Combining every season — this one is larger, give it a moment.
Team reportPremier League 2026
Bournemouth
A balanced-territory side, aggressive high-press out of possession, with a high-volume attack. Currently #13 of 20 on 9 points (2-3-3, 12:13). Tactical profile below is built from 8 matches of ball-by-ball event data, contextualised against the league.
In one read, what kind of team is Bournemouth and how good was the season?
Read. Bournemouth currently sit #13 of 20 on 9 points (2W-3D-3L, 1.12 pts/game), scoring 12 and conceding 13 for a goal difference of -1.
On the ball they are a balanced-territory team (50% field tilt, #8 in the league); off it they defend with a aggressive high-press (#8 of 20 for press intensity).
Across the 8 matches of event data, they create 1.56 xG/game (#7) and concede 0.99 (#2), a net of +0.57 xG/game — the underlying performance matches the actual goal difference.
Season Context — the league table
The question
Where did Bournemouth actually finish, and against whom?
The authoritative final table (full season), centred on Bournemouth.
#
team
P
W
D
L
GF
GA
GD
Pts
10
Hull City
8
2
4
2
9
8
+1
10
11
Everton
8
2
4
2
8
9
-1
10
12
Ipswich
8
3
1
4
12
16
-4
10
13
Bournemouth
8
2
3
3
12
13
-1
9
14
Tottenham
8
2
3
3
8
10
-2
9
15
Fulham
8
2
2
4
8
10
-2
8
16
Man Utd
8
1
4
3
10
13
-3
7
Match Momentum — when they create and concede danger
The question
Across a whole game, which periods does Bournemouth actually dominate for chances — and which periods hurt them?
Net xG (created minus conceded) in each 15-minute window, summed across the whole season's matches — above the line is time they dominate for chances, below is time it hurts them. Real on-clock shot timing.
dominant (net xG for)conceding (net xG against)
Vision AI Model Insight
Bournemouth tend to come alive after the break — first-half net xG +1.78, second-half +2.75. Their strongest period is 46-60' (net +1.59 xG); their most dangerous period to face is 16-30' (net -0.11 xG against them).
xG Race — the season, match by match
Expected goals piling up over 8 matches: Bournemouth against what their opponents created. A line pulling away upwards is a side creating more than it gives away; the gap at the end is the season’s balance (+4.5 xG). Hover a point for that match.
BournemouthOpponents against Bournemouth
Tactical DNA
The football question
In five genes, what is Bournemouth's footballing identity?
Each gene is a 0–100 score — the team's league percentile across the metrics that define that phase of play. It distils the whole report into an identity fingerprint: the taller the gene, the more that trait defines them.
48
Build-Up
possession control from the back
82
Progression
moving the ball upfield with threat
62
Creation
manufacturing chances
60
Press
winning the ball high & hard
90
Solidity
resisting the opponent's threat
Genetic identity
Bournemouth are defined most by their Solidity DNA (90/100 · elite at resisting the opponent's threat), and least by their Build-Up DNA (48/100). Percentiles vs the 20 teams in the league.
The Playstyle Wheel
Fifteen style metrics across five domains — Possess, Disrupt, Finish, Press, Defend — each a percentile against the rest of the league. Metrics marked ~proxy use the closest available event-data signal where the standard definition needs data this feed doesn't carry (explicit pressure events, offside/keeper-sweep incidents).
Possess
Deep buildup
70%
Possession
52%
Field tilt
61%
Disrupt
Central progression ~proxy
74%
Dribble tendency
65%
Progressive passes
91%
Finish
Final-third patience
22%
Shot quality
65%
Open-play xG
83%
Press
Forward press ~proxy
83%
High regains
91%
Pressing efficiency ~proxy
61%
Defend
Def-mid press ~proxy
83%
High line ~proxy
39%
PAdj defensive actions
96%
Bournemouth is defined most by Press (78% in the league) and weakest on Finish (57%). Percentiles vs the 23 teams in the league this season.
In possession
In possession
How they keep the ball, build up, progress, create and finish, and where their attacks die.
How much of the pitch does Bournemouth actually control, relative to the rest of the league?
Field tilt = share of final-third touches between the two sides across Bournemouth's matches, the standard proxy for territorial dominance. Plotted against points per game for every side in the league — the real question isn't just who controls territory, it's whether that control actually converts into results. Dashed lines mark the league average on each axis; Bournemouth highlighted. Hover any dot for the team.
Vision AI Model Insight
Bournemouth post 50% field tilt, ranking #8 of 20 in the league — comfortably above the league mid-point for territorial control, and their 1.12 points/game sits below the league-average return — a real disconnect: their territorial control isn't showing up on the scoreboard the way it should.
Where the time goes — how long each phase lasts
The question
When Bournemouth has the ball, how much of that time is spent building, progressing and creating?
The share of Bournemouth's time on the ball spent in each phase of play, in the order the phases happen. A phase is where the ball is on the pitch (own third, middle third, final third); a transition or a set piece skips the build-up and is counted on its own.
Phase
Share of the time
Build-up
26.8%
Progression
45.7%
Chance creation
24.1%
Attacking transition
3.3%
Vision AI Model Insight
Progression is where Bournemouth spends most of its time on the ball (46% of its time on the ball).
Passing Network
The question
Who actually plays with whom — the real on-pitch connections, not just average positions?
Every pass linked to its likely receiver (the next same-team touch), aggregated into player-pair combinations at each player's average position. Line width = how often the pair combines; colour = threat generated per pass (blue low → red high). Hover a line for the pair, or click a player to isolate their connections.
width = passes between the paircolour = xT per pass: low → high
Top 10 combinations
Truffert ↔ Silva
120p · 0.3xT
Hill ↔ Silva
108p · 0.4xT
Hill ↔ Petrovic
102p · -0.8xT
Petrovic ↔ Silva
90p · -0.2xT
Smith ↔ Hill
85p · -1.3xT
Adams ↔ Silva
77p · -0.3xT
Tavernier ↔ Truffert
75p · 2.1xT
Adams ↔ Hill
73p · -0.1xT
Truffert ↔ Scott
54p · -0.3xT
Smith ↔ Rayan
53p · 1.5xT
Vision AI Model Insight
Busiest connection: Adrien Truffert ↔ António Silva (120 passes). Most dangerous per pass: James Hill ↔ Rayan (0.04 xT/pass over 31 passes) — the combination that hurts opponents most when it fires, not just the one used most.
Touch Density — where Bournemouth had the ball
Every touch across 80 matches. Brighter means more touches.
Which Zones Do They Attack Through?
The question
Across the whole pitch, where does Bournemouth actually do its on-ball work?
Passes on one map, carries (the ball travelling with a player) on the other. Each is binned into the 15 pitch zones (three thirds × five vertical lanes) and shaded by its share of that kind of action; the arrows are the real actions.
Passes
the ball moved by a pass
3743
ACTIONS
Carries
the ball moved with a player
874
ACTIONS
Vision AI Model Insight
Their single busiest zone is the left half-space of the middle third (10.8% of all actions). 64% of actions run through the inside lanes (centre + both half-spaces) versus 36% down the two wings — an inside-dominant, half-space build. By third: 29% defensive, 48% middle, 23% attacking.
Attack Sides
Which channel they attacked through this season: the share of every action made in the opponent’s half, down the left, through the middle and down the right. Bournemouth leaned on their left (42%). The bars under the pitch put the league’s share beside theirs.
Bournemouth
42%22%36%
League
39%24%37%
Final-Third Entries
Every completed pass or carry that took the ball from outside the final third into it, by the channel it arrived in. Bournemouth made 399 this season (49.9 a match); 31% came into the left wing. Longer, bolder arrows mean more entries. Entries by carrying the ball in count as well as completed passes; dribbles are not counted.
Channel
Entries
Per match
Share
League share
Left wing
122
15.2
31%
31%
Left half-space
87
10.9
22%
16%
Centre
33
4.1
8%
13%
Right half-space
58
7.2
15%
14%
Right wing
99
12.4
25%
27%
Build-up2 sections
Build-Up — the pass map
The football question
How does Bournemouth progress possession from defence into attack — and who runs it?
Build-up passes grouped into 5 real categories — not the old zone grid, not raw individual lines: CB (passer is a centre-back), Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top passer.
1089build-up passes attempted
73%completed
30%reach the middle third
3%go long into the final third
Pass types
317CB · 40%
54Long Wide · 7%
7Long Central · 1%
345Wide → FB · 43%
73Central · 9%
Sequence success — build-up
140build-up sequences this season
6%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
41%turned over with nothing to show
CB317 · 40%
Long Wide54 · 7%
Long Central7 · 1%
Wide → FB345 · 43%
Central73 · 9%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Bournemouth build predominantly down the left, with Petrovic as the fulcrum (195 build-up passes). Only 33% of their build-up passes actually advance a third — the rest is lateral circulation, the hallmark of a possession-controlling side that circulates patiently in midfield before progressing. Their single most-repeated pattern is C def → RHS def (78×).
Pass Explorer
Every pass of Bournemouth’s last 8 matches as an arrow, theirs first and the opponents’ with other team, each side attacking left to right (solid = completed, dashed grey = failed). Eight families per team — click any map to open it wide, then filter by channel or third, from one to another (or click a cell of the flow grids), by outcome, half, minute and passer. Channels: right wing, right half-space, centre, left half-space, left wing.
From channel
To channel
From third
To third
Outcome
Minutes
Channel to channel · click a cell
Third to third · click a cell
Progression4 sections
How They Progress — the mechanism
Not just how many progressive passes, but where they start, who plays them, and whether they actually penetrate. 453 progressive passes across 8 matches (56.6/game).
Origin lane
Right wing
25%
Right half-space
17%
Central
11%
Left half-space
14%
Left wing
34%
Progression is left-dominant: 42% right side · 11% central · 47% left.
Who generates it
Adrien Truffert
84 · 19%
Adam Smith
60 · 13%
James Hill
54 · 12%
António Silva
43 · 9%
Marcus Tavernier
36 · 8%
Top two — Adrien Truffert & Adam Smith — account for 32% of all progression.
PROGRESSION
56.6 prog passes/game
mostly left
→
PENETRATION
30% reach final third
18% reach the box
→
THREAT
the other 70% is recycled
progress ≠ danger
What came of it.30% of progressive passes reached the final third and 18% the box; the rest was recycled in front of the block. 32% of the progression ran through two players, mostly down the left side.
Which lanes actually create the threat
Share of passes played from each lane against its share of the threat (xT) they add. Efficient = more threat than volume, sterile = lots of the ball, little damage.
Per lane — volume vs threat
Right wingefficient
Right half-spacebalanced
Centralsterile
Left half-spacebalanced
Left wingbalanced
Progression — the pass map
The football question
Once Bournemouth have the ball in midfield, how do they actually break into the final third — and who carries that job?
Progression passes grouped into 5 real categories: CB, Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top passer.
1776progression passes attempted
83%completed
21%break into the final third
14%go backward into the defensive third
Pass types
400CB · 27%
78Long Wide · 5%
12Long Central · 1%
770Wide → FB · 52%
207Central · 14%
Sequence success — progression
227progression sequences this season
28%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
43%turned over with nothing to show
CB400 · 27%
Long Wide78 · 5%
Long Central12 · 1%
Wide → FB770 · 52%
Central207 · 14%
◆ Vision AI Insight
Bournemouth progress predominantly down the left, with Silva the busiest midfield outlet (204 progression passes). Only 21% of passes that start in midfield actually break the final-third line — the rest (65%) is recycled back into midfield or (14%) played backward, the hallmark of a side that carries progression itself through midfield rather than just passing through it. Their most-repeated pattern is LHS mid → LW mid (83×) — press that lane and midfield progression stalls.
Decision Quality — not all completed passes are equal
A 90% pass completion can hide a sideways habit. Grading every pass by the threat it adds separates value creation from safe circulation.
Excellent (high xT gain)
17%
Progressive
1%
Neutral / sideways
46%
Safe / backward
36%
18% of passes are progressive-or-better; the remaining 82% keep possession without advancing it. A control-first side — safe in build-up, reliant on a few players for the incision.
Where does Bournemouth actually progress the ball with their feet, not a pass?
199 progressive carries this season across the whole squad (23% of 874 tracked carries total), grouped into up to 4 spatial patterns by where each carry starts and ends together — not just its origin zone. Median 15m, longest 46m. Most active carrier: Silva (39). Filter to one player below.
First (68)Second (50)Third (46)Fourth (35)grouped by carry pattern (start + end position), largest group first
startendown goal left, attacking →
Chance creation4 sections
Chance creation — how the shots come
The question
Where do Bournemouth's chances actually come from?
Every shot sorted twice. First by the kind of attack: an attacking transition (the shot came within 15 seconds of winning the ball), a settled attack (open play after the team had the ball), or a set piece. Then by how it was set up: a cross, a cut-back, a long ball, a pass into the box, or no pass at all (the player created it himself). So a cut-back from an attacking transition is counted apart from a cut-back in a settled attack.
116shots
12.5xG
0.11xG per shot
7big chances (0.3+ xG)
11goals
#8key passes / game in the league
#9box entries / game in the league
Kind of attack, then how the shot was set up
Shots
Goals
xG
xG / shot
Attacking transition25% of shots
29
3
2.74
0.09
Cross
1
0
0.06
0.06
Long ball
2
1
0.09
0.05
Pass into the box / short pass
17
1
1.96
0.12
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)
9
1
0.63
0.07
Settled attack59% of shots
69
7
6.11
0.09
Cross
15
0
1.27
0.08
Cut-back
8
3
1.20
0.15
Long ball
2
1
0.12
0.06
Pass into the box / short pass
27
2
2.17
0.08
Own creation (carry, dribble, rebound)
17
1
1.36
0.08
Set piece16% of shots
18
1
3.60
0.20
Corner
14
1
3.49
0.25
Free kick
4
0
0.11
0.03
Every attempt to create — and what came of it
Every pass into the box, every cut-back and every pass before a shot. Red led to a shot, gold to a goal; grey ones were tried but no shot came: solid found a team-mate, dashed lost the ball. Filter by outcome, type or player; tap an arrow for the detail.
Who sets the shots up
Player
Set-ups
xG created
Goals
Adrien Truffert
8
1.07
1
Adam Smith
6
0.86
1
Marcus Tavernier
12
0.84
0
Evanilson
7
0.73
4
Justin Kluivert
7
0.71
1
Who takes them
Player
Shots
xG
Goals
Evanilson
21
2.61
3
Rayan
26
2.42
1
Marcus Tavernier
17
1.92
5
António Silva
6
1.57
0
Justin Kluivert
13
1.48
1
Vision AI Model Insight
The biggest source of Bournemouth's chances, by xG, is settled attack (6.1 of 12.5 xG, 69 of 116 shots), mostly pass into the box / short pass. 29 of the 116 shots (25%) came within 15 seconds of winning the ball. 18 of the 116 shots came from set pieces; 11 goals from 12.5 xG (-1.5).
Chance Creation — the pass map
The football question
How does Bournemouth consistently create dangerous chances — from which zones, and who creates them?
Key passes (the pass immediately before a shot) grouped into 5 real categories: CB, Wide→FB, Central, Long Wide, Long Central. Each gets its own panel below, so nothing competes for attention. Arrow width = volume, labelled with the exact count; hover for the top creator.
Pass types
8CB · 10%
7Long Wide · 8%
3Long Central · 4%
33Wide → FB · 40%
32Central · 39%
Sequence success — final-third
109final-third sequences this season
28%succeed — produce a shot
39%turned over with nothing to show
Danger Funnel — which service carries threat
Every key pass pooled by where it was played FROM, then drawn with its arrow width set by total xT rather than by count. A zone that produces a lot of cheap balls shrinks; one that produces a few decisive ones dominates. Where this disagrees with the volume map, the volume map is the misleading one.
0 key passes shown● low threat● mid● high threatarrow width = total xT, not count
CB8 · 10%
Long Wide7 · 8%
Long Central3 · 4%
Wide → FB33 · 40%
Central32 · 39%
Who creates — volume × threat
15Tavernier
11Scott
8Evanilson
8Truffert
7Hill
6Kluivert
6Christie
83key passes #8 of 20
14.2box entries/game #9 of 20
40.9final-3rd entries/game #6 of 20
1.56xG/game #7 of 20
11goals #6 of 20
-1.5finishing vs xG #12 of 20
◆ Vision AI Insight
Bournemouth lean right — 41% of their key passes come from that flank and its half-space (34 of 83), most often from Evanilson (5). They funnel chances into the c of the final third, most often via RHS att → C att (12 key passes, most often from Evanilson). Tavernier is the primary source overall. They generate 1.56 xG a game and finish it wasteful — they under-perform their xG, led by Marcus Tavernier (5G), Evanilson (3G), Alex Scott (1G).
Crosses & Cutbacks — squad-wide
The question
How does Bournemouth deliver into the box from wide areas, and what comes of it?
128 crosses: 42 found a team-mate (33%), 16 led to a shot (12%). 29 cut-backs: 11 found a team-mate (38%), 7 led to a shot (24%). A cross starts wide and is aimed into the box; a cut-back starts near the byline and is squared back. Grey ones were tried but no shot came: solid found a team-mate, dashed lost the ball.
Crosses by Territory
The question
Which part of the final third does Bournemouth actually cross from?
128 crosses this season (the same crosses as the map above), split into fifteen territories — five channels (both wings, both half-spaces and the centre) by three depths from the halfway line to the byline. 23% come from one territory, the byline left wing; 9 come from the half-spaces and 0 from the centre.
Territory
Crosses
Share
Led to a shot
byline · left wing
30
23%
4
advanced · left wing
27
21%
2
byline · right wing
26
20%
0
advanced · right wing
20
16%
4
deep · left wing
10
8%
3
deep · right wing
6
5%
0
byline · left half-space
5
4%
3
advanced · left half-space
2
2%
0
advanced · right half-space
1
1%
0
byline · right half-space
1
1%
0
Finishing3 sections
Shot Map
116 shots for 12.5 xG (1.56/game, #7 in the league). Click an area of the box to see who shoots from there; filter by outcome, player or match.
High-volume attack. 14.5 shots/game at 0.107 xG/shot. Box entries 14/game (#9). Threat created 11.8 xT/game (#6).
Goal Sequences
The move behind each of Bournemouth’s 12 goals this season, from the moment they got the ball to the finish. Pick a goal from the list, then step through it or press Play: numbered circles are passes and touches, dotted lines are carries (the ball travelling with a player), dashed grey is a pass that was lost, the star is the shot.
Each goal’s possession, rebuilt from the raw event feed — 12 goals traced.
How Do They Score?
The question
Where do the goals actually come from — open play, dead balls, which foot?
Every goal Bournemouth scored across the loaded matches, broken down by how it was created and finished.
By situation
Open play
10 · 91%
Set pieces
1 · 9%
Penalties
0 · 0%
By finish
Right foot
3 · 27%
Left foot
7 · 64%
Header
1 · 9%
Vision AI Model Insight
11 goals scored. 91% come in open play; set pieces add 9%. Open play is clearly their main route to goal.
When they lose it1 section
Ball-Loss Map — where attacks die
Every turnover has a location and a cause. This is a rate, not a raw count — the share of pass attempts from each zone that end in a turnover, so a zone they simply play through more often doesn't automatically look riskier. Grey cells are real zones with too few attempts to trust a rate.
Loss rate by zone
How they lose it
Incomplete pass — attacking third
238
Failed forward pass
153
Failed take-on
66
Lost in the defensive third
293
Their weakest zone is the right wing in the defensive third: 50% of 133 pass attempts there are lost (67 times). Separately, 28% of all losses happen in the attacking third — a fair share happen deeper, which invites transitions.
Out of possession
Out of possession
How they press, where they win the ball back, and how they concede.
How hard does Bournemouth press, where, and does it actually work — beyond a single PPDA number?
A composite Pressing Index built from four event-derived dimensions, each ranked against the league. Not one metric — intensity, height, effectiveness and opponent disruption together. The pitch shows every defensive action (the only five events this data records); the white line is the average height that feeds the score. Toggle by action type below, hover any dot for the player.
73
Pressing Index /100 · strong
Intensity70
PPDA, high-press share, high-zone actions
Height70
how high up the pitch they defend
Effectiveness80
high recoveries & high-regain share
Disruption70
opponent completion & progression allowed
Every defensive action & where it happens
Where they win the ball back — by lane
RW
13%
RHS
20%
C
18%
LHS
30%
LW
19%
By third (high / mid / low regain)
Def 44%
Mid 40%
Att 16%
Read
Ranked #8 of 20 for press intensity, this is a high press. 56% of defensive actions happen in the middle & attacking thirds, at an average height of 40. Of recoveries, 57% are won high up the pitch.
Every pressing metric, ranked in the league
metric
value
rank
meaning
PPDA (opp passes per def action)
—
#8/20
lower = more intense; rank is what matters
Defensive actions / game
178
#2/20
High-press share
25%
#7/20
def actions won high up
Defensive-action height (0–100)
40.3
#6/20
avg pitch height of actions
High recoveries / game
26.5
#2/20
ball won in mid+att third
High-recovery share
57%
#6/20
share of recoveries won high
Opponent completion allowed
79%
#9/20
lower = more disruptive
Opponent progressive allowed
8.1%
#3/20
of opp passes, lower = better
Transition timing
This source carries per-event timestamps, so genuine transition metrics — counter-attack shots, press→shot conversions, time-to-recover — are measured; see the dedicated Transitions section below.
How long they keep it — passes and seconds until the ball is won
The question
Once the opponent has the ball, how many passes and how many seconds pass before Bournemouth win it back with a defensive action?
Counted over the 283 opposition possessions that Bournemouth ended with a tackle, interception, recovery or challenge. Fewer passes and seconds means the ball is won quickly (a press); more means the opponent is allowed to play before Bournemouth step in. Bournemouth win it after 5.1 opponent passes in the first half-hour and after 3.6 after the hour mark (sooner).
PASSES THEY GET
4.7passes
median 3 · before Bournemouth win it
TIME THEY KEEP IT
13sec
median 7s · 35.4 wins per game
How many passes the opponent got in before the ball was won
39%
36%
12%
13%
0–2 passes3–5 passes6–9 passes10+ passes
Through the match — every 15 minutes
0–15′
4.8
12s
15–30′
5.5
17s
30–45+′
5.2
15s
45–60′
5.5
16s
60–75′
4.0
11s
75–90+′
3.4
9s
average passesaverage seconds
Attitude in each third
Every other style number here says how much Bournemouth does. This says
how: wide or central, short or long, patient or direct. Bars are standard deviations
from the league mean for passes played from that third; a solid bar marks a dimension
where Bournemouth are genuinely unusual, and a verdict is only written where something clears
0.85 sd — a side that is ordinary in a third is told so rather than given a label
for average play.
Build-up (own third) 1,089 passes
nothing unusual in this zone
Width of use-0.3720.24
Wide-channel share-0.710.26
Side bias-0.11-0.25
Pass length+0.7025.21
Long-ball share+0.350.26
Forward gain per pass+0.6114.10
Backward-pass share-0.470.18
Deep-pass share+0.440.33
Completion-0.810.73
Seconds between passes+0.083.38
Side used
left 26% · central 46% · right 28%
Progression (middle third) 1,776 passes
longer passing, slower, trying to break lines
Width of use-0.1425.27
Wide-channel share-0.740.35
Side bias+0.291.19
Pass length+1.1518.83
Long-ball share+0.680.13
Forward gain per pass+0.434.25
Backward-pass share+0.110.34
Deep-pass share+0.950.21
Completion-0.310.82
Seconds between passes+0.973.62
Side used
left 36% · central 31% · right 33%
Final third 878 passes
more recycling, circulating, slower
Width of use-0.1131.34
Wide-channel share-0.520.54
Side bias+0.543.37
Pass length+0.9316.91
Long-ball share+0.160.11
Forward gain per pass-1.11-0.44
Backward-pass share+1.420.48
Deep-pass share-0.010.09
Completion+0.180.71
Seconds between passes+0.974.12
Side used
left 47% · central 16% · right 37%
Reference measured across roughly 3,500 match-teams
in this competition, per third, so the comparison is with Bournemouth's own league. The means
behave as football should: width of use grows 21.0 → 25.6 → 31.6 going forward,
pass length shrinks 22.7 → 17.2 → 15.5 m, and completion is hardest in the
final third. Tempo is integer-resolution because the feed records whole seconds.
Transitions1 section
Transitions — attacking & defensive
The question
When Bournemouth win or lose the ball, what actually happens in the seconds after?
Reconstructed from the full timestamped event stream: real possession spells (not zone-clustered), and shots that follow a regain within a fixed window. This phase of play needs ordered, per-event timestamps — which every match here carries.
Direct play share17%
#9 of 20 · reaches final third in ≤3 passes
Patient build-up share23%
#13 of 20 · spells of 6+ passes
Tempo (possession length)16.4s
#7 of 20 · shorter = faster tempo
Passes per possession4.1
#14 of 20
Counter-attack shots /game1.35
#1 of 20 · shot within 12s of a regain in own half
Press→shot /game3.26
#6 of 20 · shot within 8s of a high regain
Speed to final third after regain11.6s
#3 of 20 · lower = faster break
Sequence success — attacking transition
15attacking transition sequences this season
33%succeed — produce a shot
40%turned over with nothing to show
Sequence success — defensive transition
35defensive transition sequences this season
54%succeed — reach the next third or a shot
14%turned over with nothing to show
Vision AI Model Insight
Bournemouth are a direct, fast-break side: 17% of possessions reach the final third in 3 passes or fewer (#9 of 20), against 23% built patiently over 6+ passes (#13 of 20). Winning the ball back leads to a shot inside 12 seconds 1.35 times a game (#1), and a high regain converts to a shot within 8 seconds 3.26 times a game (#6 of 20) — a modest but real source of chances.
Defending the box2 sections
Vulnerability Map — how opponents hurt them
The report flipped: where do opponents create their threat against Bournemouth? 322 opponent progressive passes and 84 shots faced (7.9 xG against) across the season.
Opponent threat by lane (attacking into Bournemouth)
Right wing
31%
Right half-space
11%
Central
16%
Left half-space
14%
Left wing
28%
Where the danger came from. Opponents generated most of their threat through the right wing (31% of the danger conceded).
How Do They Concede?
The question
Where do the goals against Bournemouth actually come from — open play, dead balls, and who supplies them?
Every goal Bournemouth conceded across the loaded matches — the opponent's shots in Bournemouth's own matches — plus every individual opponent key pass faced, each drawn as its own real arrow (not zone-clustered) with the % share of each zone behind it.
Where the goals go in
Every opponent key pass against them (58 total)
By situation
Open play
10 · 77%
Set pieces
3 · 23%
Penalties
0 · 0%
Vision AI Model Insight
13 goals conceded. 77% come in open play; set pieces account for only 23%, so dead-ball defending is not the main issue. 15% are headers — aerial defending is not where the damage comes from. Their supply line runs mainly through the centre of the attacking third (28% of key passes faced) — that is the zone to shut off.
Context
Shape and tactics
Set pieces, strengths and weaknesses, and who they resemble.
The tactical idea behind each phase of this team's play, written from the same numbers shown above — what they do in build-up, how they progress, where they create, and how they defend it.
How much of the goal threat is manufactured from dead balls — a route to goal that bypasses their open-play mechanism entirely.
Open play
10 g · 8.9 xG
Set pieces
1 g · 3.6 xG
Penalties
0 g
9% of goals come from set pieces (1 of 11), worth 3.6 xG from 18 shots. Set pieces are a secondary threat; the danger is in open play.
Where do Bournemouth's corners go?
37 corners taken this season, split by which flag they were taken from — arrows from the flag, dots at the delivery point, shaded by % of that side's corners landing in each zone (same treatment as the concede map below). No swing-direction (inswinger/outswinger) data is recorded here, only a start and end point per pass, which cannot show how the ball curved — so this shows what is genuinely knowable: where it lands, and short vs actually delivered. Tap or hover a dot for who took it and the match; filter to one match below and the shading recomputes for just that game.
Right side (19)
Delivered into the box 95%Short 5%
Left side (18)
Delivered into the box 100%Short 0%
Where opponents attack Bournemouth from set pieces
14 shots from opponent corners against Bournemouth, 2 conceded, split by the flag the corner came from — arrows from the flag, dots where the shot was taken (gold = goal), shaded by the % of that flag's shots in each zone. Tap or hover a shot for who took it, the minute and the match; filter to one match and the shading recomputes for just that game.
Right flag (9)
Shot 9Goals 1
Left flag (5)
Shot 5Goals 1
Tactical Strengths & Weaknesses
Strengths (top-third vs league)
progression /game — 56.62 (95th pct)
xG conceded /game — 0.99 (90th pct)
threat created /game — 11.77 (70th pct)
xG created /game — 1.56 (65th pct)
shots /game — 14.50 (65th pct)
Weaknesses (bottom-third vs league)
pass retention % — 77.56 (35th pct)
Style Archetype & Similar Teams
Team archetype: Direct / counter high-press. Their closest stylistic matches in the league (cosine similarity on style metrics) — sides that play a similar way.
Nottingham Forest
79%
Man Utd
60%
Brentford
60%
Brighton
57%
Liverpool
42%
Performance vs Opponent Styles
The question
Not just how Bournemouth results against a high press or a low block — how does their own play actually change?
Every match split into three tiers by how hard that specific opponent pressed (opponent PPDA — lower means a more aggressive press), matching Bournemouth's own passing behaviour to the result.
Results
opponent type
goals for/g
goals against/g
points/g
vs high-pressing opponents (2m)
1.50
2.00
0.50
vs mid-block opponents (2m)
2.50
1.00
2.00
vs low-block opponents (4m)
1.00
1.75
1.00
Behaviour — how Bournemouth actually play against each
opponent type
retention
directness (long balls)
prog. passes/g
xT/g
box entries/g
vs high-pressing opponents
76%
18%
40
8.2
4.5
vs mid-block opponents
75%
17%
50
10.4
13.5
vs low-block opponents
79%
15%
68
14.2
19.5
Vision AI Model Insight
Facing a high press, retention drops to 76% vs 79% against a low block (3pt lower under pressure), and directness (long-ball share) sits at 18% when pressed vs 15% against a low block — a mild adjustment, not a wholesale change.
Scouting Summary — the team in brief
In brief. Bournemouth are balanced-territory with a aggressive high-press.
Their attack creates 1.56 xG a game and they concede 0.99 a game.
[Event-data based — no tracking, so off-ball structure and marking scheme need video.]
For each of ten match numbers, the one match this season that departed furthest from Bournemouth’s own average, the eight biggest swings first. Bar right of centre means more than usual, left means less. It shows how much the way they play moves from game to game, and which opponent moved it.
Bournemouth
across 8 matches this season
PPDAat Man City · 1-2 · 2026-08-238.1avg 4.4
Field tiltat Man City · 1-2 · 2026-08-2322%avg 50%
Pass accuracyat Man Utd · 3-0 · 2026-10-2571%avg 77%
Passesvs Sunderland · 2-0 · 2026-10-18619avg 468
Threat from passingat Man City · 1-2 · 2026-08-231.80avg 5.71
Final-third entriesat Man City · 1-2 · 2026-08-2327avg 50
Progressive carriesat Man City · 1-2 · 2026-08-2328avg 43
Every pass, carry, take-on, shot and ball win is worth the change it made to the chance of scoring minus the chance of conceding in the next 10 seconds. This is Bournemouth’s last 8 matches added up: where the value came from, who produced it, and the six biggest single moves. OBV only measures what a player does with the ball: it shows who added the most on-ball value, not who was the most important player (defending off the ball, positioning and pressing are not in it).
+13.4on-ball value, 8 matches
Where the value came from
Passes3743 actions+4.97
Carries874 actions+0.13
Dribbles103 actions+0.43
Shots116 actions+4.99
Ball wins539 actions+2.84
Most on-ball value (OBV)
Actions
OBV
per 100
Rayan
295
+1.98
+0.67
James Hill
637
+1.97
+0.31
Marcus Tavernier
453
+1.48
+0.33
Justin Kluivert
161
+1.37
+0.85
António Silva
638
+1.23
+0.19
Ryan Christie
216
+1.04
+0.48
Evanilson
277
+1.03
+0.37
Adrien Truffert
570
+0.60
+0.11
Biggest single moves
OBV
1 Ryan Christie · pass
+0.576
2 James Hill · pass
+0.402
3 Evanilson · take-on
+0.377
4 Marcus Tavernier · shot
+0.357
5 James Hill · pass
+0.347
6 Marcus Tavernier · pass
+0.305
Set Pieces by Player
Who delivers Bournemouth’s dead balls and who finishes them this season. 37 corners taken, most by Marcus Tavernier (19); 18 shots from corners and free kicks, 1 goals, led by Evanilson (1 goals, 1.07 xG). “Into the box” counts corners that landed inside the penalty area; free-kick takers are the players who shot from one, because this feed does not mark who delivers the others.
Player
Corners taken
Into the box
Set-piece shots
Goals
xG
Free-kick shots
Penalties
Marcus Tavernier
19
16 (84%)
3
—
0.08
3
—
Alex Scott
10
8 (80%)
1
—
0.03
1
—
António Silva
—
—
4
—
1.41
—
—
Evanilson
1
1 (100%)
3
1
1.07
—
—
Rayan
—
—
3
—
0.34
—
—
Lewis Cook
6
6 (100%)
—
—
0.00
—
—
Ryan Christie
—
—
2
—
0.04
—
—
Justin Kluivert
—
—
1
—
0.60
—
—
Adrien Truffert
—
—
1
—
0.02
—
—
David Brooks
1
1 (100%)
—
—
0.00
—
—
Top Performers
Ranked by Vision AI Score — the same tactical behavioural evaluation each player's own report page shows (min 216 minutes). Coloured chips are that player's strongest capability blocks.
Chance creation leaders — key passes /90 and box entries.
player
pos
min
key P /90
box entries
xT
Marcus Tavernier
M
669
2.02
20
8.3
Adrien Truffert
D
748
0.96
16
11.6
James Hill
D
760
0.83
13
13.8
Alex Scott
M
465
2.13
8
5.7
Evanilson
F
693
1.04
10
2.3
Adam Smith
D
708
0.64
10
10.8
Rayan
M
716
0.50
9
3.0
Justin Kluivert
M
391
1.38
5
2.1
Wide Delivery Leaders
Crosses and cutbacks — wingers and full-backs only (by real average position, not the raw D/M position code), ranked by combined volume.
player
pos
min
crosses (completed)
cutbacks (completed)
Adrien Truffert
FB
748
12 (42%)
14 (43%)
Rayan
W
716
0
11 (45%)
Adam Smith
FB
708
9 (56%)
1 (100%)
Defensive Volume Leaders
Who does the defensive work — tackles, interceptions, recoveries.
player
pos
min
def actions
tackles
intercept
recoveries
António Silva
D
760
173
10
10
30
James Hill
D
760
168
22
8
26
Adrien Truffert
D
748
151
21
10
38
Rayan
M
716
121
9
6
15
Evanilson
F
693
120
7
7
26
Marcus Tavernier
M
669
107
13
2
42
Tyler Adams
M
567
106
10
12
38
Adam Smith
D
708
103
6
5
19
Full Squad Data
Every player with 100+ minutes (15 players).
player
pos
apps
min
goals
xG
key P
prog
def
xT
António Silva
D
8
760
0
1.6
1
43
173
12.2
Djordje Petrovic
G
8
760
0
0.0
0
32
18
6.6
James Hill
D
8
760
0
0.1
7
54
168
13.8
Adrien Truffert
D
8
748
0
0.2
8
84
151
11.6
Rayan
M
8
716
1
2.4
4
21
121
3.0
Adam Smith
D
8
708
0
0.2
5
60
103
10.8
Evanilson
F
8
693
3
2.6
8
12
120
2.3
Marcus Tavernier
M
8
669
5
1.9
15
36
107
8.3
Tyler Adams
M
8
567
0
0.1
2
23
106
6.4
Alex Scott
M
5
465
1
0.5
11
23
102
5.7
Justin Kluivert
M
6
391
1
1.5
6
6
54
2.1
Lewis Cook
M
8
356
0
0.1
5
20
50
4.1
Ryan Christie
M
7
302
0
0.8
6
11
67
2.7
Ben Gannon-Doak
F
7
127
0
0.2
3
8
24
1.2
David Brooks
M
5
113
0
0.0
2
11
16
1.6
Player Role Architecture
The question
Who does what — and what tactical job does each key player actually perform?
The nine most-used players (450+ minutes), each with the role their event fingerprint points to — not just their listed position.
Djordje Petrovic
Goalkeeper · Goalkeeper
minutes760
goals · xG0 · 0.0
prog passes /903.8
key passes /900.00
def actions /902.1
pass accuracy68%
António Silva
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes760
goals · xG0 · 1.6
prog passes /905.1
key passes /900.12
def actions /9020.5
pass accuracy87%
James Hill
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes760
goals · xG0 · 0.1
prog passes /906.4
key passes /900.83
def actions /9019.9
pass accuracy75%
Adrien Truffert
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes748
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /9010.1
key passes /900.96
def actions /9018.2
pass accuracy76%
Rayan
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes716
goals · xG1 · 2.4
prog passes /902.6
key passes /900.50
def actions /9015.2
pass accuracy67%
Adam Smith
Ball-playing defender · Defender
minutes708
goals · xG0 · 0.2
prog passes /907.6
key passes /900.64
def actions /9013.1
pass accuracy78%
Evanilson
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes693
goals · xG3 · 2.6
prog passes /901.6
key passes /901.04
def actions /9015.6
pass accuracy74%
Marcus Tavernier
Advanced creator · Attacking mid
minutes669
goals · xG5 · 1.9
prog passes /904.8
key passes /902.02
def actions /9014.4
pass accuracy76%
Tyler Adams
Ball-winner / destroyer · Midfielder
minutes567
goals · xG0 · 0.1
prog passes /903.7
key passes /900.32
def actions /9016.8
pass accuracy88%
Recruitment Intelligence — profiles to sign
The question
If you were sporting director, which player profiles would move the needle most?
Each recruitment target is derived directly from the team's weakest areas vs the league — the gap, why it shows in the data, and the profile that closes it.
Need — bottom-third: pass retention % (35th pct)
Sign a secure ball-retaining midfielder. The data flags this because possession is turned over cheaply (77.56, 35th percentile vs the league).