ArticleScientific reports2026
Evaluating player relevance in football teams through cooperative game theory.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper develops a cooperative game-theoretic methodology to measure a footballer's relevance to team play by combining structural information-the network of completed passes-with individual performance data. This integration is the core of our methodological contribution. Using this information and the Shapley value concept from game theory, we propose four relevance measures (based on the Shapley value) that quantify each player's relevance in a given match. We then apply the methodology to Argentina's seven matches at the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar. Our results illustrate how the method can reveal players whose structural importance may not be captured by standard performance metrics (such as individual ratings) or standard centrality measures, providing complementary insights. Furthermore, the methodology is flexible, allowing analysts to tailor it to emphasize alternative tactical hypotheses and making it adaptable for team self-analysis, opponent preparation, and scouting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.