Zonal Marking...???

GeorgeHeslop'sTackle.

Well-Known Member
Joined
11 May 2010
Messages
3,986
A permanent wheelchair user since birth, I have never been fortunate enough to play the game, or coach, at any level - nor, I happily concede, have I ever been thought of as the sharpest chisel in the toolbox. Therefore can someone that has, or is, please explain (in words of one syllable) the perceived benefits of having no-one on each post, or marking space, rather than an opponent, when defending set pieces. - As I believe all the brightest young things are saying this week....."It's simply doin' me swede in"
 
GeorgeHeslop'sTackle. said:
A permanent wheelchair user since birth, I have never been fortunate enough to play the game, or coach, at any level - nor, I happily concede, have I ever been thought of as the sharpest chisel in the toolbox. Therefore can someone that has, or is, please explain (in words of one syllable) the perceived benefits of having no-one on each post, or marking space, rather than an opponent, when defending set pieces. - As I believe all the brightest young things are saying this week....."It's simply doin' me swede in"

In the old days from corners, the left back covered the front post the right back the back post...ie hence he could clear the ball with his strongest foot.

Man to man marking is what it says. You have your man, you mark him, he scores it's your fault.

Zonal marking I don't understand how it works, but space never scored a goal and thats fact!!
 
This really is pretty simple. Everyone wants to scream about the benefits of man marking but it has its challenges as well. The box is a very crowded place, men are looping around each other setting picks and making it very hard to tail your assigned man. Plus you have to actually each pick/identify your man based on how the other team sets up the corner....leaves lots of room for errors and mistakes, especially if the other team sets up the corner quickly.

Zonal marking is at attempt to simplify the extreme complexity of the man marking system (i know, everyone's screaming that man marking is simple!). Each player has a space and gets to watch the ball and react to it. Theoretically, this allows them to attack the ball and since you've got more men covering more space, there shouldn't be many gaps for the attacking team to exploit. It really all relies on the markers knowing their zones and being aggressive. I think if you wanted to find the critical flaw in our zonal system thus far, it would probably be that the defenders haven't been aggressive enough in going to get the ball, and then when they have we've had some unfortunate deflections.

At the end of the day, the players have to execute. I know that people like the perceived simplicity of the man marking system, but if players do not execute their responsibilities in that system, we'll concede other types of soft goals. maybe as fans it'll be easier for us to know exactly who screwed up, but that's not really worth much.

My final thought would be the following. Luck is a very fickle mistress. We've given up some free headers for sure, but in the past during some of our better defensive effort we've probably gotten away with a few of these which have since been forgotten. It's impossible to be perfect on set pieces all the time, right now I just think we're being punished more than average for our mistakes, making things seem much worse than they really are.
 
A mixture of the 2 is the best option imo. Man on each post, at the front of the area then the rest marking zonally.
 
So easy goal to give away.

They defend zones and not marking the man. So it might be not even Yaya's fault, but one's whose zone was the one where the header player runs into..
Barry?
Or as the picture shows the ball came to a zone what wasnt defended by any City players. Because the are of the six yard box is pretty empty.
One thing is sure the players dont really understand where to run, when to jump either.

1352232246133.gif


Like this goal when Cavani scored the first goal in Napoli-City. (Tha match we would win we would go to the next round.)

cavani-double-lifts-napoli-above-manchester-c-L-IVBLLO.png
 
Damanino said:

Wow really an utter joke goal to concede.
3 Ajax players basically in the box the 4th is very close to the line anyway. (While Nasri is just in the box.)
So it is basically 3 Ajax players vs. 7 City players. And the goal is a clear header.

Something clearly wrong with the zones here, someone should be lot closer to that zone the edge of the six yard box.
 
Apparently its statistically been shown to be a better defensive method, however, I don't know how this was exactly done and how a pile of other random variables were eliminated. For me it seems like a system defensively suited for athletes who can attack the ball better like Richards, not so sure if its the best for 'footballers'.

I think the reason it gets so much attention is that it looks worse when it doesn't work. Man on man fails and everyone can blame an individual. If zonal marking fails then the whole defensive structure and concept gets questioned.

teddykgb makes a very good point to me in that it still comes down to individual players executing their abilities. Who knows whether its easier to lose concentration if there isn't an individual responsibility for a man. We don't even know whether to blame Yaya or Barry for the one shown below. We can only hope the players know who's zone it was.
 
It's not the first time Yaya hasn't given it 100 at a corner... I don't think u can blame Barry as he'd have had to sprint forward in no time and had no indication that Yaya wasn't gonna cover....
Basically the issue with the Zonal system in my eyes is the lack of movement. There are times when no one attacks the ball, it floats in and they expect it to be dealt with - by whoever's closest. Trouble is if someone is flying in like De Jong and you're flat footed then u can't react in time....
 
Zonal marking itself isn't to blame, it's our shambolic interpretation of it that is. None of them attack their zones, meaning they're all stood flat footed as the opposition comes charging in from a 5-10 yard run up. It's little wonder we keep getting out-jumped.

There'll come a time when this system comes completely naturally to all footballers, but for now I think we struggle because many have played the man-marking system for their whole lives and our finding it difficult to adjust. As much as Mancini and his new defensive coach might want to go with this 100% zonal system, they've got to factor in the limitations of their existing players to execute it properly. It's clear the players aren't comfortable with it and a compromise needs to be found.

Personally, I'd cover the posts, man-mark 1-2 of the opposition's main aerial threats and go aggressively zonal with the rest.
 
what ever way we defend a corner I believe the biggest difference nowadays is the way goalkeepers defend the goal at set pieces, In years gone by a goalie would command his area and come off the line more and be a bloody big physical presence, Nowadays, goalies are trained to stay on the line as much as possible and shot stop or at best punch the ball, Hart and the rest of todays crew are nothing on past goalies and we have had seen some of the best of them at city,,, I agree its the way the game has gone but hart even though he is the best in the country and possibly the World he could and should COMMAND that box,
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.