Rotherham United vs Leyton Orient

2025-10-18 Orient perspective 1663 match-play events 170 reportable incidents Expected-goals feed merged. xG coverage: 18/18 shots; xGOT coverage: 18/18 shots. Signed passing threat proxy · v2

Match Control Board

Passes486Opp 311

Pass Completion73%Opp 60%

Progressive Passes69Opp 64

Final Third Entries30Opp 28

Box Entries2Opp 2

Shots14Opp 4

xG1.42Opp 0.51

xGOT0.57Opp 1.24

High Regains5Opp 13

Performance Verdict

Reality checkStable process with isolated review points

The data does not support a dramatic verdict. The coaching focus should be on the specific weak patterns rather than the whole performance.

bad signalMidfield did not join the game up

The event profile points to a gap between defence and attack. Possession had to travel too far before it became pressure, and central progression was not reliable enough.

Evidence: Final-third entries 30 vs 28; line breaks 4 vs 18; average event height 43.8 vs 42.9.
Video Check: Freeze possessions after centre-back passes into midfield: was anyone receiving on the half-turn, or were midfielders hiding behind cover shadows?

poor signalBuild-up became hesitant, then hopeful

The ball was either recycled without enough progression or sent long without enough success. That is how defenders start playing anxious football.

Evidence: 63% of completed deep passes were low-progression; 64 of 134 long/direct attempts failed.
Video Check: Clip every deep possession of four or more passes and every failed long exit. Separate bad pass choice from no midfield option.

Bottom-Line Pattern Board

warning signalRepeated phases need a defensive-shape review

The event profile flagged low-block/back-five review phases at 0-15, 16-30, 31-45, 46-60, 61-75, 76-90+.

Bottom line: This does not prove Orient changed formation; it says enough actions came from deep/wide defensive zones to justify freezing the video and counting the last line.
Clip check: Freeze the first defensive possession in each phase and count the last line plus wide midfield recovery positions.

warning signalLine breaks are not being supported well enough

When Orient broke a central line, the next sequence reached the box or produced a shot on 1/4 occasions.

Bottom line: The first pass through pressure is happening, but the next action is not reliably turning it into box access.
Clip check: Check the third-man support around the receiver: was the runner close enough and was the next pass available?

warning signalWide territory is not enough by itself

Wide entries became box/shot sequences at 11%; central entries did so at 33%.

Bottom line: This is the classic false comfort: Orient get up the side of the pitch, but without central occupation or cutback access the attack stalls.
Clip check: Review whether the far-side winger, 10 and nearest 8 arrive in time when the ball reaches the wide player.

positive signalThe press is creating usable attacks

High regains became a shot, box entry or final-third entry on 2/5 occasions.

Bottom line: The first action after the regain is the coaching point; effort is only valuable if the next pass punishes the opponent.
Clip check: Clip the first two actions after each high regain: support distance, body shape and runner timing decide whether the press pays off.

positive signalDefensive entries were mostly contained

Opposition final-third entries became box/shot danger on 3/29 occasions.

Bottom line: This separates defending territory from defending danger: the key is whether the first contact ends the attack or merely delays it.
Clip check: Review the first Orient action after the entry: clear contact, forced backwards pass, or only passive pressure.

Trigger Outcome Evidence

This moves the report from "events happened here" to "when this trigger occurred, this was the next useful or dangerous outcome". It is the evidence board for repeatable coaching points.

Style Shift By Phase

This flags whether Orient's event profile became deeper, more direct, or more defensively crowded by phase. It is a formation clue, not proof; the clip check confirms the actual shape.

Phase Style Audit

Phase	Orient Height	Opp Height	Def. Height	Deep Actors	Wide Deep	Direct Passes	High Regains	Read
0-15	36.2	41.8	29.6	10	7	32%	1	Back-five/low-block review
16-30	42.7	45.9	25.6	10	6	30%	0	Back-five/low-block review
31-45	39.6	46.9	34.4	8	7	21%	1	Back-five/low-block review
46-60	46.8	43.8	35.0	7	6	33%	0	Back-five/low-block review
61-75	43.2	45.4	31.2	9	9	27%	0	Back-five/low-block review
76-90+	51.5	31.6	35.4	6	4	26%	3	Back-five/low-block review

Use this table for claims such as "Orient dropped deeper", "the press faded", or "the team stopped trusting build-up". A back-five read requires video confirmation, but the event signature can tell us where to look.

Control Diagnostics

Threat Balance+1.44Opp: -15.4 | Orient median: -2.0 (61) | Above Orient baseline.

Orient had the higher net positional passing value after deductions. Review whether that came from useful progression or lower lost value; this alone does not establish better chance creation.

Line Breaks-14Opp: +18 | Orient median: -3 (61) | Below desired baseline.

Orient did not win the line-break battle. Review bravery and timing around the first central receiver.

Press Payoff2/5Opp: 8% | Orient median: 15% (61) | Above Orient baseline.

The high press had attacking value, not just effort. Regains were becoming entries, box access or shots often enough to matter.

Rest Defence0Orient median: 0 (61) | In normal Orient range.

There were transition leaks, but they were mostly contained before becoming major danger.

Final-Third Tilt51%Opp: 49% | Orient median: 48% (61) | In normal Orient range.

Share of all final-third event volume owned by Orient. This is a better control proxy than raw possession.

Average Event Height44Opp: 42.9 | Orient median: 42.8 (61) | In normal Orient range.

Average Orient event location on the x-axis. Higher means the game was played closer to the opposition goal.

Benchmark Lens

Versus What?

Metric	Orient	Opponent / Against	Orient Median	Sample	Read	What It Means
Threat Balance	1.4	-15.4	-2.0	61	Above Orient baseline.	Orient minus opposition net positional passing value, including failed-pass costs and negative completed moves. Not a calibrated goal model or standalone result predictor.
Line Breaks	-14	+18	-3	61	Below desired baseline.	Central vertical passes that broke useful pitch lines versus those allowed.
Press Payoff	40%	8%	15%	61	Above Orient baseline.	Share of high regains that became a shot, box entry or final-third entry.
Rest Defence	0	-	0	61	In normal Orient range.	Advanced Orient losses that became opposition box or shot danger.
Final-Third Tilt	51%	49%	48%	61	In normal Orient range.	Share of final-third event volume owned by Orient.
Average Event Height	43.8	42.9	42.8	61	In normal Orient range.	Average Orient event location on the x-axis. It is a territory indicator, not automatically a quality indicator.
Territory To Box	7%	7%	22%	61	Below desired baseline.	Share of final-third entries that became box entries.

Historical context loaded from 61 usable Orient event samples. Reads compare this match against Orient's own median, not a generic league assumption.

Average event height and final-third tilt are territory indicators. They become meaningful only when checked against Orient's own baseline, the opponent's match profile, and whether territory became box access, shots, or transition exposure.

Statistical Inference: Why?

Medium confidenceBuild-up may have become sterile around the back

That combination suggests Orient kept the ball in deeper areas without consistently finding the first pass through pressure.

Signal: 63% of completed deep passes were low-progression, with line breaks -14.
Video question: Clip deep possessions that last 4+ passes and ask who should have received on the half-turn.
Caveat: Safe recycling is not automatically bad; it becomes a problem when it is not followed by vertical access.

Medium confidenceDirect exits may not have stuck

If long exits fail repeatedly, the front line cannot breathe and the defence faces repeat waves.

Signal: 64 of 134 long/direct pass attempts failed.
Video question: Check whether long passes were planned outlets, pressure clearances, or poor pass selection.
Caveat: Some failed long balls are acceptable if they turn the opponent and allow the block to reset.

Phase xG Audit

Phase	Orient xG	Opp xG	Orient Shots	Opp Shots
0-15	0.00	0.18	0	2
16-30	0.02	0.00	1	0
31-45	0.00	0.00	0	0
46-60	0.07	0.27	2	1
61-75	0.29	0.06	4	1
76-90+	1.04	0.00	7	0

This checks whether the match changed by phase: early control, late collapse, or isolated big chances.

Player Leak Responsibility

Player	Leaks	Minute Span
S. Clare	2	8'-11'
C. Wellens	2	33'-71'
O. Beckles	2	41'-70'
A. Connolly	1	31'-31'
D. Ballard	1	46'-46'

This identifies the source event for dangerous transition leaks. It is a clipping queue, not a blame table.

Build-Up And Circulation Audit

Signal	Orient	Opponent
Deep low-progression pass share	63%	32%
Side/back completed pass share	63%	53%
Progressive pass rate	19%	34%
Line-break rate	1.1%	9.6%
Failed long/direct passes	64/134	59/98
Central completed pass share	29%	27%

This is the check for claims like "too deep", "too safe around the back", or "direct exits did not stick".

The Plain-English Read

Progression+5

Orient found more forward value than the opposition. The video question is whether that came through midfield control or lower-value wide forcing.

Box Access+0

There is a territory-to-box warning. Getting up the pitch is not enough if the next action cannot access the box.

High Press-8

The press did not show strongly enough in high regains. Check the squeeze behind the forwards, not just the forwards' work rate.

With The Ball

Pass Map

Red shows progressive passes, teal shows final-third entries, and gold shows box entries. This is the quickest view of whether possession became threat or just circulation.

Passing Network

Node size reflects involvement. Red nodes are players with repeated progressive contribution. Links are inferred from completed passes and the next same-team event in the feed.

Threat, Routes, Line Breaks

Threat Added Heat Map

Positional passing proxy v2, in points (value ×100), not expected goals. Completed passes earn destination minus start value, including negatives. Failed, blocked and offside passes with a known failure outcome lose their starting value; we do not add an assumed opponent counterattack cost. Cells show Orient minus opposition net value: completions at destination, failures at origin. Missing/invalid coordinates and unknown outcomes are excluded. Carries and take-ons are outside this pass-only model. Both sides assume increasing x is forward. Scored passes: Orient 487/498; opposition 313/324.

Line-Break Map

Only vertical passes through useful central lanes are shown. This isolates whether Orient actually broke the game open or simply moved around the outside.

Route Fingerprint

Lane-by-lane split of pass volume, progressive actions, entries and threat added. This makes the attacking identity visible rather than relying on eye-test memory.

Territory, Chances, Pressure

Shot Map

Pressing Heat Map

Territory Share

Phase Momentum

Press Payoff And Rest Defence

High-Regain Outcomes

Each high regain is tagged by the next attacking outcome: shot, box access, final-third entry, retention or loss. Work rate only matters if the next action has value.

Transition Leak Map

Advanced Orient losses are connected to the opposition danger that followed. This is the rest-defence audit: where attacks died and what came back.

Possession Chains

Best Attacking Chains

Start	Origin	Events	xG	Net threat	Outcome
90:07	Final third / Central	1	0.44	0.00	Shot
90:06	Final third / Central	1	0.26	0.00	Shot
74:08	Final third / Central	1	0.20	0.00	Shot
87:43	Final third / Right half-space	1	0.13	0.00	Shot
92:14	Final third / Central	1	0.08	0.00	Shot
89:39	Final third / Central	1	0.07	0.00	Shot
58:20	Final third / Right touchline	2	0.05	0.26	Shot
73:41	Final third / Central	1	0.05	0.00	Shot

Chains are inferred from consecutive same-team events. This is not a possession model replacement, but it is strong enough to find the attacks worth clipping first.

Player Impact Layer

Player	Events	Net threat	Line Breaks	Box Actions	High Regains	Shot Chain Actions
K. Cahill	65	202	2	0	0	0
J. Simpson	67	93	1	0	0	0
J. Moorhouse	17	35	0	0	0	0
S. Clare	92	20	0	1	0	1
D. Happe	74	1	0	2	0	2
T. James	23	-11	0	1	0	2
A. Abdulai	4	-45	0	0	0	0
O. Beckles	123	-56	0	2	0	3
I. El Mizouni	86	-64	0	1	1	2
J. Koroma	20	-133	0	1	2	1

Role-Adjusted Threat Context

Net passing threat /90 vs Attempted passing threat /90

This compares net passing value with positive intended passing gain, in points per 90. Both axes exclude carries and take-ons. Failed passes deduct starting value and backwards value changes remain negative; the solid horizontal line marks zero. The ratio labelled net/attempted can be negative and is not a completion probability. Wide isolation players can sit in the high-attempt/low-return quadrant without automatically being poor: the question is whether their risk is structurally necessary, well-supported and creating downstream instability. Short samples are lighter and should be used mainly as clipping prompts.

Wide isolation attackerC. WellensHigh attempt / low return

Inferred 95 mins; starter/full-match estimate from event timeline.

Do not read the low net passing threat as simple underperformance. This is a high-risk wide role: the player is trying to access value through crosses or ambitious passes, so the video question is decision quality and support timing.

Minutes: 95
Net passing threat: -284.6
Attempted passing threat: 875.7
Attempted /90: 829.1
Adventurous: 41
Turnovers /90: 20.8

Wide isolation attackerA. ConnollyHigh attempt / low return

Inferred 76 mins; starter withdrawn from player-off event.

Minutes: 76
Net passing threat: -251.1
Attempted passing threat: 384.2
Attempted /90: 452.5
Adventurous: 16
Turnovers /90: 13.0

Forward / box threatS. PerkinsHigh attempt / low return

Inferred 19 mins; very small sample. Treat this as a usage clue, not a verdict.

High chaos profile: the ambition is real, but the loss rate is high enough to require video review.

Minutes: 19
Net passing threat: -208.5
Attempted passing threat: 125.9
Attempted /90: 600.8
Adventurous: 7
Turnovers /90: 19.1

Wide isolation attackerD. BallardLow attempt / low return

Inferred 95 mins; starter/full-match estimate from event timeline.

High chaos profile: the ambition is real, but the loss rate is high enough to require video review.

Minutes: 95
Net passing threat: -302.8
Attempted passing threat: 65.6
Attempted /90: 62.1
Adventurous: 8
Turnovers /90: 11.4

Role Context Table

Player	Inferred Role	Mins	Net passing threat	Attempted passing threat	Attempted /90	Realised /90	Ambition Gap /90	Role Adj. /90	Net / attempted	Adventurous	Turnovers	Quadrant
C. Wellens	Wide isolation attacker	95	-284.6	875.7	829.1	-269.4	1098.5	+17.2	-32%	41	22	High attempt / low return
O. Beckles	Build-up defender	95	-56.4	758.2	717.8	-53.4	771.2	-54.8	-7%	42	22	High attempt / high return
K. Cahill	Build-up defender	95	202.2	579.7	548.8	191.4	357.4	+190.1	35%	24	13	High attempt / high return
A. Connolly	Wide isolation attacker	76	-251.1	384.2	452.5	-295.8	748.3	-9.1	-65%	16	11	High attempt / low return
S. Perkins	Forward / box threat	19	-208.5	125.9	600.8	-994.7	1595.6	-871.6	-166%	7	4	High attempt / low return
S. Clare	Support player	88	19.7	364.0	371.7	20.1	351.6	+0.0	5%	37	16	High attempt / high return
J. Simpson	Build-up defender	76	93.0	287.1	339.1	109.8	229.2	+108.5	32%	18	9	High attempt / high return
T. James	Wide isolation attacker	19	-10.7	111.1	536.0	-51.7	587.7	+234.9	-10%	6	1	High attempt / high return
T. Bakinson	Support player	77	-158.0	282.0	331.2	-185.6	516.8	-205.7	-56%	24	13	Low attempt / low return
I. El Mizouni	Wide connector	95	-64.2	217.1	205.5	-60.7	266.3	+264.6	-30%	28	3	Low attempt / efficient return
D. Happe	Build-up defender	95	1.4	213.4	202.0	1.3	200.7	+0.0	1%	23	9	Low attempt / efficient return
J. Koroma	Wide isolation attacker	18	-133.4	67.3	328.2	-650.8	979.0	-364.1	-198%	6	4	Low attempt / low return

Quadrants and role adjustment are minutes-normalised. Raw totals still matter, but short substitute samples should be treated as clipping prompts rather than firm judgements.

Player Involvement

Player	Events	Completed Passes	Progressive Passes	Entries	Defensive Actions	Shots
O. Beckles	123	61	13	5	8	2
C. Wellens	95	34	8	6	10	1
S. Clare	92	38	6	3	5	1
I. El Mizouni	86	53	9	4	5	1
D. Happe	74	23	6	1	6	2
J. Simpson	67	30	7	5	8	0
T. Bakinson	66	25	4	1	10	0
K. Cahill	65	30	12	2	5	0
T. Adaramola	60	11	0	0	10	0
D. Ballard	46	5	1	1	2	0

Incident Timeline

2:02Attempt SavedA. Martha
2:02SaveK. Cahill
3:29DispossessedJ. Benson
3:34DispossessedA. Connolly
3:58Take OnK. Spence
4:03Attempt SavedJ. Hugill
4:03SaveO. Beckles
5:05DispossessedA. Connolly
5:06Take OnA. Connolly
12:15Take OnS. McWilliams
12:19FoulJ. Benson
12:19FoulI. El Mizouni
13:01DispossessedD. Ballard
14:59DispossessedT. Adaramola
16:48Take OnJ. Hugill
18:12DispossessedD. Ballard
18:50FoulA. Martha
18:50FoulI. El Mizouni
+152 more incidentsavailable in source feed