StarkPitch Match Lab / FIFA World Cup 2022
Final · 2022-12-18
Argentina 3–3 France
After extra time · Argentina won on penalties
Lusail Stadium · StatsBomb Open Data
Why this match is useful for learning
- The match is famous, so learners already know the narrative — which makes it easier to separate story from evidence.
- Chance creation was uneven across halves and extra time. That forces careful reading of shot maps by phase, not only by final score.
- Argentina’s pass network and progressive-pass map show structured progression; France’s late response shows how a match state can change the picture without rewriting the earlier process.
- The penalty shoot-out sits in period 5 of the open-data file. Mixing shoot-out shots into open-play xG is a common mistake this fixture helps expose.
Match context
Argentina led 2–0, France levelled late in normal time, and both sides scored again in extra time (3–3). Argentina then won the shoot-out.
For teaching, treat regulation + extra time (periods 1–4) as the match process. Period 5 (penalties) is a different exercise: discrete high-xG attempts under a special rule set.
Periods 1–4 (90 minutes + extra time)
Figures below exclude the penalty shoot-out (period 5) so process reading is not distorted by shoot-out xG.
- Argentina
- 20 shots · 3 goals · ~2.76 xG
- Progressive passes: 130 (23.2% of passes)
- France
- 10 shots · 3 goals · ~2.27 xG
- Progressive passes: 56 (12.9% of passes)
Visual 1
Shot map
Each marker is a shot. Location, volume, and quality matter more than counting dots. Read this map with the period caveat above: process first, shoot-out second.
How to read this
- Start with location clusters, not the scoreline. Central box attempts usually carry more historical goal probability than speculative efforts from distance.
- Compare volume and quality together. Argentina recorded more shots in periods 1–4; France’s conversion relative to fewer attempts is part of the late-game story, not proof that earlier Argentine control ‘did not matter’.
- Ask which chances came from open play versus set pieces, and whether a cluster reflects sustained territorial pressure or a short burst.
- Do not invent a formation story the map cannot prove. A shot map shows outcomes of chances, not every off-ball run that created them.
Related Learn lessons
Visual 2
Pass network
Nodes are players (average on-ball locations); edges show completed-pass connections. Thicker or stronger links usually mean more frequent combinations — not automatically better football.
How to read this
- Look for hubs and corridors. Who receives in central zones? Who connects the first line to the final third?
- A dense network on one flank can mean intentional overloads — or forced circulation away from pressure. Confirm with video before naming a ‘plan’.
- Compare Argentina’s denser progressive structure with France’s more selective connections. Difference in volume is informative; it is not a moral ranking.
- Substitutions and game state change networks. A final with long extra time mixes several match phases into one average picture.
Related Learn lessons
Visual 3
Progressive passes
Progressive passes move the ball meaningfully toward goal (here: at least ~12 metres of progress under the football-ai definition used to render these maps). They help separate sterile possession from territory gained.
How to read this
- High progressive volume suggests a team repeatedly advanced the ball; it does not guarantee high-quality shots at the end of those advances.
- Argentina’s progressive share (~23% of passes in this rendering) is substantially higher than France’s (~13%). Read that as a process difference across the match file, then ask when France’s dangerous moments arrived.
- Trace start and end zones. Progression into the half-space or box carries different tactical meaning from sideways progress near halfway.
- Pair this map with the shot map: progression without shots can be sterile control; shots without progression can be transition or set-piece dependent.
Related Learn lessons
Visual 4
Average positions
Markers show average on-ball action locations for players with enough actions. This is not a formation diagram from a chalkboard — it is a spatial summary of where involvement occurred.
How to read this
- Average position ≠ tactical role for every second. A full-back who inverts late will still leave a trail of earlier wide actions in the average.
- Use the plot to form hypotheses about height of engagement and central occupation, then test them on video clips.
- Compare the two sides’ vertical height. A higher average block can indicate territorial dominance or chasing a deficit — match state matters.
- Heatmaps (linked assets in the folder) show density of actions; average positions compress that density into one point per player. Use both ideas, not one alone.
Related Learn lessons
Putting it together
A responsible short report on this final would state the question (for example: how Argentina controlled progression before France’s late surge), show evidence by layer (network → progressive passes → shots), and keep the shoot-out analytically separate.
If you are following the Learn path, write five sentences using only claims these visuals can support — then note what still requires video.
Practice prompt
In 150–200 words: (1) one claim about Argentina’s build-up, (2) one claim about France’s chance quality or timing, (3) one limitation of event data in this match. Link each claim to a visual above.
Event data from StatsBomb’s public World Cup 2022 release. Coordinates use StatsBomb’s pitch model.