 | 38.2 | 6 |
| Takefusa Kubo | M | 74 | 0 | 0.07 | 0.01 | 1220% | 2 | 0.2 | 88.6 | 11.8 | 11 |
| Kaishu Sano | M | 95 | 0 | 0.05 | 0.06 | ok | 2 | 0.9 | 86.4 | 60.7 | 7 |
| Yuito Suzuki | M | 84 | 0 | 0.13 | 0.08 | 70% | 1 | 0.8 | 77.9 | 49.2 | 10 |
| Ritsu Doan | M | 89 | 0 | 0.14 | 0.03 | 462% | 1 | 0.7 | 88.6 | 55.6 | 7 |
| Daichi Kamada | M | 74 | 0 | 0.07 | 0.10 | ok | 1 | 0.5 | 84.0 | 45.8 | 12 |
| Ayase Ueda | F | 89 | 0 | 0.17 | 0.18 | ok | 2 | 2.2 | 81.0 | 71.0 | 5 |
| Daizen Maeda | F | 91 | 1 | 0.27 | 0.27 | ok | 3 | 1.3 | 86.5 | 45.8 | 11 |
| Team totals | 1 | 1.07 | | 13 | | 84.3 | |
Antagonist / tactical summary
Midfield is evenly contested — Hannibal Mejbri vs Takefusa Kubo will be the pivotal duel. Total antagonist xG — Home: 0.23, Away: 0.61. Home danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle. Away danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle.
Midfield — possession 47.7% / 52.3%, dominance ratio 0.44, key duel: Hannibal Mejbri vs Takefusa Kubo
Hannibal Mejbri xG 0.04Sebastian Tounekti xG 0.03Ismael Gharbi xG 0.04Ayase Ueda xG 0.17Ritsu Doan xG 0.14Daichi Kamada xG 0.07
Summary
Antagonist matchup analysis for Tunisia vs Japan. Most likely scoreline: 1-1. Lambdas derived from 5 home and 5 away individual player duels.
Tactical parity between 4-2-3-1 and 3-5-2. Match outcome driven primarily by individual player quality. Midfield is evenly contested — Hannibal Mejbri vs Takefusa Kubo will be the pivotal duel. Total antagonist xG — Home: 0.23, Away: 0.61. Home danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle. Away danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle.
Netherlands vs Sweden
FIFA World Cup · 20260620 · 4-3-3 vs 3-1-4-2
Predicted 1-1Winner: DrawConfidence 0.75λ home/away 1.63 / 1.05Most-likely P 11.8%
Actual vs predicted: result not available yet (upcoming fixture).
Lambda decomposition (how the goal rates were built)
| Stage | Netherlands λ | Sweden λ |
|---|
| Pre-competitive-floor | 1.634 | 0.675 |
| Pre-calibration | 1.634 | 0.675 |
| Final λ | 1.634 | 1.050 |
competition calibration scale 1.0competition observed total goals 0.0quality gap applied Truemismatch score pressure applied Falsecompetitive underdog floor applied Truestage discount 1.0
Scoreline distribution & markets
| Top 5 scorelines | P |
|---|
| 1-1 | 11.8% |
| 1-0 | 11.1% |
| 2-1 | 9.6% |
| 2-0 | 9.1% |
| 0-1 | 7.1% |
| Home win | 50.9% |
| Draw | 24.8% |
| Away win | 24.3% |
| Over 2.5 | 50.2% |
| BTTS yes | 52.4% |
Pregame fair line — favorite Netherlands (50.9%), fair total 2.68, fair spread 0.58
Projected players vs season baseline
Proj = projected for this match · Season = this season's per-game average from match data · deviation badge compares projected xG to the player's season xG/game.
Netherlands — projected line vs season baseline (4-3-3)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Bart Verbruggen | G | 92 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 84.3 | 36.5 | 11 |
| Cody Gakpo | M | 86 | 0 | 0.18 | 0.14 | 31% | 3 | 0.9 | 91.5 | 36.8 | 17 |
| Crysencio Summerville | M | 78 | 0 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 42% | 1 | 0.5 | 84.5 | 45.7 | 10 |
| Tijjani Reijnders | M | 69 | 0 | 0.06 | 0.10 | 36% | 2 | 1.3 | 92.8 | 41.9 | 11 |
| Teun Koopmeiners | M | 27 | 0 | 0.13 | 0.02 | 484% | 2 | 0.3 | 87.5 | 56.9 | 7 |
| Ryan Gravenberch | M | 85 | 0 | 0.06 | 0.05 | ok | 2 | 0.9 | 92.4 | 43.6 | 14 |
| Micky van de Ven | D | 92 | 0 | 0.03 | 0.01 | 153% | 1 | 0.3 | 88.6 | 37.7 | 12 |
| Virgil van Dijk | D | 91 | 0 | 0.13 | 0.06 | 101% | 1 | 0.4 | 97.7 | 47.2 | 14 |
| Jan Paul van Hecke | D | 92 | 0 | 0.31 | 0.11 | 186% | 1 | 0.4 | 87.4 | 40.0 | 11 |
| Denzel Dumfries | M | 90 | 0 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 132% | 0 | 0.3 | 91.1 | 20.2 | 14 |
| Donyell Malen | F | 77 | 1 | 0.40 | 0.51 | ok | 2 | 1.8 | 85.8 | 52.4 | 9 |
| Team totals | 1 | 1.63 | | 15 | | 89.4 | |
Sweden — projected line vs season baseline (3-1-4-2)
| Player | Pos | Min | Proj G | Proj xG | Season xG/g | | Proj Sh | Season Sh/g | Proj Rtg | Season Rtg | Rec |
|---|
| Viktor Gyökeres | F | 87 | 1 | 0.40 | 0.19 | 110% | 2 | 1.6 | 94.9 | 57.7 | 18 |
| Gabriel Gudmundsson | D | 53 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.2 | 84.2 | 36.8 | 11 |
| Alexander Isak | F | 79 | 0 | 0.25 | 0.07 | 273% | 3 | 0.8 | 96.2 | 36.8 | 11 |
| Yasin Ayari | M | 81 | 0 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 101% | 2 | 0.7 | 83.2 | 45.9 | 12 |
| Benjamin Nygren | F | 72 | 0 | 0.09 | 0.10 | ok | 1 | 1.2 | 78.9 | 51.8 | 13 |
| Alexander Bernhardsson | F | 69 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 100% | 0 | 0.1 | 78.6 | 24.0 | 8 |
| Jesper Karlström | M | 83 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.01 | 100% | 1 | 0.5 | 81.4 | 47.2 | 10 |
| Victor Lindelöf | D | 89 | 0 | 0.14 | 0.02 | 805% | 1 | 0.1 | 84.4 | 37.2 | 21 |
| Isak Hien | D | 88 | 0 | 0.05 | 0.01 | 951% | 0 | 0.2 | 84.7 | 56.7 | 9 |
| Gustaf Lagerbielke | D | 88 | 0 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 94% | 0 | 0.4 | 76.7 | 62.4 | 16 |
| Kristoffer Nordfeldt | G | 89 | 0 | 0.00 | - | n/a | 0 | 0.0 | 78.3 | 37.0 | 7 |
| Team totals | 1 | 1.05 | | 10 | | 83.8 | |
Antagonist / tactical summary
Home midfield dominates with ~51% possession expected (Ryan Gravenberch vs Yasin Ayari). Total antagonist xG — Home: 0.71, Away: 0.68. Home danger zone: LW vs CB. Away danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle.
Midfield — possession 51.0% / 49.0%, dominance ratio 0.60, key duel: Ryan Gravenberch vs Yasin Ayari
Ryan Gravenberch xG 0.07Tijjani Reijnders xG 0.07Donyell Malen xG 0.34Viktor Gyökeres xG 0.39Yasin Ayari xG 0.05Victor Lindelöf xG 0.11
Summary
Antagonist matchup analysis for Netherlands vs Sweden. Most likely scoreline: 1-1. Lambdas derived from 5 home and 5 away individual player duels.
Tactical parity between 4-3-3 and 3-1-4-2. Match outcome driven primarily by individual player quality. Home midfield dominates with ~51% possession expected (Ryan Gravenberch vs Yasin Ayari). Total antagonist xG — Home: 0.71, Away: 0.68. Home danger zone: LW vs CB. Away danger zone: Striker vs Two Centre Backs — 1v2 Aerial/Physical Battle.
Generated 2026-09-04 22:27:55 UTC · Soccer prediction reporting