What's new

Zonal marking.

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,392
Anyone a fan? I'm certainly not. Can anyone explain why it is anything other than a disaster waiting to happen and why we seem to be using it. Ta.
 

prawnsandwich

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2014
6,035
4,064
Carlisle does not like it. He gave good reasons.
My memory-was it Ramos who brought it in first-did AVB have a go at it?
 

Drew10

Member
Jun 8, 2005
163
59
I didn't notice us playing it. We seemed to have a couple of strategically placed players ie Ade covering the near post, but the rest were picking up men.
 

absolute bobbins

Am Yisrael Chai
Feb 12, 2013
11,650
25,962
Carlisle does not like it. He gave good reasons.
My memory-was it Ramos who brought it in first-did AVB have a go at it?
AVB tried it in preseason and binned it when he realised our squad is packed full of simpletons.

We haven't really been using it in preseason so I don't really know what the thread is about
 

mpickard2087

Patient Zero
Jun 13, 2008
21,886
32,513
Presume we are talking from set pieces... I'm not a fan of total zonal marking, I think you need a mix. Getting people in specific areas like the front post on the 6 yard box is fine but I still think you need to man-mark as well. If you do all zonal marking I think it is too easy for the attackers to get a run on the player in that zone and also to get across the front of them. We have seen this happen a number of times in the last couple of seasons.
 

0-Tibsy-0

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2012
11,201
43,791
Statistically teams concede less from set pieces using Zonal marking.

Also read that the conversion rate from short corners is higher than just whipping the ball in to the box...

I've read articles on both before but can't remember where...2 things I certainly wouldnt have believed from my own observations..
 

prawnsandwich

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2014
6,035
4,064
Statistically teams concede less from set pieces using Zonal marking.

Also read that the conversion rate from short corners is higher than just whipping the ball in to the box...
We tried a couple of short corners yesterday. Andros' direct corner kicks actually made it past the 1st man.
 

Spurs' Pipe Dreams

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2011
20,008
32,728
It works as long as the defenders are committed and not scared of crossing imaginary lines.

It makes sense in that wherever the ball goes a defender should be there. The problems arise when the ball comes down in between zones or an attacker gets a run and good jump at the ball.

Overall I quite like zonal marking but and it is a big BUT, that when the ball is played in you still need committed defenders attacking the ball and taking ownership.

Effectively zonal marking is percentage football and should only be used for starting position only. If your gonna use it imo
 

SpurSince57

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2006
45,213
8,229
Carlisle does not like it. He gave good reasons.
My memory-was it Ramos who brought it in first-did AVB have a go at it?

I'm pretty sure that Jol gave it a whirl at set pieces in 2006-07. It worked no better than man-marking, mainly because of Pascal Chimbonda's total inability to follow the script.
 
Last edited:

beats1

Well-Known Member
Feb 22, 2010
30,006
29,551
Presume we are talking from set pieces... I'm not a fan of total zonal marking, I think you need a mix. Getting people in specific areas like the front post on the 6 yard box is fine but I still think you need to man-mark as well. If you do all zonal marking I think it is too easy for the attackers to get a run on the player in that zone and also to get across the front of them. We have seen this happen a number of times in the last couple of seasons.
Yep this, mark areas and get your best to man mark their best
 

hodsgod

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2012
4,241
3,082
Presume we are talking from set pieces... I'm not a fan of total zonal marking, I think you need a mix. Getting people in specific areas like the front post on the 6 yard box is fine but I still think you need to man-mark as well. If you do all zonal marking I think it is too easy for the attackers to get a run on the player in that zone and also to get across the front of them. We have seen this happen a number of times in the last couple of seasons.
Exactly, pick up the attackers, and everyone defending without a player has a specific task or zone, and importantly they have to attack the ball.
 

SandroClegane

Well-Known Member
Jun 27, 2012
3,717
13,842
Anyone a fan? I'm certainly not. Can anyone explain why it is anything other than a disaster waiting to happen and why we seem to be using it. Ta.
Glad you provided a lot of evidence why it's a disaster waiting to happen and when we've used it this preseason because we haven't
 

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,392
Glad you provided a lot of evidence why it's a disaster waiting to happen and when we've used it this preseason because we haven't


I've seen plenty of instances in other teams where static players are beaten to balls at set pieces by opponents making runs. The players making the runs seem totally unhindered and are able to attack the ball at pace.

Against Schalke it appeared that our players were not 'man marking' at set pieces which, to me, looked like we had adopted a zonal system. I thought that perhaps somebody might enlighten me - for instance, maybe it is a system that Eric Dier has been part of at Sporting, maybe Pochettino used it at Southampton, maybe it was an experiment or maybe I misinterpreted what I saw.

Thanks for the friendly reply anyway. Appreciate it.
 

Ribble

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2011
3,505
4,777
Anyone a fan? I'm certainly not. Can anyone explain why it is anything other than a disaster waiting to happen and why we seem to be using it. Ta.

It's an extremely effective system when deployed correctly (and we're only talking at corners naturally, practically everyone uses zonal marking outfield), Benitez' Liverpool were the best team in the league at defending corners 2 seasons in a row using it (and near it in his others). The reason people don't like it (and pundits love to run it down) is because it looks bad when it doesn't function, and there's no obvious culprit if you don't know who was picking up which zone so it's just easier to blame the system itself.
 

brasil_spur

SC Supporter
Aug 25, 2006
12,670
16,717
Zonal marking is a better system IMO.

The problem is that as soon as it fails (in the same way that non zonal marking will often fail too), then everyone jumps on the 'zonal marking is shit' bandwagon.

I don't think i've ever heard someone say that we should switch to zonal marking because player marking is shit when a defender losses his man and concedes.

It's just one of those areas of football that gets dealt more shit than it deserves, a bit like sweeper keepers.

That being said i don't think we've been playing any serious zonal marking, from what i've seen under Poch.

P.S. shit, shit
 

Main Man

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2013
2,314
1,699
Sheffield United's goal at the weekend really did show zonal marking for what it is... Terrible.

I have never seen a team successfuly use zonal marking on set pieces.

But zonal, man marking whatever - I can't remember the last Spurs team to look decent on set pieces.

But the sight of no players on posts does personally send shivers down my spine, as it did on Saturday night.
 

Sir Henry

Facts > Feelings
Aug 18, 2008
2,706
2,817
Carlisle mentioned it once in the Shalke game, it wasn't zonal in the slightest, we were just shit at defending that corner, no-one got near so it looked zonal.
 
Top