admin
Shape-shifters: Rowley v Cattermole could be Huish Park’s real contest
There is an intriguing subplot to Yeovil Town v Gateshead which has very little to do with individual players.
Watch the technical areas.
On one side will be Billy Rowley, 42, whose reputation has been built around progressive coaching, tactical detail and a willingness to manipulate his shape according to the opposition.
On the other will be Lee Cattermole, 38, only two months into his first senior managerial job after coaching roles with Middlesbrough, Burnley, Bristol Rovers and Northern Ireland.
They are relatively young managers taking rather different routes into National League management.
But after watching both sides last weekend, they appear to have something important in common, neither seems particularly interested in being imprisoned by the formation written on the team-sheet.
And that could make Saturday’s 12.30 kick-off at Huish Park a fascinating tactical contest.
Against Carlisle, the Yeovil team-sheet suggested a fairly conventional back four.
And technically it was. But that didn’t tell us how Yeovil actually defended. Mason Obeng’s role was the giveaway.
When Carlisle established possession, Obeng repeatedly dropped deep on the left, sometimes effectively operating outside the back four as a supplementary wing-back.
That allowed Jordan Norville-Williams to narrow. Norville-Williams could therefore protect the channel alongside Joe Gubbins rather than being continually dragged towards Carlisle’s width.
Brett McGavin protected the area ahead of the centre-backs.
It wasn’t a permanent five. It was a five when Yeovil needed a five.
That distinction matters.
Rowley hadn’t changed formation in the traditional sense. He had given one player a specific job which altered the geometry of the entire team depending upon where Carlisle had the ball.
Until Gubbins’ dismissal after 65 minutes, it worked extremely well.
Carlisle’s central combinations were largely negated, Yeovil looked the better side and Stephen Walker’s goal came from exactly the sort of turnover Rowley’s structure was designed to encourage.
Only after Yeovil went down to ten did the balance of the game fundamentally change, and Carlisle required the final attack of the match to equalise.
That suggested something rather encouraging about Rowley.** He’s prepared to coach solutions rather than simply select formations.**
Cattermole did something different, but equally interesting. From the highlights, Gateshead’s defensive shape in the first half looks very much like a 5-2-3. With it being 3-4-3 in possession.
Three centre-backs. Wing-backs dropping alongside them. Two central midfielders. Three left higher to form the first line of pressure.
Out of possession, that’s a substantial defensive line. But there is an obvious trade-off.
Only two players are protecting the middle of the pitch.
If the front three are bypassed, those two midfielders potentially have a huge area to defend.
Woking caused Gateshead problems during the first half and goalkeeper Pete Jameson had to make an important save from Matt Ward to take them into the interval at 0-0.
And Cattermole changed it. Rocco Coyle, one of those central midfielders, was withdrawn at half-time and Keon Lewis-Burgess came on.
From the footage, the consequence appears clear** that Gateshead moved to a back four.** That’s particularly interesting because it wasn’t a late-game emergency change. It wasn’t 1-0 down with ten minutes remaining and throw another striker on.
It was 0-0 at half-time in the second game of the season.
Cattermole looked at what was happening, decided his starting structure wasn’t giving Gateshead enough control and changed it.
Ten minutes later Alex Lankshear made it 1-0.
Eight minutes after that Kyle Ferguson made it 2-0 from Josh Home’s cross. Gateshead won 2-0.
That does not prove the formation change alone won the match.
But the chronology is difficult to ignore:0-0 and Woking causing problems.
Change at half-time.
55 minutes: 1-0.
63 minutes: 2-0.
Cattermole found a different solution.
So which Gateshead will Yeovil actually face?
This is now the first big question for Saturday.
Does Cattermole return to the system he originally selected against Woking?
Something resembling a 3-4-3 in possession and 5-2-3 without it? Or does he begin with the back four which helped Gateshead take control after half-time?
That uncertainty itself is tactically significant.
Yeovil cannot simply spend the week’s preparation rehearsing movements against one fixed opposition structure.
Because Gateshead have already demonstrated that they may change it.
If it’s 5-2-3, Yeovil should attack the midfield two and overload the centre. This is the obvious opportunity.
A five-man defensive line looks secure.But the interesting space is in front of it. If Gateshead leave three attackers high and defend midfield with two, Yeovil can potentially manufacture a 3v2 centrally.
McCormick becomes particularly important.
If he receives behind Gateshead’s midfield pair, one of the three centre-backs has to make a decision.
Step out?
Walker can threaten the newly-created channel.
Stay home?
McCormick can turn and run at the defence.
That is exactly the sort of decision an attacking midfielder wants to force upon a centre-half.
And there’s another possibility. If Gateshead’s wing-backs push forward when they have the ball, the space behind them should be an immediate transition target.
That could suit Ryan Jones and Mason Obeng perfectly.
But what happens if Cattermole changes again?
This is where Saturday becomes particularly interesting.
Imagine Yeovil start well against the 5-2-3. McCormick is finding the central pocket. McGavin and Westbrooke are creating the extra midfielder. Obeng is pinning the wing-back.
Cattermole can respond by moving to four.
Now suddenly the pictures Yeovil prepared for have changed.
And then Rowley has to respond to the response.
That’s where modern coaching gets much more interesting than arguments about whether a manager “plays 4-4-2”.
Formations are starting positions. The real question is:** Where are the spare players?**
Against Carlisle, Rowley manufactured one down Yeovil’s left by dropping Obeng deeper. Against Gateshead, he may try to manufacture one centrally against their midfield two. Obeng may well play higher to pin the full back.
Cattermole, meanwhile, has already demonstrated that if the answer isn’t working, he’ll redraw the board.
An interesting contrast between the managers. Their backgrounds could hardly be more different.
Cattermole played 272 Premier League matches, primarily as the combative central midfielder most of us remember from Middlesbrough, Wigan and Sunderland. This is his first senior managerial appointment.
Rowley’s playing profile is nothing like that. His education has largely been coaching: Chelsea, Fulham and Millwall academies, time in America and then the remarkable rise of Walton & Hersham before Yeovil took him into the National League. When Yeovil appointed him last November they specifically highlighted his reputation for “tactical detail” and progressive coaching.
One learned much of his football inside Premier League dressing rooms. The other largely learned his from the coaching pitch.
Now they’re meeting in the same technical area. And neither appears dogmatic
Perhaps that’s the most encouraging thing about both. Football occasionally becomes obsessed with managers having an identity.
He’s a 4-3-3 manager. He’s a back-three manager. He plays possession football. He plays transition football.
But the more interesting managers usually have principles rather than immutable formations.
Rowley’s principle against Carlisle seemed to be, protect the centre, deny their overload and attack quickly when possession turns over. Obeng dropping into a five was simply the mechanism used to achieve it.
Cattermole’s principle against Woking appears to have been equally pragmatic, if the structure isn’t giving us control, change the structure.
A 5-2-3 became a back four. The game changed with it.
Which makes the first 15 minutes particularly worth watching
Forget the ball for a moment on Saturday.
Watch Gateshead’s wing-backs/full-backs. When Yeovil have possession, do they retreat onto the defensive line?
If they do:
it’s the 5-2-3.
Then watch McCormick. Is he positioning himself behind Gateshead’s midfield two? If so, Yeovil have clearly identified the same potential weakness.
Then watch Obeng. Does he again drop alongside the back four as he did against Carlisle?
Or does Rowley deliberately leave him higher this time to pin Gateshead’s right wing-back and threaten the space behind him?
And finally, keep watching the Gateshead bench.
Because what Lee Cattermole showed last weekend is that the formation we see at 12.30 may bear little resemblance to the one we’re watching at 1.30.
Rowley v Cattermole
That might ultimately be the most interesting contest of the afternoon.
Two relatively young managers. Two teams still developing. Two coaches who have already demonstrated, within the opening fortnight of the season, that they are prepared to manipulate their shape during games.
Rowley effectively turned a back four into a situational five to frustrate Carlisle.
Cattermole started with what looks like a 5-2-3 against Woking and switched to four when it wasn’t working.
Neither appears particularly interested in tactical purity for its own sake. Good. Because Saturday may not be decided by whether 4-2-3-1 beats 3-4-3.
It could be decided by which manager recognises the problem first. And, more importantly,** which one finds the answer.** 💚