England
Snapshot · 2026-07-14Model 1.0.0UEFA·Grupo L·FIFA #4
Defensively elite side missing Tino Livramento through injury, with a Manchester City-heavy spine.
Formação recente: 4-1-4-1 (3 de 5)
- Rival
- Croatia (#10)
- Destaque
- Harry Kane (FW)
Final squad announced · England · 2026-06-06
Source: Sky Sports — Football ↗WC2026 results
Panorama do torneio
Analysis
England are rated at 6.5% to win the tournament, placing them 6th in the field. A key storyline is the fitness of Tino Livramento — thigh problems, no expected return. Drawn in Group L alongside Croatia, Panama, Ghana, they are projected at 98.7% to advance to the knockout stage.
How they play
England under Thomas Tuchel play a balanced game, holding 55% of the ball — among the highest in the tournament field. Their likely shape is a 4-1-4-1, though they have also used 4-3-3. They apply moderate pressing intensity (PPDA 23.5) and build patiently through midfield with 8.5 passes per attacking sequence. They favour high-quality chances (xG/shot 0.142, among the best in the field).
Path to success
Their route begins in Group L with Croatia, Panama, Ghana, where the model projects a 65.6% chance of finishing top and 98.7% of advancing. From there the projected knockout path runs: round of 32 (65.4%), quarter-finals (42.8%), semi-finals (24.5%), the final (12.6%). Sustaining intensity through up to seven matches across three host countries will demand squad depth and adaptability.
What they must execute
England will need to leverage their strengths while managing the physical demands of a tournament spread across three host countries. Managing the fitness of Tino Livramento could prove decisive — their availability transforms the team's ceiling.
Controversial take
One factor to watch: XI averaged 2,119 club minutes in 2024-25 — #4 of 43 in the field. Heavy pre-tournament load on the starting eleven.
Key numbers
How they play
Style vs the 48-team field
Balanced · style profile from 26 recent matches
What to watch: patient, multi-pass build-up.
Percentiles position England against the 48-team field. Higher means more of that trait, not better or worse. Press is inverted (lower PPDA = higher press); width uses crossing rate as a proxy; tempo is open-play passes per minute of possession. Descriptive style analytics; does not feed the published probabilities.
Group L finish · England
Monte Carlo, 100,000 simsTop two advance to the round of 32; best 8 of 12 third-placed teams also qualify.
- 65.0%1st (group winner)Advances to R32
- 27.8%2nd (runner-up)Advances to R32
- 5.9%3rdAdvances only if among the best 8 of 12 third-placed teams
- 1.2%4thEliminated
Stage progression · England
, 100,000 sims- 97.9%AdvAdvance from group
- 66.5%R16Round of 16
- 44.0%QFQuarter-final
- 25.6%SFSemi-final
- 13.5%FFinal
- 7.0%WinWin the tournament
Likely knockout path · England
Monte Carlo, 10,000 simsO elenco
Confirmed squad
Model-predicted · snapshot 2026-05-28Roster confirmed by the federation's official squad announcement. The XI/bench split below is the model's composite-rating ordering, not the head coach's lineup.
★ likely first sub badge on the top-3 by first-sub score within each position group, plus a late-game impact rating where club per-90 stats are available.
▸How to read this squad— 4 columns explained
- Pos
- Broad position bucket — GK / DF / MF / FW.
- Caps
- Senior international appearances. Used by the model as a recency-weighted signal of how often the manager calls the player up.
- Stat
- Position-aware stat: career international goals for forwards; career international assists for midfielders (Transfermarkt); latest available Big-5 club season's total tackles for defenders (FBref); latest available Big-5 club season's save percentage for goalkeepers (FBref). Em-dash when no data is joined — most often for defenders and keepers at non-Big-5 clubs.
- Rating
- Composite rating (Model #4) — combines recent caps + goals, recent club xG and xAG per 90, position-relative quality, and call-up priors. Higher = the model thinks the player is more likely to start. Typically 0.9 (depth) to 2.5 (elite).
Selection driver — coloured chips show which input dominates a player's selection score. Caps-driven = selected mainly on international experience. Rating-driven = selected mainly on club performance quality. Jersey-boosted = jersey number from a recent squad snapshot lifted their score. Goals-driven = international goal record was the decisive factor. No chip when the score is a balanced blend.
Squad cohesion
Projected XI · club overlap
- Pairwise club minutes
- 4.85%
- Share of the 55-pair × 3000-minute ceiling. Higher = more of the XI plays together at club level.
- Club concentration
- 0.124
- How concentrated the XI is across clubs. 0.091 = 11 different clubs · 1.000 = all the same club.
- Top-3 clubs share
- 45%
- 5 of 11 play for the three most common clubs in the XI.
Top clubs in projected XI
- Manchester City2
- Arsenal2
- Everton1
Most-connected club pair
Declan Rice + Bukayo Saka — Arsenal, 2023-24 · 4,753 shared minutes
Show next 2
- Harry Maguire + Marcus Rashford — Manchester United, 2023-24 · 1,645 min
- John Stones + Kyle Walker — Manchester City, 2023-24 · 1,599 min
Descriptive metric — does not feed the published probabilities. Methodology →
Squad depth
Projected XI · replaceability
Most irreplaceable starters
- Marc GuéhiCentre-backLikely cover: Jarell Quansah · 0.65Bayer Leverkusen0.32gap to repl.
- Jude BellinghamAttacking midfieldLikely cover: Morgan Rogers · 0.72Aston Villa0.27gap to repl.
- Marcus RashfordWingerLikely cover: Anthony Gordon · 0.62Newcastle United0.19gap to repl.
Gap to repl. = how far this nation's rating at the position falls from the starter to his likely in-squad replacement (named above). Larger = harder to replace.
Descriptive metric — does not feed the published probabilities. Methodology →
Calendário do grupo
Group-stage schedule
Confrontos diretos
Histórias
Storylines
Updated 49 days agoThigh problems, no expected return. Composite 0.94 — would have been a likely starter.
Conceded only 0.44 xG per match across 11 recent internationals — #2 of 35 in the field for defensive solidity.
Model's top anytime-scorer for the team — 32% probability of scoring at least once, rank #2 of all players.
XI averaged 2,119 club minutes in 2024-25 — #4 of 43 in the field. Heavy pre-tournament load on the starting eleven.
Forma e retrospecto
Video analysis: England
Performance data from official highlights analysis across 5 matches. 14 players observed, 32 events tracked.
Scored two crucial goals, including a penalty and a header, demonstrating his clinical finishing.
5 goalsPlayer ratings (14)
8.5Harry Kane4 apps · 9 events5 goals3 shots (3 on target)1 header8989▼
Scored two crucial goals, including a penalty and a header, demonstrating his clinical finishing.
8.2Jude Bellingham5 apps · 8 events8 goals789107▼
Scored England's third goal early in the second half, putting them ahead for good.
8Jordan Pickford2 apps · 5 events5 saves79▼
8England GK1 app8▼
Made two significant saves, showcasing strong reflexes and positioning to prevent further goals for the opposition.
7Marcus Rashford4 apps · 5 events2 goals3 shots (2 on target)7876▼
Scored England's fourth goal, extending their lead and securing the victory.
7Noni Madueke2 apps59▼
7Nico O'Reilly1 app7▼
Came very close to scoring with a powerful shot that struck the post.
6.5Anthony Gordon2 apps58▼
6.3Declan Rice3 apps · 3 events2 shots (2 on target)676▼
Registered a strong shot on goal that tested the Croatian goalkeeper.
6Elliot Anderson1 app · 1 events1 shot6▼
Attempted a shot from distance but it went wide, with no other significant contributions mentioned.
6Magway1 app · 1 events1 shot (1 on target)6▼
Registered a shot on target that was saved by the England goalkeeper.
6Bukayo Saka2 apps57▼
6Ezri Konsa1 app6▼
Showed good attacking intent by hitting the post from inside the box, despite being a defender.
4Marc Guéhi1 app4▼
Conceded a penalty that allowed Mexico to score, a significant defensive error.
Match observations
- gs-023The match was played at Dallas Stadium.
- gs-023England wore white kits, while Croatia wore blue.
- gs-023England demonstrated effectiveness from set-pieces, scoring a penalty and a header from corners.
- gs-047The match was a high-scoring affair with both teams demonstrating attacking intent.
- gs-047England took the lead three times, but Croatia showed resilience to equalise twice.
- gs-047Set pieces proved to be a significant factor, with goals originating from a penalty and a corner.
- gs-071England secured their progression from the group stage, winning their group despite a performance that was not always 'pretty'.
- gs-071The team's success was largely attributed to individual brilliance from key players like Jude Bellingham and Harry Kane, who delivered crucial goals.
- gs-071Concerns were raised about the overall team performance, particularly the consistency and quality of wide players and the manager's settled best XI.
- r16-004This was a high-scoring and intensely contested match, featuring numerous attacking passages from both sides. England established leads twice, but Mexico demonstrated remarkable resilience, especially after being reduced to nine players.
- r16-004The game was characterised by physical challenges, resulting in multiple fouls and two red cards for the home side. Both goalkeepers delivered strong performances, making several crucial stops.
- r16-004Mexico's ability to convert two penalties late in the match, despite their numerical disadvantage, highlighted their determination to secure a draw.
- r32-008England then mounted sustained pressure, creating numerous chances that were repeatedly denied by an outstanding goalkeeping performance.
- r32-008Despite the resilience of Congo DR, England eventually found their rhythm and secured a late victory through their captain.
- r32-008The atmosphere in the stadium was electric, with fans reacting passionately to every significant moment.
Statistical profile
BalancedAttack
Defence
GK: Dean Henderson
Set pieces
Style
Squad
Workload class: light
Attack and defence ratings from the model; style metrics from recent international matches; penalty rates via Bayesian estimation; goalkeeper rating from shot-prevention data. Rank is out of 48 tournament teams.
Where goals come from
Phase of play · scored & conceded
- Open play
- Set piece
- Counter
- Penalty
Share of goals by how the chance began, across 26 matches (Euro2020,Euro2024,WC2018,WC2022). Shoot-out kicks are excluded. Descriptive metric — does not feed the published probabilities. Methodology →
Group-stage matchups
Probabilities from the calibrated ensemble model. xG from the Dixon–Coles fit. See each fixture page for full analysis.
Rating & probability history
12 snapshots · 2026-05-22 → 2026-06-24England trajectory: 12 snapshots between 2026-05-22 and 2026-06-24 (33 days). Elo moved from 2020.0 to 2020.0 (0). Tournament-winner probability moved from 6.9% to 5.9% (−1.0pp).
Each point is one model build. The shaded band is the bootstrap 90% credible interval around the tournament-winner probability.
Recent form (10 matches)
| Date | Opponent | Score | Result | Competition |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-31 | HJapan | 0–1 | L | Friendly |
| 2026-03-27 | HUruguay | 1–1 | D | Friendly |
| 2025-11-16 | AAlbania | 2–0 | W | FIFA World Cup qualification |
| 2025-11-13 | HSerbia | 2–0 | W | FIFA World Cup qualification |
| 2025-10-14 | ALatvia | 5–0 | W | FIFA World Cup qualification |
| 2025-10-09 | HWales | 3–0 | W | Friendly |
| 2025-09-09 | ASerbia | 5–0 | W | FIFA World Cup qualification |
| 2025-09-06 | HAndorra | 2–0 | W | FIFA World Cup qualification |
| 2025-06-10 | HSenegal | 1–3 | L | Friendly |
| 2025-06-07 | NAndorra | 1–0 | W | FIFA World Cup qualification |
martj42 international results (CC0) · last 10 matches · ~2 years.
Head-to-head vs group opponents
| Opponent | Meetings | W-D-L | Last meeting |
|---|---|---|---|
| Croatia | 12 | 7-2-3 | 2026 — Win (4–2) · FIFA World Cup |
| Ghana | 2 | 0-2-0 | 2026 — Draw (0–0) · FIFA World Cup |
| Panama | 1 | 1-0-0 | 2018 — Win (6–1) · FIFA World Cup |
All meetings via the martj42 international results dataset.
Major tournaments — most recent appearance
| Tournament | Year | Finish | W-D-L | Since then |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UEFA Euro | 2024 | Runner-up | 3-3-1 |
|
| FIFA World Cup | 2022 | Quarter-finals | 3-1-1 |
|
Source: FIFA archives. Penalty outcomes resolved to W/L.
Most similar past team-tournaments
Closest comparable teams from past major tournaments (1990-2024), by squad strength, group draw, and recent form. Shown for context, not a prediction.
Belgium · Euro 2024
Exited at the round of 16
Comparable pre-tournament strength (Elo 2048) and group draw.
Spain · Euro 2016
Exited at the round of 16
Germany · Euro 2016
Exited at the semi-final
Standard Pass
See all 104 match forecasts
Unlock match probabilities, expected goals, scoreline distributions, and per-player scoring chances across all 104 matches.
Every forecast graded against the real result, scored on 987 matches since 2014. See the scorecard.
24h money-back, no questions asked·No subscription, no auto-renewal·Access through 31 Dec 2026. See refund policy.