Paid subscribers will be able to download the complete match-event spreadsheet in XLSX format at the end of this article. It contains the event-level actions behind this Sevilla vs Barcelona tactical analysis and can be used for independent research, visualisation and football-data modelling.
Data disclaimer: No match images or video footage were used in this analysis. The conclusions are based exclusively on event-level match data and derived tactical information, including xT progression, passing networks, player centralities, defensive influence and event-derived positional tendencies. The movement analysis therefore represents functional patterns inferred from where players passed and interacted with the ball, not tracking-data running paths.
Barcelona won 3–1 away to Sevilla in La Liga 2026/27, with Raphinha scoring all three Barcelona goals after Sevilla had taken the lead. Yet the passing data tells a much less conventional story: Sevilla generated considerably more positive threat from its passing sequences, while Barcelona combined a much denser circulation network with extraordinary efficiency at the decisive end of attacks.
Sevilla 1–3 Barcelona analysis inside the Football Hacking Web App
The full tactical structure can be explored interactively in the Football Hacking Web App, including passing relationships, xT patterns and player roles. The web app offers a 7-day free trial for anyone who wants to move beyond traditional match statistics and examine how the game was actually connected.
Sevilla’s opening structure created real danger with relatively few passes
The opening phase immediately showed a contrast in philosophy. Barcelona established the more elaborate circulation structure, but Sevilla did not need long possession sequences to move the ball into threatening areas; Gabriel Suazo provided an aggressive left-sided outlet, while Juan Iglesias helped maintain width and progression on the opposite side rather than allowing Sevilla to become compressed into one corridor.
Sevilla’s network was relatively sparse across the full match, with an edge density of just 0.413 compared with Barcelona’s 0.525. That did not make it ineffective, however, because Sevilla’s passing sequences generated significantly more threat per action and were often designed to reach the next dangerous zone rather than simply preserve possession.
The home side’s early goal captured that distinction. Youssouf Fofana attacked the centre of the six-yard area and headed Sevilla ahead in the 18th minute, turning a relatively direct progression into a high-value finishing situation rather than requiring a long sequence around Barcelona’s defensive block.
Barcelona’s response came from movement around the structure, not from its main hub
Barcelona responded only three minutes later, and the scorer’s network profile is one of the most interesting features of the entire match. Raphinha equalised from the left side of the penalty area in the 21st minute, but he would finish the match with zero Load Centrality and a relatively modest PageRank of 0.035.
That apparent contradiction is actually tactically useful. Raphinha was not being used as the player through whom Barcelona’s possession repeatedly travelled; instead, his value came increasingly from arriving at the end of sequences, moving into finishing zones and exploiting the structure created by teammates rather than becoming the structure himself.
In the opening phase, Lamine Yamal maintained a high position on the right while Barcelona also kept an advanced reference on the opposite side. The resulting horizontal stretch created space between Sevilla’s defensive references, while Raphinha could occupy more central positions without being required to remain permanently wide.
22.5’–HT: Barcelona rotate the midfield, but Sevilla still create more passing value
After the equaliser, Barcelona changed the height of several midfield roles. Fermín López began operating higher and more aggressively between midfield and the attacking line, while Pedri increasingly appeared underneath that level to support circulation and reconnect the first phase with the attacking structure.
This distinction becomes important when interpreting Barcelona’s possession volume. Their central and left-sided build-up could generate multiple routes toward the final third, but many of those sequences included backward or lateral actions after reaching more threatening areas, reducing the net xT value even when the team remained in control of the ball.
Sevilla were much more economical. Their full-match passing profile produced approximately 0.885 xT per 100 passes, with a positive net passing progression of +1.07 and +0.73 net xT generated in the final third despite recording only 197 analysed passes.
Barcelona, by contrast, recorded 549 analysed passes but only 0.240 xT per 100 passes, while their overall net passing progression finished at -0.88. Their final-third passing alone produced -0.84 net xT, meaning that many possessions moved from a more threatening location into a less threatening one even though Barcelona continued circulating the ball.
Negative passing xT does not mean Barcelona were harmless
That distinction needs to be understood correctly. Passing xT measures how possession changes the expected threat of the next state; it does not measure finishing quality, shot conversion or the value of the shot itself, so Barcelona could produce a negative net passing profile and still score three times from decisive attacking actions.
The game is therefore a strong example of why possession quality cannot be reduced to one metric. Barcelona’s circulation was less efficient at continuously increasing territorial threat, but when the structure finally delivered the ball into the right moment, their finishing and final-action execution were decisive.
Sevilla had the inverse problem. Their passing network produced threat at a much higher rate and lost very little of it through destructive backward progression, yet the advantage did not translate into enough goals after the opening finish.
Pau Cubarsí was Barcelona’s structural hub
The centrality data shows exactly where Barcelona’s possession was anchored. Pau Cubarsí recorded the highest Load Centrality on the team at 0.362 and also the highest PageRank at 0.150, while his Closeness Centrality of 4.13 placed him at the heart of Barcelona’s ability to keep the network connected.
This is a very different role from Raphinha’s. Cubarsí was responsible for carrying a large share of important network routes and repeatedly became an influential receiving destination, whereas Raphinha largely existed downstream of those connections, closer to the point where structure became finishing.
João Cancelo was another major connector, posting a Load Centrality of 0.271, while maintaining an important left-sided role throughout the match. His influence also changed spatially: he could support deeper circulation but remained capable of advancing outside the midfield line, especially when Barcelona needed width around Sevilla’s compact central defence.
Barcelona’s network was more connected — but not necessarily more progressive
Barcelona’s pass network contained 126 connections and a reciprocity rate of 0.841, compared with Sevilla’s 99 connections and 0.646 reciprocity. In practical terms, Barcelona had more established relationships and more two-way passing routes between players, which is exactly what we would expect from a team able to maintain long periods of structured possession.
The problem is that network richness and progression are different things. Barcelona’s density helped them retain and recycle the ball, but Sevilla’s less complex structure produced much greater xT efficiency because its connections were more frequently aimed at escaping a line or arriving directly in an advanced zone.
This is also reflected in the corridor data. Barcelona’s central starts were divided between central final-third entries and the right half-space, while left-sided possessions could finish through several different channels; the structure was flexible, but that flexibility frequently required additional circulation before the ball became dangerous.
Sevilla’s most important network relationship also produced attacking value
Sevilla’s centralities were distributed differently. Gabriel Suazo posted the highest Load Centrality at 0.357, making him the main carrier of routes through the network, while other midfield connections provided the receiving influence that helped Sevilla move from the first line toward attacking areas.
The relationship between Félix Correia and Youssouf Fofana was particularly productive. Their passing connection generated the largest positive progression among Sevilla’s leading links, and the same broad relationship appeared in the sequence that produced Sevilla’s opening goal; this was a network with fewer interactions but a much clearer tendency to convert specific combinations into danger.
That distinction helps explain why Sevilla’s overall Network Health was higher despite losing 3–1. Their structure, efficiency and defensive influence combined for a general score of roughly 0.765, compared with Barcelona’s 0.607, reinforcing that the scoreboard and the quality of the underlying passing system can tell very different stories.
Football Predictions with Poisson & Monte Carlo: Fair Odds for Upcoming Matches
Two upcoming matches. One question: what do the numbers actually support?
45’–67.5’: Lamine Yamal stretches the right and Raphinha attacks the box
Barcelona’s second-half movement made their attacking roles clearer. Lamine Yamal continued to operate as the high right-sided reference, while Raphinha increasingly attacked central finishing spaces rather than dropping into circulation, separating the role of chance creator from the role of finisher.
The second goal arrived in the 56th minute and was the clearest expression of that relationship. Yamal created the opportunity from the right side, and Raphinha attacked the central zone to score with a first-touch header, giving Barcelona a 2–1 lead despite the underlying passing xT still favouring Sevilla.
Barcelona then changed their left-side structure around the hour mark. Gerard Martín replaced Andreas Christensen, giving the team a deeper left-sided support position while allowing the player ahead of him to maintain greater width and height instead of constantly dropping to stabilise possession.
Sevilla’s defensive work repeatedly forced Barcelona to reset
Sevilla’s strong passing numbers should not obscure their defensive contribution. Their defensive influence index reached 0.769, with the central defensive third producing the strongest concentration of interventions, and several of those defensive zones forced Barcelona into recirculation instead of immediate progression.
That helps explain Barcelona’s negative final-third xT. Sevilla were not necessarily preventing Barcelona from entering advanced areas, but they were often preventing the next action from becoming more dangerous; Barcelona would reach a threatening zone, encounter resistance, and then move the ball backward or laterally to restart the attack.
Barcelona’s own pressure operated much higher. Their most influential defensive actions were concentrated in central areas of Sevilla’s attacking build-up, and those interventions frequently caused Sevilla to lose rhythm before establishing longer possession sequences.
The consequence was a fascinating tactical trade-off. Sevilla produced more threat when they escaped Barcelona’s pressure, while Barcelona prevented them from escaping often enough to dominate possession and control the number of attacking sequences.
Raphinha’s third goal completes the separation between network role and finishing role
Barcelona’s third goal arrived in the 73rd minute, and once again Lamine Yamal was involved in creating the decisive situation. Raphinha received centrally and finished one-on-one with his left foot, completing his hat-trick from another action in which his contribution came at the terminal point of the attack rather than through extensive involvement in the pass network.
That is perhaps the strongest individual tactical takeaway from Sevilla 1–3 Barcelona. A player can have almost no Load Centrality and still decide the match because centrality measures structural importance inside circulation, not finishing importance; Raphinha did not need to organise Barcelona’s possession because his job was to exploit what that possession eventually created.
After the third goal, Barcelona could reduce some of the attacking risk in their positional structure. Raphinha was later replaced by Karim Adeyemi, while Barcelona continued to maintain a wide outlet and sufficient central occupation to prevent Sevilla from committing completely forward without exposing space behind their defensive line.
Why the final score and the passing model tell different stories
If this game were analysed only through the score, the conclusion would be straightforward: Barcelona won comfortably and Raphinha scored a hat-trick. If it were analysed only through passing xT, the interpretation could move too far in the opposite direction, because Sevilla generated dramatically more progression value per pass and a much healthier final-third profile.
Both views are incomplete on their own. Sevilla were more efficient at using passes to increase threat, but Barcelona were more connected, sustained possession for longer, suppressed many Sevilla sequences before they developed, and converted their decisive chances with exceptional efficiency.
That combination is why this match is so useful analytically. Barcelona did not need the stronger passing-threat profile to win because their network successfully delivered enough high-quality terminal actions, while Sevilla demonstrated that producing better progression numbers is not the same as converting those advantages into goals.
Final takeaway: structure created the platform, Raphinha decided the outcome
Barcelona’s 3–1 win over Sevilla was a match in which the passing network and the scoreboard pulled in different directions. Cubarsí was the structural hub, Cancelo helped connect and stretch the left side, and Barcelona maintained the denser and more reciprocal network; nevertheless, that circulation often reduced xT once possession reached advanced areas.
Sevilla were almost the opposite. They completed far fewer analysed passes but generated substantially more positive progression from them, used their wide-to-central relationships efficiently and produced the healthier overall passing structure, yet they were unable to turn that advantage into enough finishing output after taking the lead.
The decisive layer therefore came from player roles. Raphinha was not a central connector and did not need to be one: he occupied the final stage of Barcelona’s attacks, scored three times and demonstrated why network centrality and match-winning attacking influence are related concepts, but certainly not identical ones.
Download the data
Paid subscribers can download the complete Sevilla vs Barcelona match-event XLSX below the paywall. The spreadsheet contains the event-level data from the match and can be used for independent tactical analysis, visualisations, modelling and further football-data research.