Discuss Pellegrini

[iRfn34]

I am not worried at all, 2 games in, both our CB'S injured, new manager, new players, new tactics, new style ect ect. We have 36 games to go, the season is long and I have no doubt that we will do well, we are stronger than United or Chelsea. Have faith.

 

[hgblue]

It was something that i was just going to bring up about the keeper, whatever system is played the keeper should come for the ball within his 6 yard, Hart clearly didn't, is that the systems fault?[/quote]
As stupid an individual I am, I just couldn't for the life of me understand why Milner did not drag their forward away from the keeper. Harsh and possibly simplistic but a consideration in my tiny mind nonetheless.

Well, yes, I think that the system can take some blame for this.
If you man mark, and the attacking team place two players in the middle of the 6 yard box, with the main intention of blocking off the keeper, the defensive team responds by marking those two players. Hence, there are now 4 players in this area, plus the keeper. IF marking zonally, the defensive team leaves these two attackers unmarked and leaves the keeper to deal with any ball coming into this area; if the keeper does his job, these two attackers are of no danger, at least not in the first phase of play. Now, surely it is a lot easier for the keeper to come and dominate this area when the 6 yard box is only half as populated, regardless of whether these players are attackers or defenders?
While I think Hart should still have dealt with that cross on Sunday, I am convinced half of the problem was getting blocked by the shear number of people in the 6 yard box. Hence, with zonal marking, I am convinced he would have been able to claim or punch that cross comfortably.

Not a difficult concept to grasp is it? Man marking also allows the attacking side to isolate the weakest link in a defensive set up and target them. Fair play to Cardiff, they exploited this weakness really well, but I'm amazed they were given the opportunity. I'm with BK on this one, gobsmacked that we changed systems for thsi game.

 

[OB1]

Your point is equally effective, and I'd add that there isn't a system on the planet that doesn't require your keeper to claim a ball inside his 6 yard box.

It was something that i was just going to bring up about the keeper, whatever system is played the keeper should come for the ball within his 6 yard, Hart clearly didn't, is that the systems fault?

As stupid an individual I am, I just couldn't for the life of me understand why Milner did not drag their forward away from the keeper. Harsh and possibly simplistic but a consideration in my tiny mind nonetheless.

I must be stupid too as I'm sure I have made a similar comment about Joe getting some help...

Not that it excuses Joe for getting distracted: if he had just focused on the ball and the attacker had blocked him, he might have go a free kick if he did not get the ball.

 

[Cityfan]

Not a difficult concept to grasp is it? Man marking also allows the attacking side to isolate the weakest link in a defensive set up and target them. Fair play to Cardiff, they exploited this weakness really well, but I'm amazed they were given the opportunity. I'm with BK on this one, gobsmacked that we changed systems for thsi game.

Not arguing that changing the systems didn't really work but the idea that Cardiff succeeded by targeting the weakest link is a bit bizarre Zabaletta is generally a pretty good marker and decent in the air,

 

[Anonymous]

Not a difficult concept to grasp is it? Man marking also allows the attacking side to isolate the weakest link in a defensive set up and target them. Fair play to Cardiff, they exploited this weakness really well, but I'm amazed they were given the opportunity. I'm with BK on this one, gobsmacked that we changed systems for thsi game.

Not arguing that changing the systems didn't really work but the idea that Cardiff succeeded by targeting the weakest link is a bit bizarre Zabaletta is generally a pretty good marker and decent in the air,

I agree ... I'd put more stock in the idea that Pellegrini dropped a massive clanger if it weren't the case that the same player, a usually reliable defender, lost the same player twice.

 

[hgblue]

Not a difficult concept to grasp is it? Man marking also allows the attacking side to isolate the weakest link in a defensive set up and target them. Fair play to Cardiff, they exploited this weakness really well, but I'm amazed they were given the opportunity. I'm with BK on this one, gobsmacked that we changed systems for thsi game.

Not arguing that changing the systems didn't really work but the idea that Cardiff succeeded by targeting the weakest link is a bit bizarre Zabaletta is generally a pretty good marker and decent in the air,

I agree ... I'd put more stock in the idea that Pellegrini dropped a massive clanger if it weren't the case that the same player, a usually reliable defender, lost the same player twice.

Zonal allows you to place you tallest/best defenders in the most dangerous areas at set pieces. They mark the space not the man, so that when the ball is delivered into their zone, they are there to clear their lines. Man to man allows the oppostion to create a 'crowd scene' (preferably around the keeper), where all sorts of carnage can and does ensue. It also allows the opposition to isolate an individual defender v an attacker who's decent in the air. The rest of the opposiotion players in the box are basically decoys dragging your best defenders out of the way and exposing one defender in a position where the attacker can get a run on him. All of the above happened on Sunday when we switched to man to man marking.

 

[taconinja]

I will always possess the firm, unshakable belief that the chief and singular benefit of man-marking at corners is that it makes it easy to blame a particular player when things go wrong. That seems to be what most announcers want out of it anyway.

 

[hgblue]

I will always possess the firm, unshakable belief that the chief and singular benefit of man-marking at corners is that it makes it easy to blame a particular player when things go wrong. That seems to be what most announcers want out of it anyway.

Yep, the normally reliable Zabaleta suddenly turns into a schoolboy playing his first game, at the same time as we switch to man to man marking. What a conicidence eh?

 

[Anonymous]

Not arguing that changing the systems didn't really work but the idea that Cardiff succeeded by targeting the weakest link is a bit bizarre Zabaletta is generally a pretty good marker and decent in the air,

I agree ... I'd put more stock in the idea that Pellegrini dropped a massive clanger if it weren't the case that the same player, a usually reliable defender, lost the same player twice.

Zonal allows you to place you tallest/best defenders in the most dangerous areas at set pieces. They mark the space not the man, so that when the ball is delivered into their zone, they are there to clear their lines. Man to man allows the oppostion to create a 'crowd scene' (preferably around the keeper), where all sorts of carnage can and does ensue. It also allows the opposition to isolate an individual defender v an attacker who's decent in the air. The rest of the opposiotion players in the box are basically decoys dragging your best defenders out of the way and exposing one defender in a position where the attacker can get a run on him. All of the above happened on Sunday when we switched to man to man marking.

Although I take your point, considering the number of shitty goals in important games we conceded from set pieces last season whilst marking zonally, i'm not in the slightest bit bothered or concerned by the change to man marking yet. I'll reserve judgment until such time as the system continually lets us down (ala Mancini's 3 at the back).

 

[St Helens Blue (Exiled)]

So Billy...What's the tactics for Saturday then mate?.................