This systematic review highlights the role of social network analysis in team performance and tactical behavior, suggesting improvements in coaching and analysis.
Introduction This systematic review aims to critically examine the application of social network analysis (SNA) in football, with a focus on its contribution to evaluating team performance, tactical behavior, and player interactions. Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across four databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus) from January 2017 to October 2024. Results Fifty-five peer-reviewed studies met the inclusion criteria, addressing network analysis in official men's professional football matches. Data were extracted and summarized regarding methodological quality, network metrics used, tactical context, and practical implications. Discussion Most studies demonstrated that cohesive network structures, characterized by high density, clustering coefficients, and centrality, are associated with successful team performance. Centrality metrics were frequently used to identify key tactical players, typically central defenders and midfielders. Recent methodological advances included dynamic time-window analysis, pitch-passing networks, and spatial-temporal integration using tracking data. However, there remains an overrepresentation of elite men's football and offensive phases, with limited focus on defensive networks, youth categories, and women's football. SNA offers a powerful framework to decode the complexity of football performance, evolving from static graphs to dynamic, rolesensitive, and context-rich models. Future research should adopt longitudinal designs, multi-layer network approaches, and closer collaboration with practitioners to enhance the operational utility of network insights in coaching and performance analysis. Systematic review registration https://osf.io/2pe3y
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alves et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: