Table 3. The structure and performance of the generalised linear (GLM) and Decision Tree (DT) models in both phases of the analysis.

Phase 1	Data Driven Approach (DDA)		Rational Approach (RA)		Literature Driven Approach (LDA)
	Variable	Coefficient	Variable	Coefficient	Variable	Coefficient
GLM Predictors	First Goal	-1.47	First Goal	-1.24	Relative Shots On Goal	-0.20
	Relative Intentional Assist	-0.58	Relative Percentage Shots On Goal Saved	-0.95
	Relative Big Chances On Target	-0.07	Relative Intentional Assist	-0.49
	Relative Right Foot Shots on Target	-0.01	Relative Shots On From Inside Box	-0.06
	Relative Shots On Conceded Inside Box	0.01
GLM Accuracy (95% CI)	0.96 (0.93, 0.98)		0.99 (0.97, 1.00)		0.78 (0.72, 0.84)
DT Accuracy (95% CI)	0.88 (0.83, 0.92)		0.89 (0.84, 0.92)		0.75 (0.68, 0.80)
Phase 2
GLM Predictors	Relative Intentional Assist	0.75	Percentage Successful Duels	-2.01	Relative Aerial Duels Won	-0.05
	Assists	0.17	Relative Intentional Assist	-0.69	Relative Offsides	-0.04
	Relative Touches Open Play Opponent Box	-0.002	Intentional Assist	-0.24	Relative Total Passes	-0.001
			Relative Successful Dribbles	-0.02
			Relative Recoveries	-0.01
			Relative Aerial Duels Lost	0.003
GLM Accuracy (95% CI)	0.87 (0.82, 0.91)		0.78 (0.72, 0.83)		0.65 (0.58, 0.71)
DT Accuracy (95% CI)	0.76 (0.70, 0.82)		0.77 (0.70, 0.82)		0.66 (0.59, 0.72)

Phase 1 of the analysis included pseudo-score related variables, whereas in phase 2 they were excluded. There were also three analytical approaches that reflect different sets of variables that were used for modelling. Accuracies presented on scale 0–1 with 95% Confidence Interval (CI).