Pass difficulty
49.3%
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Player profile
Manuel Riemann
Bochum · Goalkeeper · GK
Matches observed2
Pass attempts109
Reliable sampleActual completion
50.5%
55 completed passes
Pass difficulty
49.3%
How difficult a pass was to complete.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.2 pp
+1.3 completions vs model expectation
Actual pass completion compared with the model's expected completion.
Player intelligence
Position profile
GK context · Each percentile is an empirical rank among eligible players in the same broad position group. Percentiles are not ratings.
Limited goalkeeper profile: FootyScout does not yet have enough goalkeeper-specific metrics for a meaningful radar.
Style
Tendencies describe what a player attempts; higher is not automatically better.
Under-pressure pass rate
15.6%
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Progressive pass rate
77.1%
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Long-pass rate
81.7%
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Average forward distance
47.8 units
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Positive forward distance / 100 passes
4775.8 units
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Final-third entries / 100 passes
26.606
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Carry share of actions
30.4%
7th percentile among GK players
n = 16 eligible peers · sample 138
Progressive carry rate
0.0%
50th percentile among GK players
n = 14 eligible peers · sample 42
Progressive action rate
51.4%
100th percentile among GK players
n = 16 eligible peers · sample 138
Under-pressure action rate
21.7%
60th percentile among GK players
n = 16 eligible peers · sample 138
Shots / observed match
0.00 / match
Unavailable among GK players
n = 0 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
xG / shot
—
Unavailable among GK players
n = 0 eligible peers · sample 0
metric unavailable
Performance
Observed execution or model-derived output relative to opportunities.
Actual vs. expected passing
+1.2 pp
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 109
requires 10 eligible position peers
Under-pressure completion above expected
-3.9 pp
Unavailable among GK players
n = 4 eligible peers · sample 17
requires 20 pressure passes
Progressive completion above expected
+2.4 pp
63rd percentile among GK players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 84
Long-pass completion above expected
+3.1 pp
61st percentile among GK players
n = 19 eligible peers · sample 89
Goals above expected
0.000
Unavailable among GK players
n = 0 eligible peers · sample 0
requires 20 shots
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.030
67th percentile among GK players
n = 16 eligible peers · sample 138
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.063
69th percentile among GK players
n = 17 eligible peers · sample 96
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Carrying impact / 100 carries
0.047
31st percentile among GK players
n = 14 eligible peers · sample 42
Moderate split-half stability; descriptive rather than latent ability.
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.054
67th percentile among GK players
n = 16 eligible peers · sample 138
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
0.008
27th percentile among GK players
n = 16 eligible peers · sample 138
Weak split-half stability in the current 34-match product cohort.
Playing style
Archetype unavailable
Goalkeepers are excluded from the outfield archetype model.
Archetypes describe outfield playing tendencies, not quality, ability, or rank.
Role Fit — Bayer Leverkusen
Role Fit unavailable
Role Fit is currently available for outfield DEF, MID, and FWD players only.
Attacking impact
Impact of passes and carries
Measures how much each pass or carry changed the expected attacking value of a possession. Positive values improved the attack; negative values reduced it.
Overall impact / 100 actions
-0.030
Passing impact / 100 passes
-0.063
Carrying impact / 100 carries
+0.047
Progressive-action impact / 100 actions
-0.054
Under-pressure impact / 100 actions
+0.008
138 actions · 96 passes · 42 carries · 56.5% increased attacking value
Campos visualization
Carry value map
Exact StatsBomb carry start/end locations. Green increases modeled possession value; coral decreases it.
Situational execution
Under pressure
17 attempts
- Actual
- 41.2%
- Pass difficulty
- 45.1%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- -3.9 pp
Limited sample — interpret this split cautiously.
Progressive passing
84 attempts
- Actual
- 38.1%
- Pass difficulty
- 35.7%
- Actual vs. expected passing
- +2.4 pp
Long passing
89 attempts
- Actual
- 42.7%
- Pass difficulty
- 39.6%
- Actual vs. expected passing
Progression profile
Progressive-pass rate
77.1%
Pressure-pass rate
15.6%
Average forward distance
47.8 m
Positive forward distance / 100
4775.8 m
Final-third entries / 100
26.6
Campos visualization
Pass map
Attacking left to right. Switch between xPass execution difficulty and possession attacking impact.
Showing 1–109 of 109 passes
CompletedIncompleteStronger line = greater pass difficultyThicker line = progressive or under pressure
- Pass difficulty
- 23.1%
- Outcome
- Incomplete
- Attacking impact
- -0.0056
- Value before
- 0.0056
- Value after
- 0.0000
- Length
- 66.7 m
- Context
- Progressive
Event clocks are not retained in the pass API.
Similar playing styles
Style similarity compares position-relative playing style across passing and carrying tendencies. Scores are not ability ratings.
100 means identical observed profiles; 50 is about the median same-position playing style match. Not a probability.
Playing-style similarity unavailable
V3.3B similarity requires an outfield player with at least 50 passes and 29 carries.
Sample support uses the lower observed-match count in each pair. Lower coverage means a measured profile may vary more with additional matches; it never changes the style similarity or ranking.