zonal marking

[marco]

liverpool did this under rafa but now have ditched it with the new manager and to be honest they look better for it, are we still doing this and what are the pros and cons with it

 

[Bluemoon115]

Tbh both systems work if players do their jobs.

If a player makes a mistake when man marking is applied, the player gets blamed.
If a player makes a mistake when zonal marking is applied, the system gets blamed.

 

[Kinky by name]

I don't think it sits well with most fans because it's not the game they watched/played when they were kids and if a team doesn't get it bang on it can really make you look like you haven't got a clue as a team.

 

[hgblue]

As I understand it, you're responsible for protecting a zone, rather than a particular player. If the ball enters your zone, it's your responsibilty to clear it. I like it because it means that your best defenders are evenly spaced and all danger zones should be covered. Man to man marking means that the opposition can overload certain areas leaving certain danger zones unprotected. A late run into that danger zone and Bob's your uncle.

 

[pee dubya]

Our defending from set-pieces has probably been the biggest thing that's improved since Mancini took over. So if it's working, i'm all in favour.

 

[marco]

As I understand it, you're responsible for protecting a zone, rather than a particular player. If the ball enters your zone, it's your responsibilty to clear it. I like it because it means that your best defenders are evenly spaced and all danger zones should be covered. Man to man marking means that the opposition can overload certain areas leaving certain danger zones unprotected. A late run into that danger zone and Bob's your uncle.

so under zonal, if two strikers are in a defenders zone box then is it up to that defender who covers that box to mark them both or does another defender vacate his apointed box to help this leaving a box undeafended,this sounds like a nightmare

 

[Bluemoon115]

As I understand it, you're responsible for protecting a zone, rather than a particular player. If the ball enters your zone, it's your responsibilty to clear it. I like it because it means that your best defenders are evenly spaced and all danger zones should be covered. Man to man marking means that the opposition can overload certain areas leaving certain danger zones unprotected. A late run into that danger zone and Bob's your uncle.

so under zonal, if two strikers are in a defenders zone box then is it up to that defender who covers that box to mark them both or does another defender vacate his apointed box to help this leaving a box undeafended,this sounds like a nightmare

It's not about marking players, it's about clearing the ball.

It shouldn't matter if 5 players are in your area, if the ball enters it you should win the header.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

Tbh both systems work if players do their jobs.

If a player makes a mistake when man marking is applied, the player gets blamed.
If a player makes a mistake when zonal marking is applied, the system gets blamed.

Good post, all very true.

 

[Originals]

I hate watching us defend a corner watching a charge off the opponents players running in always worries me but we haven't been to bad with it.

Liverpool used it well under Rafa.

 

[ElanJo]

Under Mancini I cannot think of a goal we have conceded from a corner.

I prefer the idea of a defender attacking the ball rather watching his man. Zonal for me