Côte d'Ivoire operates with a balanced, mixed-tempo tactical identity. The team maintains a steady 59.6% possession share while distributing scoring responsibilities across the squad, with Amad Diallo contributing 10% of their non-own-goal output. This collective approach allows them to adapt their pace effectively against varying levels of opposition.

Playing identity · system ↔ individual × direct ↔ possession

Côte d'Ivoire is plotted from possession share and top-scorer concentration. PPDA and recent form are supporting context when present.

+Recent form8 · 4W 1D 3L

2026-06-30World Cup 2026HCIV 1-2 NORL

2026-06-25World Cup 2026ACIV 2-0 CUWW

2026-06-20World Cup 2026ACIV 1-2 GERL

2026-06-14World Cup 2026HCIV 1-0 ECUW

2026-01-10Africa Cup of Nations 2025ACIV 2-3 EGYL

2026-01-06Africa Cup of Nations 2025HCIV 3-0 BFAW

2025-12-31Africa Cup of Nations 2025ACIV 3-2 GABW

2025-12-28Africa Cup of Nations 2025HCIV 1-1 CMRD

International friendly matches are excluded

N2 · Scoring

open play 97%

How they score

Côte d'Ivoire relies almost exclusively on open play to generate their scoring output. With a conversion rate significantly higher than the field average, their attacking efficiency is driven by sustained possession rather than set-piece opportunities.

Goal source · share of play-type-classified goals

97.3%

Open play97.3%Counter2.7%

Effectiveness · conversion by source vs benchmark

Open play31%avg 20%+11 pts

37 goals from 120 shots.

Set piece0.0%avg 4.5%-4 pts

0 goals from 61 shots.

benchmark average higher than field by 3+ pts lower than field by 3+ pts

Goal-source shares use non-own-goal rows with source_class values; own goals are excluded.

+Top scorers · still a threat?75% intact

75% of listed scorer goals come from players still marked in the squad.

Amad Diallo	in squad	4 · 10%
Franck Kessié	in squad	4 · 10%
Sébastien Haller	out	4 · 10%
Seko Fofana	in squad	4 · 10%

N3 · Conceding

open play 100%

How they concede

Côte d'Ivoire's defensive vulnerabilities are exclusively rooted in open play scenarios. With every classified goal conceded occurring during active play, opponents may find success by prioritizing quick transitions and sustained pressure. Their resilience against set pieces provides a stable foundation, but maintaining defensive shape during fluid sequences remains a critical challenge.

Conceded goal source · share of play-type-classified goals

100%

Open play100%

Effectiveness · conceded conversion by source vs benchmark

Open play16%avg 20%-3 pts

12 conceded from 74 shots faced.

Set piece0.0%avg 4.5%-4 pts

0 conceded from 33 shots faced.

benchmark average lower than field by 3+ pts higher than field by 3+ pts

Conceded source shares use non-own-goal rows with source_class values.

N4 · Big moments

falls short · -0.27 GD residual

Better than their rating?

Côte d'Ivoire currently trends below their Elo-based expectations. With a goal difference residual of -0.27, the team demonstrates higher performance volatility than the field median. This suggests an inconsistent output that often fails to capitalize on their underlying rating profile.

Over-performance DNA · beats-its-rating × reliability, the tournament field

CIVTournament field · 48solid line = rating-neutral · dashed = field-median reliability100 Elo ~= -0.37 goals

+Biggest over- & under-performances26 matches

Residual = actual goal difference minus what the Elo gap predicted.

vs SEY · 2023-11-17	GD +9 vs exp +3.68	+5.32
vs SEY · 2025-10-10	GD +7 vs exp +3.77	+3.23
vs BFA · 2026-01-06	GD +3 vs exp +1.14	+1.86
vs EQG · 2024-01-22	GD -4 vs exp +1.34	-5.34
vs NGA · 2024-01-18	GD -1 vs exp +1.08	-2.08
vs KEN · 2024-06-11	GD 0 vs exp +1.97	-1.97