Skip to content
Touchline

Search

Jump to a club, a player, or a section

Ipswich

Leif Davis

Left-back26 yrsFree kicks 2nd
Non-penalty xG per 90
0.262 non-penalty goals from 7 shots
Expected assists per 90
0.131 assists, 6 key passes
Finishing
+0.39goals above what the league converts the same chances into
Build-up per 90
0.299% of Ipswich’s build-up value

Leif Davis ranks 34th of 138 qualified players for attacking involvement, shooting from 11.3m on average. They carry 12% of Ipswich’s attacking involvement, the 3rd largest share in the squad.

Against their position

81 defenders

Average match rating6.51

Shooting

per 90
Goals
0.29
Non-penalty goals
0.29
xG
0.26
Non-penalty xG
0.26
Shots
1.00
Shots on target
0.67
Shot accuracy
–not ranked
npxG per shot
–not ranked
Shot distance
–not ranked
Set-piece share
–not ranked
Goals against xG
+0.2

Creating

per 90
Assists
0.14
Expected assists
0.13
Key passes
0.86
npxG + xA
0.39
xG chain
0.57
xG build-up
0.29
Assists against xA
+0.1

On the ball

per 90
Touches
49.33
Passes
29.33
Pass completion
76%
Take-ons attempted
0.33
Take-on success
–not ranked
Dispossessed
1.00

Defending

per 90
Tackles
0.67
Tackles won
–not ranked
Interceptions
0.67
Clearances
3.33
Aerials won
0.67
Aerial success
–not ranked
Dribbled past
0.00

Discipline

per 90
Fouls committed
0.00
Caught offside
0.33
Errors
0season count
Yellow cards
2season count
Red cards
0season count

Ranked against 81 defenders with half a match a round or more, the same comparison the compare page makes. Where less is better, such as being dispossessed, the order is turned round, so a high percentile is always the good end.

This week

Gameweek 8

Next fixture

Gameweek 8

vs Nottingham Forest

Fri 23 Oct, 19:00 UTC

Nottingham Forest concede 11.0 shots a match and are 1.02× the league norm against full-backs (9 shots so far). A difficult one.

Projected shots
0.91

1.00 per 90 × 0.91

Projected on target
0.36

0.43 per 90 × 0.85

Season rate times what this opponent concedes, over a full ninety minutes. Check availability.

Shots

7 appearances
  • Over 0.55 of 771%± 17
  • Over 1.52 of 729%± 17
  • Over 2.50 of 70%± 0
  • Over 3.50 of 70%± 0

The band is one standard error, the tick the estimate. Blanks count as misses, 2 of 7.

Shooting profile

7 shots

Where they shoot

7 shots
Every shotBy zone
Opponent goalLeftRight
GoalNo goalMark area is the chance’s expected goals

Leif Davis, 2026/27, 7 shots in the final 35m, 2 scored.

left
71%
Centre
26%
right
3%

share of their shooting xG

Chance profile

quality, volume and route
xG per shot
0.257
Shots per 90
1.00
Key passes per 90
0.86
Average shot distance
11.3m
From set pieces
3%

How the chances arrive

Crosses
53%
Through balls
20%
Own dribble
0%
Headed
33%

Club role

Ipswich

What they are for

  • On the pitch100% of available minutes.

What would actually have to be replaced. Losing the penalty taker is not the same as losing a proportional slice of Leif Davis’output.

Chances received

who supplies them
  1. Abdul Fatawu1.2 xG4 shots, 1g
  2. Emersonn0.5 xG1 shot, 1g
  3. Julio Enciso0.0 xG1 shot, 0g

Chances created

who they supply
  1. Emersonn0.5 xG2 shots, 1g
  2. Daizen Maeda0.2 xG2 shots, 0g

Season record

2026/27

Involvement in build-up

excludes their own shots and final passes

Leif Davis carries 9.0% of Ipswich’s build-up value.

  • Build-up per 900.286
    48% of defenders
  • Possession value per 900.567
    83% of defenders

Ranked against 52 defenders with a comparable sample. Build-up is the value of possessions a player was involved in, with their own shots and final passes removed, so it credits the work before the chance rather than the chance.

Match by match

Match log

7 appearances, oldest first
1g

at Man Utd2 shots
2 on target

v Liverpool1 shot
0 on target

1g

at Palace2 shots
1 on target

at Everton1 shot
0 on target

v Fulham1 shot
0 on target

2 blanksno shot
not placed

Height is shots, solid is on target, and the dashed rule is the 1.5 line. The feed cannot date an appearance with no shot in it, so 2 sits at the end, counted but unplaced.

How to read the ties. Each rate ties back to the league average: solid where the sample is settled, broken where it is still being shrunk toward the league, an open circle where there is no cohort to rank against.