So we've switched to Zonal marking?

[Ironskullll]

I don't get it.

Man marking is simple IMHO, if you keep tight to your man and don't let him get the run on you, they won't score.

Zonal means you're not tight to them they can run where they want, there will be confusion etc.

I agree - as an attacking team wouldn't you adapt your tactics accordingly and overload certain zones while underloading others? Or am I being stupid?

 

[Courtneyjd]

Zonal marking is f*****g horrible!

 

[$hoguN]

Krafty is spot on in that to have a truly effective system for dealing with dead ball situations you need a mixture of zonal and man marking. Ideally having your best defenders doing the man marking, and your midfielders who are good in the air each picking upon a zone to clear.

However if AVB really can't see the errors in the current zonal marking system (he must do, surely?), he at least needs the press upon the players the importance of attacking the ball when zonal marking, as it would instantly make the system 10 times better.

 

[Teegart]

The way we defended corners yesterday was laughable. There was no zonal/man marking mix, it was straight zonal which won't work. Marking your zone with at best a 3 yard run or standing jump will always come off second best to attackers having 5-8 yards unopposed run and jump at it. Without at least some players obstructing runs it will be a failure.

That said, the easiest think to implement straight away is to actually have someone on the back post. God knows why we refuse to do this, it would have saved 3-4 goals last season easily.

 

[thinktank]

Don't like it; never have, never will.

 

[danielneeds]

Well we were worst in the league defending corners last year, so it's worth a try in my view. Got to get better at it quickly though.

 

[teok]

It doesn't matter what style of marking you use the players have to implement it properly which just comes from organisation and training.

We struggled with it last season as well. I think we just need to put in extra hours to get it right.

 

[Monkey Bastard Hands]

Agree it doesn't look particularly good but let us not react too quickly, yesterday was a pre-season game with a defence that in all liklihood hasn't played together in a competitive setting before, let alone the rest of the team which included several new signings and people coming back from long term injuries. I'm not suggesting that everything will be hunky dory come next weekend, but it's going to take time for the team to settle so let's not be too hasty in rubbishing tactics.

 

[Blake Griffin]

harry - doesn't do tactics
avb - studies them in his sleep

yet we've conceded from more corners under avb than the entire duration under harry, funny that.

 

[SteveH]

not sure

I listen to a lot of pundits say not to zonal - AVB I doubt has done this to be different........

both would not work if done badly?

 

[Challows]

It probably works fine in training as we don't have anyone to take a decent corner anyway to practice defending against!

 

[RickyVilla]

Looks like a disaster waiting to happen. I remember Ramos trying something similar. Our players don't seem to understand how it works.

I think we have different players now than we did under Ramos.

 

[SpurSince57]

It doesn't matter what style of marking you use the players have to implement it properly which just comes from organisation and training.

We struggled with it last season as well. I think we just need to put in extra hours to get it right.

My feeling is that man-to-man is preferable at set-pieces, but the problem is that you're going to have to assign different players to different targets for every team in the EPL. In theory, zonal marking negates that. This is your area, you defend it. Simples. Of course, if a player doesn't defend his assigned space, it all falls over. Then, if a player goes walkabout and loses his man, the effect is the same. Remember Pascal Chimbonda, anyone?

As I posted earlier, Liverpool's defensive record under Benitez is evidence that it can work very well—there were certainly comedy occasions when things went horribly wrong, that the press played up no end, but they were exceptions that proved the rule; properly executed, zonal marking can work very well.

 

[mpickard2087]

This isn't new, we used it last year, especially at the front post, and got caught out time and time again by the runner steaming in ahead of a flat footed Spurs player 'marking' his zone. Numerous times last year the likes of Bale, Sigurdsson and Vertonghen (to name three off the top of my head) were caught out by this, but its the system that is at fault rather than any individual.

Every opposition seems to have noticed it (lets be honest, anyone who cant see it doesn't deserve to work in football) and we are being targeted. I commented on it last season, it cant be a fluke that all the headers are coming in that 'zone' in and around the front post, whipped in flat so there is less time to react when the opposition gets a run on our players.

Needs to be sorted out, and has done for ages now. I dunno what the coaching team are playing at here, really I don't.

 

[Mr Pink]

Did Nzonzi score a ridiculously easy header in our penultimate game of the season as well?

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I love zonal defending (NOT marking), when it works obviously. Somebody referred to Ramos going zonal. What happened was that we were chaotic on defending corners, we then went part zonal and that made it better. It does rely on every player to do their job in their zone.

I think this is a typical reaction from fans. Soldado did not do his job, there was nothing wrong with the system. A lot of teams use it to some extent, usually with three to four players defending the spaces, and the rest marking and obstructing. It annoyed me today how the commentator simplified things. Tons of goals are conceded with man marking. The weakness of it being that if your next to your player, he will make a move and you do not know where his going - you will lose track.

I will say that our zonal defending on the corner looked messy, like too many players were doing it which can only cause confusion. Three to four will suffice.

Spot on. Personally I like a zonal/man combo (ooh er).

Most set piece goals are conceded from man marking systems yet everyone is so convinced it's the only way. Why ?

 

[SpurSince57]

Spot on. Personally I like a zonal/man combo (ooh er).

Most set piece goals are conceded from man marking systems yet everyone is so convinced it's the only way. Why ?

Because a player or players forget what they're supposed to be doing?

2005-06 we were as solid as we've ever been, 2006-07 was a horror show. Several factors were involved, but Jol and Hughton surely didn't forget how to organise a defence in training. It doesn't matter which system you're playing, or how often you practise set pieces, it takes just one player to forget what his role is and everything goes to pot. Chimbonda was a particular offender, I recall.

 

[SargeantMeatCurtains]

Rule 1 of Zonal marking: mark the man.


Isnt that man marking?

*brain fart*

 

[Mouse!]

People were blaming Fryers for the goal conceded yesterday, but it's likely that being young and English he's never played in a zonal marking system before.

It'll take time to get it right, but it'll be worth it when we do.

 

[bceej]

harry - doesn't do tactics
avb - studies them in his sleep

yet we've conceded from more corners under avb than the entire duration under harry, funny that.

Ledley.