Group C
MAR

Morocco

Coach: Mohamed Ouahbi
Group rank
2
Points
7
Played
3
Goal diff.
3
Status
Qualified from group
Fixtures
By date
Fixtures / results
Sat, Jun 13
BrazilvsMorocco
FT 1-1
Group C
Fri, Jun 19
ScotlandvsMorocco
FT 0-1
Group C
Wed, Jun 24
MoroccovsHaiti
FT 4-2
Group C
Tue, Jun 30
NetherlandsvsMorocco
FT 1-1 · PEN 2-3
Round of 32
Sat, Jul 4
CanadavsMorocco
FT 0-3
Round of 16
Thu, Jul 9
FrancevsMorocco
FT 2-0
Quarter-final
Countries
Groups overview
Group C
1BRAQ
PL 32-1-0GF 7-1GD 6PTS 7
2MARQ
PL 32-1-0GF 6-3GD 3PTS 7
3SCOOut
PL 31-0-2GF 1-4GD -3PTS 3
4HAIOut
PL 30-0-3GF 2-8GD -6PTS 0
#TeamPLWDL+/-GDPTSStatus
1Brazil32107-167Qualified
2Morocco32106-337Qualified
3Scotland31021-4-33Out
4Haiti30032-8-60Out
Nation lens
Identity1 / 4
N1 · Identity
balanced · mixed-tempo

How they play

Morocco maintains a balanced tactical identity characterized by controlled possession and a distributed scoring threat. With 60.3% possession and a moderate pressing intensity, they prioritize structural stability over high-frequency transitions. This measured approach allows them to remain competitive against diverse opposition while relying on a collective offensive output.

Playing identity · system ↔ individual × direct ↔ possession
SystemIndividualPossessionDirectSystem-builtpossessionStar-ledpossessionPress-and-transitionStar-ledcounter-attackersMAR

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

+Recent form8 · 6W 1D 1L
2026-07-09World Cup 2026AMAR 0-2 FRAL
2026-07-04World Cup 2026AMAR 3-0 CANW
2026-06-30World Cup 2026AMAR 1-1 PEN 3-2 NEDW
2026-06-29Fifa World Cup 2026AMAR 4-3 NEDW
2026-06-24World Cup 2026HMAR 4-2 HAIW
2026-06-19World Cup 2026AMAR 1-0 SCOW
2026-06-13World Cup 2026AMAR 1-1 BRAD
2026-01-14Africa Cup of Nations 2025AMAR 4-2 NGAW
International friendly matches are excluded
N2 · Scoring
open play 85%

How they score

Morocco relies heavily on open play to generate their scoring opportunities. With 85% of their goals originating from open play, the team demonstrates a clear preference for fluid attacking sequences over set-piece reliance. Their ability to convert these chances remains consistent with field averages, underscoring a cohesive offensive identity.

Goal source · share of play-type-classified goals
85%
Open play85%Corner7.5%Free kick7.5%
15% set piececorner + free kick
Effectiveness · conversion by source vs benchmark
Open play19%avg 20%-1 pts
34 goals from 183 shots.
Set piece7.7%avg 4.5%+3 pts
6 goals from 78 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?54% intact

54% of listed scorer goals come from players still marked in the squad.

Ayoub El Kaabiin squad7 · 15%
Brahim Díazin squad6 · 13%
Youssef En-Nesyriout6 · 13%
Hakim Ziyechout5 · 11%
N3 · Conceding
open play 75%

How they concede

Morocco is most vulnerable to goals originating from open play. With 75% of classified goals conceded in open play, opponents may find success by prioritizing quick transitions and fluid movement. While set-piece volume is lower, the higher conversion rate against them suggests that disciplined delivery remains a viable secondary threat.

Conceded goal source · share of play-type-classified goals
75%
16.7%
Open play75%Corner16.7%Free kick8.3%
25% set piece concededcorner + free kick
Effectiveness · conceded conversion by source vs benchmark
Open play15%avg 20%-4 pts
9 conceded from 59 shots faced.
Set piece9.1%avg 4.5%+5 pts
3 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
beats ranking · +0.24 GD residual

Better than their rating?

Morocco consistently outperforms their Elo-based expectations. With a positive goal difference residual of 0.24, they demonstrate a higher level of reliability than the field median. This suggests their tactical identity is well-suited to exceeding baseline projections in competitive play.

Over-performance DNA · beats-its-rating × reliability, the tournament field
Beats rating -><- Falls shortVolatile ^Reliable vHigh-ceilingwildcardVolatileunderachieverReliablyoverdeliversReliablybelow par-1.7-0.90+0.9+1.70.81.41.92.5Beats its Elo rating by (goals/match) ->ESPNORHAICODMAR
MARTournament field · 48solid line = rating-neutral · dashed = field-median reliability100 Elo ~= -0.37 goals
+Biggest over- & under-performances34 matches
Residual = actual goal difference minus what the Elo gap predicted.
vs CGO · 2024-06-11GD +6 vs exp +2.26+3.74
vs NIG · 2025-09-05GD +5 vs exp +2.07+2.93
vs BEL · 2022-11-27GD +2 vs exp -0.73+2.73
vs RSA · 2024-01-30GD -2 vs exp +1.45-3.45
vs CGO · 2025-10-14GD +1 vs exp +2.42-1.42
vs COD · 2024-01-21GD 0 vs exp +1.41-1.41