What the review page must answer
- Convert a tactical question into observable measures.
- Choose context splits without over-fragmenting the sample.
- Create a review page that leads from metric to clip.
Question, measures, context
Brief
Hypothetical scenario: “Are we recovering the ball quickly enough after losing it in the middle third?”
Measure set
For this hypothetical scenario, recovery within 8 seconds, average recovery time, attempts, and recovery location form a compact starting measure set.
Context
Split by match, score state, and opponent build-up behavior before adding more dimensions.
Wireframe the match review
Deliver a one-page wireframe. Top: one sentence answer. Middle: four measures with comparison to the team baseline. Bottom: three context splits and a linkable list of representative clips. Add one caveat about event tagging quality.
One page should answer one review question
A match dashboard becomes noisy when it tries to represent the entire game. Instead, decide which conversation the page should support: chance creation, pressing, progression, transition defense, set pieces, or another specific topic. Then choose indicators that tell different parts of that story rather than repeating the same signal in several forms.
Always include context. A team can have more final-third entries because it chased the game for thirty minutes. A player can show fewer actions because their minutes changed. The dashboard should make those conditions visible before anyone interprets movement as performance.
Add an evidence trail
For each important indicator, include a way to inspect the underlying events or a small set of linked clips. The goal is not to turn the dashboard into a video library. It is to let a coach move from the summary to representative evidence without asking the analyst to rebuild the analysis in the meeting.
One page, one conversation
Name the review meeting at the top of the wireframe: “first 15 minutes after halftime,” “pressing after turnovers,” or another narrow topic. Every visual must earn its place by helping that conversation. If a chart is interesting but does not change the review, move it to an appendix or remove it.
Add links from summary metrics to representative clips and keep the metric definition nearby. A difference of two events can look dramatic in a small sample; the clips and context help staff judge whether it matters.
Before publishing, write a short data story from the page. If you need to jump between six tabs to explain the conclusion, the dashboard is probably organized around the data model rather than the meeting.
Build for the review room, not the screenshot
Before polishing the submission, give the work to a skeptical reviewer with three questions: What decision is this supposed to support? Which assumption is doing the most work? What would make the recommendation change? If those answers are hard to locate, the project needs editing before it needs another chart.
Use Case: Write a Post-Match Executive Memo to revisit the weakest part of the method and KPI Design to check whether the output is appropriate for the role that would receive it. Add one edge case that your first version handles badly. A useful case study shows the correction instead of pretending the first attempt was clean.
Finish with a short handoff note: source, definitions, exclusions, refresh steps, and the next decision date. Compare the result with Data Storytelling for Sports Decisions. The final portfolio piece should be understandable by someone who did not watch you build it, because that is much closer to how analytical work is reviewed inside a team.
What a demanding reviewer should ask of this case
Treat the case as if it were being handed to a colleague on a busy day. The reader should be able to identify the decision, the source of the evidence, the main assumption, and the requested action without watching a presentation. If those elements are scattered across tabs or paragraphs, reorganize the work before adding more analysis.
Run one adverse scenario. Change a high-impact assumption or introduce an edge case that the first version handles poorly. Use Case: Write a Post-Match Executive Memo to strengthen the method, then state how the recommendation changes—or why it does not. This is where a case study starts to demonstrate judgment rather than only execution.
Ask a second person to review the artifact with a timer. In the first two minutes, can they tell what happened, why it matters, and what should happen next? Compare their interpretation with KPI Design. If the reviewer focuses on a chart you considered secondary, either move the chart or make the decision hierarchy clearer.
The final handoff should include a source note, definitions, exclusions, refresh instructions, and one limitation that remains unresolved. Use Data Storytelling for Sports Decisions to connect the case to the next skill or role. A strong portfolio case does not pretend uncertainty disappeared; it shows that the uncertainty was identified and managed.