Overview

As graphic designers, we often focus so much on creating that we rarely pause to critically review the work of others. With the Women’s Euro 2025 coming to a conclusion this weekend, I took the opportunity to evaluate the Starting XI graphics shared by each team, not just looking at how visually striking they are, but for how effectively they communicate key information. While design is inherently subjective, this exercise sparked thoughtful discussion and diverse perspectives within our team. This is a reminder of how valuable critique and conversation are to the creative process.

1st – Norway – 13/15

Visually, it features a strong, dynamic photograph, balanced spacing and good text alignment which is why this gets top marks for overall aesthetics. The use of a bold, clear font for the players adds to the clarity of the design. The captain’s symbol could be slightly larger for better visibility, and incorporating a second font colour could improve visual hierarchy.

Creativity: 3/5
Functionality: 5/5
Overall aesthetics: 5/5

2nd – Netherlands – 12/15

This graphic showcases high-quality player imagery, a vibrant and textured orange background that reinforces the team’s strong national identity, and a bold, modern font. The layout feels dynamic however, the players are in numerical order rather than positional order. Additionally, some of the names are partially covered making them a bit difficult to read which is why this scores low on functionality.

Creativity: 5/5
Functionality: 2/5
Overall aesthetics: 5/5

3rd – England – 11/15

The lineup features a clear and readable font, though listing players in numerical order that takes away from a more strategic or position-based layout. With a strong use of imagery as the focal point of the graphic as well as dynamic red and blue colour palette that strongly reflects the national identity, creates a seamless integration into the rest of the design. However, the choice of text size for the substitute names impacts the legibility and the double use of the England badge feels redundant and more of an afterthought. I am surprised that there is no reference to the tournament.

Creativity: 2/5
Functionality: 4/5
Overall aesthetics: 5/5

4th – Iceland – 11/15

Iceland’s lineup graphic features vibrant use of colours, a clean layout, and subtle nods to the tournament whilst using a sticker book composition to add a playful and nostalgic feel. The text for the player names are small and hard to read, this can’t always be helped in this scenario as they all have long names. I think the design would be more suited to a 4:5 aspect ratio for better balance and readability.

Creativity: 4/5
Functionality: 3/5
Overall aesthetics: 4/5

5th – Wales – 10/15

Wales matchday graphic features strong player imagery and a patterned background which creates a dynamic feel. The text is clean, well organised and highly legible, contributing to good overall clarity in contrast to other teams’ graphics. Again the players are listed in numerical order and player image could have improved treatment for more impact. Additionally, the overall colour palette is a bit bland and could benefit from using more of the home kit colour or more vibrant green of the away kit to enhance contrast and vibrancy.

Creativity: 2/5
Functionality: 5/5
Overall aesthetics: 3/5

6th – France – 10/15

France’s lineup graphic is visually striking, with standout elements like custom team logos and thoughtful ordering of players by position which enhances clarity. The use of custom team logos is well-executed, adding a nice touch of identity. However, the centred text feels slightly off-balance, and the predominantly white background could benefit from added colour or texture to bring more energy and depth to the design. While the player image is strong, it could be more seamlessly integrated with the background to elevate the overall cohesion and visual impact.

Creativity: 2/5
Functionality: 4/5
Overall aesthetics: 4/5

7th – Belgium – 10/15

Belgium’s Starting XI graphic showcases a clean, well-chosen font for player names and is supported by nicely treated imagery. However, the use of two separate slides feels unnecessary and disrupts the flow. The substitute names are difficult to read due to the thin font weight, and the image crops feel awkward and misaligned. Overall, the design leans toward being too minimal, and could be elevated with a secondary font colour and more intentional image placement to create a stronger visual hierarchy and cohesion.

Creativity: 3/5
Functionality: 3/5
Overall aesthetics: 4/5

8th – Finland – 10/15

This graphic features engaging imagery of all players and a bold blue background that creates strong visual impact. It also includes all the key contextual information, which is a major strength. While the background pattern adds texture, it can be somewhat distracting, especially when combined with a hard to read font that further affects legibility. Additionally, the substitute names are quite small, and the text down the sides is difficult to read.

Creativity: 4/5
Functionality: 4/5
Overall aesthetics: 2/5

9th – Portugal – 9/15

Portugal’s graphic features a clean, modern font with an effective use of contrasting colours which help differentiate elements and guide the viewer’s eye. The textured background adds a sense of depth and visual interest, but despite these strengths, the overall design feels minimal and lacks standout elements. The centred text affects legibility and the decision to split the content across two slides again feels unnecessary. It disrupts the flow without adding value.

Creativity: 2/5
Functionality: 3/5
Overall aesthetics: 4/5

10th – Poland – 9/15

Poland’s graphic makes a bold visual statement, opting for a clean layout that lists players in positional order making it very practical and viewer-friendly. The font pairing is strong, offering clear hierarchy, and the use of contextual imagery in place of player photos adds a distinctive and editorial feel. However, the design is let down by a few key issues: the player numbers and substitute names are extremely small and hard to read, there’s no visible reference to the tournament, and some text loses clarity due to the background imagery. With slight adjustments to scale, contrast, and contextual detail, this graphic could be much more effective in both form and function.

Creativity: 3/5
Functionality: 2/5
Overall aesthetics: 4/5

11th-15th

11th – Germany – 9/15

Creativity 3/5
Functionality 3/5
Overall aesthetics 3/5

12th – Switzerland – 8/15

Creativity 2/5
Functionality 3/5
Overall aesthetics 3/5

13th – Sweden – 8/15

Creativity 2/5
Functionality 2/5
Overall aesthetics 4/5

14th – Italy – 8/15

Creativity 3/5
Functionality 2/5
Overall aesthetics 3/5

15th – Denmark – 7/15

Creativity 2/5
Functionality 3/5
Overall aesthetics 2/5

Where’s Spain? Visualising their Starting XI

Spain is notably the only team missing from this list because they don’t release a Starting XI graphic. Fans often turn to social media for quick and clear lineup information and this is a bold and somewhat surprising choice. With so much emphasis on visual communication in modern football, especially for a major tournament like the Women’s Euro, the lack of a graphic feels odd. Drawing on the things I’ve observed and analysed from the other teams’ designs I have created a Starting XI graphic for Spain myself. I have aimed for clarity, functionality, and strong visual appeal.