Newly-promoted Yeovil Town find themselves on the cusp of occupying a National League play-off spot! Mark Cooper is on his way to guiding The Glovers to, at least, a comfortable mid-table finish in their first season back at this level, after winning the National League South title in April.
In this article, I’ll analyse Cooper’s on and off-ball approaches; assess Yeovil’s chances of reaching the play-offs this season; and determine the long-term prospects of Cooper’s project at Huish Park.
In-possession
Yeovil typically line up in a 3-4-2-1 formation. They can mix between playing long or short passes from their goal-kicks, and their shape varies depending on the positioning of their right wing-back…
They can form a 4-2-5 shape by pushing their wing-backs high and wide, and using their goalkeeper as a situational centre-back to form a back-four – as we can see below.
Alternatively, their right wing-back and left-sided centre-back can move into the second line; and their right-sided #10 can move outside to hold the width. This leaves Yeovil with a 3-4-4 shape.
Higher up the pitch, Yeovil form a 3-2-5 during their build-up. The 3-2-5 allows Yeovil to have players in close proximity during the build-up, as well as having sufficient numbers in the last line. Five players are positioned deep, and five players are positioned high.
The close proximity of the deeper players allows them to combine quickly, retain possession, and exert control on matches. Then, in the final-third, the front-five can overload opposition back-fours with ease; the two #10’s can drop deeper to overload the midfield; and, because they have players spread evenly across all five vertical zones, the front-five can quickly combine and interchange positions.
Now let’s break down a couple of goals…
First up, against Ebbsfleet United. One of Yeovil’s forwards, Frank Nouble, had the ball on the left touchline, with Josh Sims and the left-sided centre-back, Alex Whittle, helping to form a triangle (below). This allowed them to combine and interchange positions. Whittle made an underlapping run, was found by Nouble, and then crossed into the penalty area. His cross found its way to Brett McGavin, who finished.
And here, versus Maidenhead United. Nouble dropped slightly deeper into the midfield from the last line of attack. One of Maidenhead’s centre-backs followed him, which created space in-behind the defensive line for the centre-forward, Aaron Jarvis, to run into. Nouble played a through pass towards Jarvis, as we can see below, who scored.
Yeovil’s positional play is good. They can form a front-five reliably which allows them to occupy all five vertical zones; although the structure isn’t absolutely top because it relies on them pushing their wing-backs into the last line, as opposed to midfielders. These players are responsible for both defending and attacking in the last line, so there are moments when Yeovil are under-powered in attack because it takes time to get them up the pitch.
However, the 3-2-5 structure with wing-backs is identical to how Barnet and Rochdale set up. They’re two very good sides in the National League, and prove that the structure itself is conducive to competing at the top at this level.
Even when they aren’t able to attack with five in the last line, Yeovil are a threat in transitional moments. They regularly have three players positioned high up the pitch who can connect and manufacture goalscoring opportunities.
Yeovil are also a threat from set-pieces, having scored four goals from corners so far this season (ranking them joint-fourth in the National League).
Out-of-possession
But what about when they’re without the ball? In the high press, Yeovil allow their opponents an average of 12.67 passes per every defensive action they attempt (PPDA). This ranks Yeovil 19th in the National League for this particular metric, and illustrates how their press is, generally speaking, more of a passive one.
Now let’s have a look at some examples…
Away to Gateshead, straight from a goal-kick, Yeovil allowed them to have an overload in the build-up. Yeovil’s centre-forward was tasked with both shadow-marking Gateshead’s #6 and pressing the central centre-back (below); they were man-to-man out wide and in the midfield; and they had a 5v4 numerical advantage in the last line.
The back-five that Yeovil set up with causes them issues in the high pressing moment. Rather than defending with a back-four, and having an additional player who can be used higher up the pitch to press, Cooper typically opts for a +1 in the defensive line.
However, it’s important to note that Yeovil’s passive press isn’t just because they go with a back-five. It just makes it more difficult to be aggressive because the opposition are more likely to have overloads in the build-up. For instance, Barnet lead the way in the PPDA metric this season, and also press with a 5-2-3 shape.
Below, York City formed a 3-2-5 shape after their right-back had inverted into the midfield to form a double-pivot. This meant that Yeovil’s block matched up in man-to-man fashion, and York had no overloads. The centre-forward, Jarvis, and left-sided #10, Kofi Shaw, shadow-marked the double-pivot before pressing the defensive line, backed up by the right-sided #10, Pedro Borges.
When Jarvis and Shaw pressed, Yeovil’s midfielders jumped to press York’s now free pivot players. We can see Jarvis signalling to a teammate to ‘jump’ as he presses the centre-back, above. This is a top structure from Cooper.
Yeovil followed the same pressing structure against Barnet, who also built play in a 3-2-5. However, although Yeovil’s block matched up in man-to-man fashion all across the pitch, their press lacked intensity. Yeovil, the home side, allowed Barnet to have 64% of the possession.
That may be harsh to set the bar that high. Barnet are one of the very best sides in the National League, and Yeovil are newly-promoted. However, that’s the level Yeovil should aspire to be at. The size and stature of the club should mean they’re competitive towards the top of the division.
However, in the present, Yeovil don’t have the quality to reliably play through pressure against top sides like Barnet, and don’t have the athleticism in the press to consistently put good pressure on the ball. This means that they fail to exert optimal control against the top sides.
Because they fail to consistently get good pressure on the ball high up the pitch, Yeovil can regularly be pinned back and forced to defend deep. They have faced 220 shots against, ranking them 18th in the division.
Although, when Yeovil are forced to defend deep, their wing-backs enable them to form a 5-4-1 shape (as we can see below) and defend with five in the last line.
This makes it more difficult for opponents to overload their defensive line; makes it easier to track runs from deep, as they already have players in the last line to pick these runs up, rather than relying on midfielders to track these runs; and, when the wing-backs move wide to defend the wide spaces, they still have sufficient numbers centrally to provide compactness.
Yeovil have conceded 22 goals so far this season (6th in the National League), compared to their expected level of 23.19 xG Against (9th).
Then, once possession has been turned over after defending deep, Yeovil have three players left high up the pitch. This makes them a greater threat in transition, as opposed to if they only had two players left up.
Conclusion
To summarise, Yeovil’s structure is very similar to Barnet and Rochdale. They go with a 3-2-5 shape with wing-backs; look to ‘play out’ from defence; press with a 5-2-3; and defend in a 5-4-1, leaving three players high up the pitch for transitions. In fact, they’re more similar to Rochdale because they lack Barnet’s intensity in the high press.
Where Yeovil differ to Rochdale, however, is in both penalty areas. Yeovil have scored 24 goals so far compared to Rochdale’s 28, and have conceded 22 goals to Rochdale’s 18.
However, it’s important to note that the two clubs are at different stages in their projects under their respective managers. Rochdale have already had a year of consolidation under Jimmy McNulty at this level, and were ready for a play-off push this season; whereas Cooper only got Yeovil promoted in April.
Therefore, the aim this season should never have been to challenge for the top seven – that should be more of a medium-term target. Having said that, with six standout sides this season, I believe the final play-off spot is up for grabs, and I consider Yeovil to be in the mix.
The next step for Cooper is to recruit better quality at Yeovil to take them to the next step. Tactically, they’re already set up to be competitive towards the top of the division. However more quality is needed to eradicate some silly mistakes which lead to soft goals, retain possession more reliably to exert more control on matches, and become a greater threat in the final-third.
Yeovil have averaged a 50.8% possession share (8th), and have accumulated 22.24 expected goals (xG), ranking them 14th in the division.
More physical profiles in attack, who can lead the press and reduce the time the opposition spend with the ball, would also be advantageous. Then, Cooper’s pressing structure can be better assessed as he would have the correct profiles at his disposal to put consistent pressure on the ball.
Until then, however, I believe Cooper’s system at Yeovil isn’t conducive to eventually challenging for the title, as not enough pressure is put on the ball. This means they’re forced to defend deep for longer spells, which means they can’t exert optimal control. It’s for this very same reason why I concluded that Rochdale wouldn’t be in title contention this season – despite their impressive summer transfer window and style of play.
But that’s talk for the future. Right now, Mark Cooper is doing a tremendous job at Huish Park. His Yeovil side won the National League South title earlier this year, and are already in contention for a top seven spot at Step 1. They’re ahead of schedule.
Commentaires