Jordan operates as a direct, individual-led side that prioritizes efficiency over sustained possession. With Yazan Al-Naimat responsible for nearly a third of their scoring output, the team relies heavily on individual brilliance to create threats in transition. This approach allows them to remain competitive against varied opposition despite maintaining a lower share of the ball.

Playing identity · system ↔ individual × direct ↔ possession

Jordan is plotted from possession share and top-scorer concentration. PPDA and recent form are supporting context when present.

+Recent form8 · 2W 2D 4L

2026-06-28World Cup 2026HJOR 1-3 ARGL

2026-06-23World Cup 2026HJOR 1-2 ALGL

2026-06-17World Cup 2026AJOR 1-3 AUTL

2025-06-10World Cup 2026 qualifying · AFCHJOR 0-1 IRQL

2025-06-05World Cup 2026 qualifying · AFCAJOR 3-0 OMAW

2025-03-25World Cup 2026 qualifying · AFCAJOR 1-1 KORD

2025-03-20World Cup 2026 qualifying · AFCHJOR 3-1 PLEW

2024-11-19World Cup 2026 qualifying · AFCAJOR 1-1 KUWD

International friendly matches are excluded

N2 · Scoring

open play 100%

How they score

Jordan relies exclusively on open play to generate their scoring output. With 100% of their classified goals originating from open play, the team demonstrates a clear preference for fluid attacking sequences over set-piece opportunities. This reliance is supported by an open play conversion rate that slightly exceeds the field average.

Goal source · share of play-type-classified goals

100%

Open play100%

Effectiveness · conversion by source vs benchmark

Open play21%avg 20%+2 pts

37 goals from 174 shots.

Set piece0.0%avg 4.5%-4 pts

0 goals from 72 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?64% intact

64% of listed scorer goals come from players still marked in the squad.

Yazan Al-Naimat	out	12 · 29%
Mousa Tamari	in squad	10 · 24%
Ali Olwan	in squad	9 · 21%
Mahmoud Al-Mardi	in squad	2 · 5%

N3 · Conceding

open play 93%

How they concede

Jordan is overwhelmingly susceptible to goals originating from open play. With 93% of their classified concessions occurring in active play, opponents may find success by prioritizing quick transitions and sustained pressure over set-piece reliance. Their defensive structure remains significantly more vulnerable to fluid movement than to dead-ball situations.

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

92.9%

Open play92.9%Corner7.1%

7% set piece concededcorner + free kick

Effectiveness · conceded conversion by source vs benchmark

Open play10%avg 20%-10 pts

13 conceded from 129 shots faced.

Set piece1.5%avg 4.5%-3 pts

1 conceded from 66 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 · -0.63 GD residual

Better than their rating?

Jordan currently trends below their Elo-based performance expectations. With a -0.63 goal difference residual, the team consistently falls short of the statistical baseline despite showing higher reliability than the field median. Their output remains volatile, characterized by occasional high-scoring surges offset by significant underperformances against stronger opposition.

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

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

+Biggest over- & under-performances24 matches

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

vs OMA · 2024-10-15	GD +4 vs exp +1.19	+2.81
vs MAS · 2024-01-15	GD +4 vs exp +2.13	+1.87
vs OMA · 2025-06-05	GD +3 vs exp +1.27	+1.73
vs QAT · 2024-02-10	GD -2 vs exp +1.27	-3.27
vs KSA · 2023-11-21	GD -2 vs exp +0.87	-2.87
vs BHR · 2024-01-25	GD -1 vs exp +1.59	-2.59