Mousa Tamari

Stade Rennais · Defender · Jordan · 2,224 min

Ballity Verdict

What makes this player special?

Confidence · medium

Mousa Tamari earns his standing through how he shapes phases of play for Stade Rennais — not through a single viral trait. Ballity's strongest current profile is offensive fb.

He is not trying to be everything. The profile is concentrated: do offensive fb at a high level, and let secondary tasks stay secondary.

Deployment evidence is thinner than the skill-set read — treat any talk of a “natural” secondary position as hypothesis until the minutes show it.

The trade-off is real: ball_progressing shows up as a structural caveat in the profile. Any club buying the upside has to decide whether that hole is tolerable in their system — or whether they will need complementary players beside him.

Why Ballity says this

  • Clearest current facet: offensive fb (great)
  • Known caveat: ball_progressing
Receipts
  • · Player Profile
  • · Role Breadth
  • · Deployment · thin
  • · Sample · featured

Position

Fullback

Appearances

33

Great+ roles

1

Age

29

Preferred foot

Left

Height

175 cm

Ballity insights

Peer context vs forwards — how often they get the ball and what they do with it. Separate from role tiers above. Attackers also split separation into on-ball (dribble-created) and off-ball (movement).

Usage rate

Share of team touches (non-GK) among forwards with match data.

8.8% team touches

Peer band · High

Pool percentile

78.6%

Also 47.4 touches/90 (season aggregate).

Efficiency

Output quality per action for forwards.

36 score

Peer band · Minimal

Pool percentile

20.7%

xG per shot 0.075Goals / npxG 1.23Goals /90 0.24

On-ball separation

Dribble-created space and self-made shot quality.

35 score

Peer band · Average

Pool percentile

69.5%

1v1 win % 42.3Self-created shot share % 35.9Dribbles won/90 1.3Fast break (self-created) % 34.8

Off-ball separation

Movement-created space on assisted attempts.

48 score

Peer band · Minimal

Pool percentile

1.2%

Unblocked (assisted) % 75.6Shadow zone (assisted) % 43.9Arrival zone (assisted) % 36.6Central channel (assisted) % 19.5xG per assisted shot 0.1

Balance & structural weaknesses

How complete this player is on the position's job board — strengths and holes.

How we define this

Two-way = Great+ on ≥2 complementary axes. One-way = every other route Limited/closed. Weak routes = Average holes on complementary axes.

One-wayFullback

Strong as Ball Progressing (Great)

Weak routes

Defensive · Limited

Stat profile

Within position peers — percentile shape (not role scores).

Tempo 55Defending 51Carrying 49
Creation32
Ball Progressor9
Carrying49
Finishing21
Defending51
Duels47
Tempo55
Box threat44

Versatility Index

Precise 0–100 score — cross-group breadth (67%) plus within-group depth (33%), quality-scaled by tier. Distinct from the shape card below.

2 groups · 4 roles
31/ 100

Index

31.4

Breadth 20.1 · Depth 11.3

Fullbacks · GreatCentre-backsMidfielders · GreatWingersForwards
  • ·Fullbacks: Offensive FB (Great)
  • ·Midfielders: Creator (Great), Box Crasher (Great), Carrier (Good)

Versatility shape

Coarse directional pattern (Specialist / Dual-threat / Generalist) — not the 0–100 Index above.

Great

Specialist

Great Specialist
1

Distinct Great+

1 Great+ roles total

Where he plays

Positions with deployment evidence — not statistical guesses.

Natural

None inferred

Role translations

Where the profile could fit. Tap a position — then see which role style suits it.

NaturalValidatedSupportedStrongPlausibleExploratory

Select a position on the pitch to see the best role, alternatives, and evidence.

Role-by-role detail

How each role is scored. Expand a row for a radar of role-shaped stats.

Similar players

Shape match across fullback roles — cosine similarity of role scores (domestic leagues only). Slot 1 is the best same-league match; the rest are the next closest from the full pool.

© 2026 Ballity · Player Profiling