Sportra
Sportra Intelligence
How we gather football data, process it, and show it on match, team, and player pages
Last updated: 4 November 2026
Sportra Intelligence is Sportra's data layer: we collect match and season records, normalize and aggregate them into consistent structures, then derive comparisons, scores, and summaries you see in the app. Nothing is hand-counted from video — results come from the datasets we maintain and update.
The previews below use fixed sample data (Northbridge Athletic, Leo Castell, Northbridge Athletic vs Riverside Rovers). On the live site, the same views load for the fixture, club, or player you open.
Data pipeline
Sportra Intelligence runs in four steps for every statistics tab:
- Gather — Sportra loads fixture, team, and player datasets when you open the page (match detail, club season, or player season). Statistics views load their current dataset when requested; live matchday surfaces use a separate background-refresh pipeline.
- Process — values are cleaned (percentages, ranges, missing fields) so numbers can be compared side by side.
- Aggregate — season rows, home/away splits, minute buckets, and team-vs-team pairs are rolled up into the blocks shown in the UI.
- Present — base totals appear in tables and bars; Sportra Intelligence adds derived metrics, scores, and short narratives on top.
| Layer | What you see |
|---|---|
| Base data | Shots, passes, cards, season totals, home/away splits — as gathered for that page |
| Sportra Intelligence | Derived rates, 0–100 scores, archetypes, impact ranks, and match comparisons |
Team and player pages use the league and season you select. Match pages use that fixture only.
Overview
The same intelligence layer powers the Statistics, Players, and Predictions tabs on matches, plus Statistics on team and player profiles. Where the dataset includes a field, we show it; where it does not, we omit the derived metric rather than guess.
Labels such as archetypes, impact leaders, and comparison winners are Sportra definitions for reading the game on Sportra — they are not official competition statistics.
Team statistics — Northbridge Athletic (fictional sample)
Where: Team page → Statistics tab.
Season totals are grouped into blocks (fixture record, goals, minutes, formations, and more). Sportra Intelligence turns those blocks into charts, 0–100 scores, traits, and an archetype summary. Full season tables remain available under Full statistics tables when present.
Season data blocks
| Block | Content |
|---|---|
| Fixture record | Played, wins, draws, losses — home, away, and total |
| Goals | Scored and conceded — totals and averages per game |
| By minute | Goals and cards by time window (e.g. 0–15, 46–60) |
| Goal thresholds | Over/under counts (e.g. over 2.5 goals) |
| Formations | Formation usage counts |
| Form & records | Recent W/D/L, biggest wins/losses, clean sheets, streaks |
Season intelligence (0–100)
- Home fortress — home attack share vs an even split, plus home goals vs home conceded
- Away attack — away goal share vs an even split
- Defensive reliability — clean sheet rate blended with goals conceded per game
- Match chaos — share of high-scoring games from threshold data
- Form momentum — recent form string weighted toward wins
- Tactical flexibility — distinct formations used relative to matches played
Traits and archetype
Traits are rule-based tags (for example, a late-finisher tag when a high share of goals come after 76′). The archetype headline (such as home fortress) summarizes the season profile for quick reading.
Home-Dominant Attack
Much more aggressive at home; away performances lean conservative.
61% of goals scored at home — clear home attacking lift (40 home vs 26 away). Away blanking is more common (6 away vs 2 home).
Peak scoring window: 16-30′ (26% of goals for).
Yellow cards peak in the 76-90′ window (29% of cautions). Late-game discipline risk is elevated.
4-2-3-1 in 84% of matches — stable tactical identity.
13 clean sheets in 38 matches (0.95 conceded per game).
18W 12D 8L in last 38 — 1.74 PPG. Results swing match-to-match.
Low-chaos — controlled scorelines
Averaging 1.7 goals scored and 0.9 conceded per match this season.
Season extremes
Biggest results, streaks, and set-piece record.
Form & momentum
- PPG
- 1.74
- Record
- 18W 12D 8L
- Momentum
- 73%
- Resilience
- low
Goals per game
Average scoring and concession rates for the season.
| Metric | Home | Away | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Goals per game | 2.1 | 1.4 | 1.7 |
| Conceded per game | 0.9 | 1.0 | 0.9 |
Goal markets & chaos
Over/under lines for team goals and opponent goals — full threshold matrix from Sportra.
Team goals (over/under)
Opponent goals (over/under)
Low-chaos — controlled scorelines
Scoring distribution
- 0-15′
- 16-30′
- 31-45′
- 46-60′
- 61-75′
- 76-90′
- 91-105′
Full statistics tables
On the live site, expandable tables list fixture, goal, minute, and formation blocks for the selected season.
Player statistics — Leo Castell (fictional sample)
Where: Player page → Statistics tab.
Season output is merged into one profile: hero metrics, card-style attributes, derived rates, then a full stat breakdown. Non-penalty goals are shown as total goals minus penalties scored when both exist.
Stat groups
Appearances, shooting, goals, passing, tackling, duels, dribbling, fouls, cards, and penalties — combined for the selected league and season. If multiple rows exist for the same competition, counting stats are summed and the highest rating is kept.
Card attributes (scouting profile)
Each rating is scaled 0–99 from this season's stats. Higher is stronger in that area relative to elite benchmarks for the metric mix — not an absolute world ranking.
- Attack
- Goal threat — goals per 90 plus on-target shooting share.
- Vision
- Chance creation — assists per 90 and key passes per match.
- Control
- Ball carrying — dribble success rate and attempts per 90.
- Precision
- Execution quality — shot accuracy, or passing accuracy when shots are scarce.
- Pressure
- Drawing contact — fouls won per 90 (players who attract challenges).
- Defense
- Defensive actions — tackles per 90 and duel win rate.
- Engine
- Usage — average minutes per appearance (stamina / role).
- Discipline
- Card record — fewer yellow/red cards mean a higher score.
- Flair
- Take-on volume — dribble attempts per 90 (direct, skillful play).
Derived categories
| Category | Examples | How it is calculated |
|---|---|---|
| Goal efficiency | Goals per 90, non-penalty goals per 90, shot accuracy, conversion | Per 90 and shot/goal ratios |
| Chance creation | Assists per 90, key passes per match, chance creation index | (Key passes × 2) + assists |
| Ball carrying | Dribbles per 90, dribble success rate | Successful dribbles ÷ attempts |
| Pressure & discipline | Fouls drawn per 90, fouls per yellow | Volume and discipline proxy |
| Defensive work | Tackles per 90, duel win rate, defensive actions per 90 | Tackles + blocks + interceptions |
| Goalkeeping | Saves per 90, conceded per 90, save % | Saves ÷ (saves + conceded) |
| Involvement | Starting rate, minutes per appearance | Lineups ÷ appearances; minutes ÷ appearances |
Some tiles include an intensity bar: value compared to a fixed Sportra benchmark, capped at 100 — a visual cue, not a league percentile.
Season intelligence
Wide creator
Profile as Midfielder: creator, high usage. Archetype: Wide creator. Season rating 7.6.
- Finisher
- Creator
- Ball carrier
- Pressure magnet
- Defensive work
- High usage
Card attributes
Scouting profile
- Attack57
- Vision86
- Control62
- Precision86
- Pressure51
- Defense70
- Engine99
- Discipline3
- Flair19
Derived metrics
How these metrics are calculated
Full stat breakdown
Season summary
- Appearances
- 34
- Lineups
- 32
- Minutes
- 2980
- Position
- Midfielder
- Rating
- 7.6
- Goals
- 11
- Assists
- 9
Appearances & minutes
- Appearances
- 34
- Lineups
- 32
- Minutes
- 2980
- Position
- Midfielder
Shooting
- Total
- 78
- On
- 34
Goals & keepers
- Total
- 11
- Assists
- 9
Passing
- Total
- 2100
- Key
- 72
- Accuracy
- 82%
Defending
- Total
- 42
- Blocks
- 12
- Interceptions
- 28
Duels
- Total
- 280
- Won
- 145
Dribbling
- Attempts
- 38
- Success
- 22
Fouls
- Drawn
- 48
- Committed
- 55
Discipline
- Yellow
- 8
- Red
- 0
Penalties
- Scored
- 6
- Missed
- 1
- Won
- 3
- Committed
- 1
Match statistics — Northbridge Athletic vs Riverside Rovers (fictional sample)
Where: Match page → Statistics tab.
Home and away team totals are paired stat-by-stat, grouped into six themes, then extended with Sportra Intelligence derived rows (efficiency, pressure, gameplay ratings).
Comparison groups
| Group | Examples | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Attacking | xG, shots, shots on target, inside/outside box, offsides | |
| Possession & passing | Possession %, passes, pass accuracy | |
| Set pieces | Corners | |
| Defensive & goalkeeping | Blocks, saves, goals prevented | |
| Discipline | Fouls, yellow and red cards | Lower is better on comparison bars |
| Other | Any remaining stat types | Shown with a readable label |
Derived match metrics
- Shot accuracy — shots on target ÷ total shots
- xG per shot — expected goals ÷ total shots
- Inside box ratio — inside-box shots ÷ total shots
- Attack pressure — (in-box shots × 2) + corners + shots on target + blocks faced
- Gameplay ratings — aggression, control, siege pressure, clinical index, defensive compactness, chaos factor
Comparison bars highlight the leading side; fouls and cards favour the lower value.
Attacking
Shot volume, box entries, and chance quality — who threatened the goal more.
| Northbridge Athletic | Statistic | Riverside Rovers |
|---|---|---|
7 | Total shotsAll attempts including blocked and off-target. | 21Lead |
4 | Shots on target | 9Lead |
3 | Shots inside the box | 15Lead |
4 | Shots outside the box | 6Lead |
0.77 | Expected goals (xG)Quality of chances created — not just shot count. | 2.05Lead |
2Lead | OffsidesTiming of runs — high counts can mean aggressive lines. | 4 |
Possession & passing
How each side moved the ball and shared control of the match.
| Northbridge Athletic | Statistic | Riverside Rovers |
|---|---|---|
49% | Ball possession | 51%Lead |
555Lead | Total passes | 502 |
472Lead | Accurate passes | 421 |
85%Lead | Pass accuracy | 84% |
Set pieces
Dead-ball situations that can swing momentum and territory.
| Northbridge Athletic | Statistic | Riverside Rovers |
|---|---|---|
3 | Corner kicks | 6Lead |
Defensive & goalkeeping
Blocks, saves, and how much danger was actually allowed.
| Northbridge Athletic | Statistic | Riverside Rovers |
|---|---|---|
2 | Blocked shotsDefensive actions — also counts as part of attacking pressure faced. | 11Lead |
6Lead | Goalkeeper saves | 3 |
0.2 | Goals preventedKeeper performance vs expected — positive is above average. | 0.6Lead |
Discipline
Physical intensity and referee involvement — fouls and cards.
| Northbridge Athletic | Statistic | Riverside Rovers |
|---|---|---|
11 | Fouls | 9Lead |
2 | Yellow cards | 1Lead |
0 | Red cards | 0 |
Tactical insights
Sportra Intelligence methodology ↗Scouting-style duels — each row compares both teams, shows share of the pie, and who had the edge. Categories summarize who won more signals.
Shooting efficiency
How clinical and dangerous each attack was — not just how often they shot, but where and how good those chances were.
Northbridge Athletic leads this block
Northbridge Athletic leads shot accuracy (+33% vs Riverside Rovers)
- 1Northbridge Athletic57%57% shareRiverside Rovers43%43% share
Northbridge Athletic leads shot accuracy (+33% vs Riverside Rovers)
- 2Northbridge Athletic0.11053% shareRiverside Rovers0.09847% share
Northbridge Athletic leads (0.110 vs 0.098).
- 3Northbridge Athletic43%38% shareRiverside Rovers71%63% share
Riverside Rovers leads box penetration (+67% vs Northbridge Athletic)
Tactical identity
Playing style signals: whether chances came from patient possession or direct vertical play.
Riverside Rovers leads this block
Riverside Rovers leads possession efficiency (+156% vs Northbridge Athletic)
- 1Northbridge Athletic0.01628% shareRiverside Rovers0.04072% share
Riverside Rovers leads possession efficiency (+156% vs Northbridge Athletic)
- 2Northbridge Athletic7977% shareRiverside Rovers2423% share
Northbridge Athletic — slower buildup (more passes per shot)
Pressure & control
Territorial dominance built from box presence, set pieces, and sustained threat.
Riverside Rovers leads this block
Riverside Rovers leads territorial pressure (+273% vs Northbridge Athletic)
- 1Northbridge Athletic1521% shareRiverside Rovers5679% share
Riverside Rovers leads territorial pressure (+273% vs Northbridge Athletic)
Defensive
How well each side limited chance quality and how demanding the keepers’ workload was.
Northbridge Athletic leads this block
Northbridge Athletic — stronger shot quality allowed
- 1Northbridge Athletic0.09847% shareRiverside Rovers0.11053% share
Northbridge Athletic — stronger shot quality allowed
- 2Northbridge Athletic0.3457% shareRiverside Rovers0.2643% share
Northbridge Athletic leads keeper workload (+33% vs Riverside Rovers)
Gameplay profile
Archetype ratings you can map to card modifiers, AI behaviour, or match narratives.
- 1Northbridge Athletic15.058% shareRiverside Rovers11.042% share
Northbridge Athletic leads (15.0 vs 11.0).
- 2Northbridge Athletic41.649% shareRiverside Rovers42.851% share
Riverside Rovers leads (42.8 vs 41.6).
- 3Northbridge Athletic6.022% shareRiverside Rovers21.078% share
Riverside Rovers leads (21.0 vs 6.0).
- 4Northbridge Athletic0.11053% shareRiverside Rovers0.09847% share
Northbridge Athletic leads (0.110 vs 0.098).
- 5Northbridge Athletic90.250% shareRiverside Rovers89.050% share
Northbridge Athletic leads (90.2 vs 89.0).
- 6Northbridge Athletic15.042% shareRiverside Rovers21.058% share
Riverside Rovers leads (21.0 vs 15.0).
Match player statistics
Where: Match page → Players tab.
Each player line from the match dataset is processed into a box score, derived rates, an impact score, optional badges, and team-level duel bars that sum both squads.
Per player
Minutes, rating, position, goals, assists, saves, cards — plus derived passing, duel, and discipline metrics for that appearance.
Impact score
- Outfield: rating, goals, assists, key passes, shots on target, tackles, interceptions, saves, and card penalties combined into one ranking score
- Goalkeeper: rating, saves, goals conceded, and passing volume
Badges mark standouts (best rating, playmaker, wall, and similar). Captain is shown when flagged in the data. Team totals aggregate all players on each side for head-to-head bars.
Leo Castell leads the player ratings (Rating 8.4).
- Leo Castell (M) logged the full 90 minutes with a 8.4 rating. Contributed 1 goal and 1 assist. 5 defensive actions (5.0 per 90).
- Yann Duval (F) logged the full 90 minutes with a 7.5 rating. Contributed 1 goal and 1 assist.
- Owen Hale (F) logged the full 90 minutes with a 7.8 rating. Contributed 1 goal.
- Tomas Brandt played the full 90 minutes for Northbridge Athletic (rating 7.1). Completed around 20 of 28 passes (71%). Faced 8 shots on target (75% save rate).
Top performers
- Best playerLeo Castell
- PlaymakerLeo Castell
- WallTomas Brandt
- Defensive anchorLeo Castell
- DribblerYann Duval
- Attacking threatLeo Castell
- Risky playerLeo Castell
- CaptainLeo Castell
Squad totals
Summed from every player on the pitch — useful for spotting which side controlled each phase.
Total shots
Passes
Key passes
Tackles
Duels won
Successful dribbles
Saves
Sportra impact score
Sportra blend of rating, goals, creativity, defending, and discipline.
- 1118Leo CastellNorthbridge Athletic
- 299Yann DuvalRiverside Rovers
- 393Owen HaleRiverside Rovers
- 489Tomas BrandtNorthbridge Athletic
- 579Erik SolbergRiverside Rovers
- 671Marco IlvesNorthbridge Athletic
Player comparison
Side-by-side match box scores — sorted by rating.
| Player | Rating | Minutes | Goals | Assists | Key passes | Def. contrib. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Leo Castell | 90 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 5 | |
Owen Hale | 90 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | |
Yann Duval | 85 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | |
Tomas Brandt | 90 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | |
Marco Ilves | 78 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Erik Solberg | 90 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
Full squad box scores
Every player with box scores, derived metrics, and expandable full stat breakdowns.
- —Tomas BrandtG
90′ · 6 SV
- 28.0 ps/90
- 20 acc ps
- 75% saves
Tomas Brandt played the full 90 minutes for Northbridge Athletic (rating 7.1). Completed around 20 of 28 passes (71%). Faced 8 shots on target (75% save rate).
- —Marco IlvesF
78′
- 13.8 ps/90
- 9 acc ps
- 2.3 sh/90
- 33% duels
- 0% drib
Marco Ilves (F) logged 78 minutes with a 6.9 rating. 2 shots without finding the net.
- —Leo CastellMC
90′ · 1G · 1A
- 68.0 ps/90
- 58 acc ps
- 5 def
- 4.0 sh/90
- 57% duels
- 75% drib
Leo Castell (M) logged the full 90 minutes with a 8.4 rating. Contributed 1 goal and 1 assist. 5 defensive actions (5.0 per 90).
- —Erik SolbergG
90′ · 3 SV
- 24.0 ps/90
- 21 acc ps
- 75% saves
Erik Solberg played the full 90 minutes for Riverside Rovers (rating 6.8). Completed around 21 of 24 passes (88%). Faced 4 shots on target (75% save rate).
- —Yann DuvalF
85′ · 1G · 1A
- 32.8 ps/90
- 26 acc ps
- 1 def
- 5.3 sh/90
- 58% duels
- 71% drib
Yann Duval (F) logged the full 90 minutes with a 7.5 rating. Contributed 1 goal and 1 assist.
- —Owen HaleF
90′ · 1G
- 22.0 ps/90
- 18 acc ps
- 6.0 sh/90
- 55% duels
- 50% drib
Owen Hale (F) logged the full 90 minutes with a 7.8 rating. Contributed 1 goal.
Predictions
Where: Match page → Predictions tab.
Win, draw and away shares are an estimate. Each team's expected goals average its season goals scored with the opponent's season goals conceded. Early-season rates are pulled towards a typical 1.35 goals, as if each team had already played five typical matches, and the home side gets a 10% edge. A Poisson model then turns the two rates into outcome shares. The estimate needs at least three league matches for both teams; with fewer we show no shares. It uses pre-match data only, ignores injuries and line-ups, and is a statistical guide, not betting advice.
What the tab includes
- Estimated outcome shares (home, draw, away) and expected goals
- Side-by-side comparison (form, attack, defence, goals, head-to-head, overall)
- Season and streak metrics per team
- Recent head-to-head fixtures when available
- Charts — outcome donut, profile radar, scoreline bars, season anchors, signal grids
Balanced — model leans Northbridge Athletic
Estimated win chances: Northbridge Athletic 54.6%, draw 25.5%, Riverside Rovers 19.9%. From 13 and 13 competition matches.
Outcome model
Sportra's estimate from each team's season goal rates. It is a statistical guide, not betting advice.
Goal expectancy
1.56Expected goals0.83
From 13 and 13 competition matches
Likely scorelines (Poisson)
Form & momentum
Weighted momentum, recent result run, and form-window W–D–L — the live pulse before kickoff.
Northbridge Athletic carries the sharper recent run (+12 momentum).
Northbridge Athletic
4W · 3D · 6LRiverside Rovers
4W · 2D · 7LForm split comparison
Wins, draws, and losses across the sampled form window
Season record
League totals anchoring the snapshot — points, goal balance, and season shape vs opponent.
Northbridge Athletic
15 pts3W · 6D · 4L · 13 played
Riverside Rovers
14 pts4W · 2D · 7L · 13 played
Season shape comparison
League table W–D–L, goal balance, and form-run counts from league profile signals
Matchup edges
Attack vs opponent defense in the matchup comparison.
- Northbridge Athletic offensive edge
Northbridge Athletic's attack (43%) vs Riverside Rovers's defense (38%).
+5 - Riverside Rovers offensive edge
Riverside Rovers runs into a stronger home defensive profile.
-5
Goals profile
Average goals for and against — home, away, and overall splits.
Scoring reliability
Blank spells, clean sheets, and under/over tendencies.
- Failed to score42%38%
- Clean sheet31%15%
- Under 3.5 goals72%68%
Extremes & streaks
Biggest wins and losses, plus longest win/loss runs.
Northbridge Athletic
Riverside Rovers
Team comparison
Comparison indices from the match data partner.
H2H in this snapshot
From 3 meetings included in this prediction snapshot.
Sample data only (Sample League · 2019–20 (illustrative)). Live pages use the same views with Sportra data for your selected fixture, team, player, league, and season.
Team of the Week
Team of the Week uses the stored match rating on players who appeared in that round. It is not a season reputation score and it is not a weighted formula.
- A player needs at least 60 minutes in a finished match in the round.
- The position must be a known goalkeeper, defender, midfielder, or forward.
- If a player appears twice, the higher match rating is kept.
- The XI is 4-3-3. At most three players from one club are selected while the side is filled.
- Ties break by rating, then goals, then assists, then player id.
- Player of the Week is the highest-rated selected player.
Limits
- If a stat is missing from the dataset for that page, related derived metrics are not shown.
- Penalty shootout scores on match headers follow the PEN status and phase breakdown used elsewhere on Sportra.
- Match, team, and player detail pages show the dataset from when the page was loaded. To see updated statistics, reload the page — we do not poll upstream on a fixed interval for those tabs.
- Predictions reflect pre-match data only.
Questions: Contact · Data licensing: Data attribution
Frequently asked questions
What is Sportra Intelligence?
- Sportra Intelligence is Sportra's derived data layer. We collect match and season records, normalize them, then derive comparisons, 0–100 scores, archetypes, and narratives — not hand-counted video tags.
Are the previews on this page real match data?
- No. The interactive previews use fixed illustrative sample data with fictional clubs and players (Northbridge Athletic, Leo Castell, Northbridge Athletic vs Riverside Rovers). On live entity pages, the same UI loads real fixture, club, or player data.
Do Intelligence scores update live during a match?
- Match, team, and player detail tabs show the dataset from when the page was loaded. Reload to pick up post-load corrections. Predictions reflect pre-match signals only and do not update from in-play events.
Where can I read more about sourcing?
- See Data attribution for licensing boundaries and Contact for product questions.
