Brazil: 4

South Korea: 1  

Brazil had 67% of performance relative to a team working at maximum performance and South Korea had 57%.              

Relative intensity in the game:            

               Brazil: 54%

               South Korea: 46%

Finishes:         

               Good number of submissions in the match, 23.

               Brazil: had a good number of submissions compared to a team acting at maximum performance. The goal-direction rate was 67%, which is an excellent rate.

               South Korea: had a regular number of submissions. The goal-direction rate was 75%, which is an excellent rate.

               Who got the most successful submissions: South Korea-Hee-Chan Hwang-ATA, submitting 4 times.

Disarms:             

               Brazil: neutralized 9% of the opponent's moves. Rate below average.

               South Korea: Neutralized 9% of the opponent's plays. Rate below average.

               Brasil-Thiago Silva-ZAG was the one who disarmed the most.

Passes:  

               Brazil: had rate acting at maximum performance. Used 8% of long passes as resources.

               South Korea: had rate acting at maximum performance. Used 9% of long passes as resources.

               Brasil-Thiago Silva-ZAG was the one who hit the most passes.

What to keep:     

               Brazil: rate of correct passes

               South Korea: Right pass rate

What to improve: 

               Brazil: intensity

               South Korea: intensity and finishing

The tireless of the game were:          

               Brazil-Thiago Silva-ZAG

               Brazil-Casemiro-VOL

               South Korea-Hee-Chan Hwang-ATA

The best performances:              

               Thiago Silva, ZAG do Brasil

               Casemiro, VOL do Brasil

               Min-jae Kim, ZAG South Korea

Worst performance:               

               Gue-sung Cho, South Korea ATA

Croatia: 1              

Japan: 1

Croatia had a 78% performance relative to a team performing at peak performance and Japan had 51%.       

Relative intensity in the game:            

               Croatia: 61%

               Japan: 39%

Finishes:         

               Good number of submissions in the match, 27.

               Croatia: had an excellent number of finishes compared to a team working at maximum performance. The goal-direction rate was 19%, which is a bad rate.

               Japan: had a good number of submissions compared to a team acting at maximum performance. The goal-direction rate was 36%, which is regular

               Who got the most successful submissions: Croatia-Ivan Perisic-MEI, submitting twice.

Disarms:             

               Croatia: neutralized 11% of the opponent's plays.

               Japan: Neutralized 8% of the opponent's moves. Rate below average.

               Croatia-Josko Gvardiol-ZAG and Croatia-Dejan Lovren-ZAG were the ones that disarmed the most.

Passes:  

               Croatia: had a good rate. Used 11% of long passes as resources.

               Japan: needs to evolve. Mistakes in passes can mean a defeat. Used 14% of long passes as resources.

               Croatia-Marcelo Brozovic-VOL was the one who made the most passes.

What to keep:     

               Croatia: number of finishes

               Japan: no high performance standouts

What to improve: 

               Croatia: Shots on target rate

               Japan: sure pass rate

The tireless of the game were:          

               Croatia-Dejan Lovren-ZAG

               Croatia-Josko Gvardiol-ZAG

The best performances:              

               Dejan Lovren, Croatia ZAG

               Josko Gvardiol, ZAG of Croatia

               Marcelo Brozovic, VOL from Croatia

Worst performance:               

               Takuma Asano, Japan ATA

               Mislav Orsic, Croatia MEI

Artificial Intelligence does not understand football, but it reveals patterns and important details for professionals, specialists and executives who want to identify key points for consistent improvement in their businesses.

One of the great advantages of AI is the capacity for in-depth analysis in real time, keeping the business in question at a high level of dynamism.

(*) FIF-AI: Football Intensity Factor, developed with the application of AI - Artificial Intelligence applied to football data generated from high-performance games and updated with continuous learning techniques.