In 2019, the IFAB introduced a rule change with massive tactical consequences: teams could now receive goal kicks inside their own box. This tweak opened the door to a new era of short build-up play — particularly for possession-heavy teams.
What followed was a tactical domino effect. Elite clubs began using short build-ups to bait opposition pressure and play through it, turning goal kicks into launchpads for control and space. Naturally, the rest of the football world followed. But should they have?
The same trend is seen in the Eredivisie, with more and more teams building short. But while teams with technical quality and structure can execute this style with minimal downside, many are copying the approach — but lack the counter-pressing structure and press-resistance needed to pull it off.
This raises a key tactical question: 🧠 Do teams that build short actually concede more dangerous transitions?
Answering the Question — in Minutes with MyGamePlan
To find out, we used MyGamePlan’s customizable trackers to build a quick workflow. Here’s what we did:
We analyzed every Eredivisie goal kick from the 2024/25 season.
We grouped them into three zones:
🔹 Short = ends in the defensive third
🔹 Mid = ends in the middle third
🔹 Long = ends in the final third
For each type, we measured:
➤ % of total goal kicks
➤ Opponent shot within 15 seconds
➤ Opponent goal within 15 seconds
The results
Who Builds Short Most Often?
The usual suspects lead the way: Feyenoord, Ajax, PSV, FC Twente — over 70% of their goal kicks end in the defensive third.
At the other end: Fortuna Sittard, Almere City, FC Groningen play short the least.
Playing Short Isn’t Inherently Risky
AZ stand out as the most efficient — using short build-ups frequently and not conceding a single shot or goal within 15 seconds.
Feyenoord, Ajax, PSV also maintain high short GK usage with minimal downside — thanks to better technical security and counterpressing.
Executed Poorly, Short Build-Up Can Be Costly
Go Ahead Eagles, Heerenveen, and especially Willem II conceded multiple shots or goals from short build-ups — despite lower usage.
Willem II conceded 2 goals from just 43% short build-ups. Proof that it’s not how often you play short — but how well.
The Mid-Third Trap: The Most Dangerous Zone
Surprisingly, short goal kicks weren’t the most dangerous — mid-third build-ups were.
- Fortuna Sittard (12), Go Ahead Eagles (10), FC Groningen (10) top the list for shots conceded after mid-third goal kicks.
- PEC Zwolle have conceded 2 goals from mid-third goal kicks.
Mid-third kicks stretch the team shape and defensive line. If the ball is lost or a second ball isn't recovered, it can leave the back line exposed.
Conclusion
Short build-ups have often been branded as dangerous. And while they can be devastating when executed poorly — or mimicked without structure — they’re not the riskiest option. When done well, short build-ups aren’t just safe — they’re strategic.
Goal kicks ending in the mid-third stretch team shape, reduce compactness, and leave back lines exposed if second balls are lost.
So rather than asking: “Is short build-up too risky for us?” Maybe the real question is: “Does your team have the tools to manage that risk?” Or even: “Are we avoiding it for the wrong reasons — and inviting even more danger?”
Want to Run This for Your Team or Opponent?
With MyGamePlan, you can build custom trackers to answer tactical questions like this — combining event + tracking data, linked to video.
No code. No manual tagging. Just insight that drives better decisions. Book a call and get a free trial.
