Zonal Marking

[Graffito]

The general opinion seems to be that Saints' poor defending is mainly due to sloppy individual errors but is zonal marking contributing to our defensive problems? Bent won an easy header against Fox in the build up to Villa's goal. Ok Fox didn't compete but it was a mismatch. We've seen other strikers target our smaller fullbacks, e.g Van Persie, and Lambert has done so frequently. I can see the benefit of zonal marking in keeping shape but is there are argument for man to man marking, if only at corners and free kicks?

[Stu Man Do]

We seemed to give villa a lot of free headers in the peno box by marking areas rather than the man. I'm struggling to remember did we, in others opinion, use zonal marking last year or is this a new fangled idea?

[doggface]

New idea, don't like it. Don't remember us conceding many set pieces last year.

 

This year each one looks hugely dangerous. Van persies winner avoidable, villa should have scored yesterday.

[Crazy Diamond]

Stephen Ireland was given the freedom of St. Mary's at times yesterday. It's also down to the fact a few of our defenders can't stop falling over. Clyne and Fonte look like they're playing on ice at times.

[ToreSF]

It looks very stupid when you concede, but i believe the stats shows that teams that use zonal marking on set pieces concedes less goals than teams that use man marking. Raf Benitez uses it as well with his teams.

[Crab Lungs]

Stephen Ireland was given the freedom of St. Mary's at times yesterday. It's also down to the fact a few of our defenders can't stop falling over. Clyne and Fonte look like they're playing on ice at times.

 

Yeah, I noticed this but I thought was also because we do, for want of a better term, bomb forward and when the move breaks down, we've got 5-6 players in front of the ball. They do get back well, but it's a bloody dangerous (and exciting!) game to play.

[doddisalegend]

Second half Villa's man mountain (number 20) got two free headers from corners once no one picked him up and once we Adam trying to mark his knee cap didn't make any sense to me at all.

[scally]

Liverpool tried it a few years ago and it failed miserably, it leaves the defenders too static, a player who is on the move is going to out jump a player who is relatively static all day long.

[Saint_John]

The general opinion seems to be that Saints' poor defending is mainly due to sloppy individual errors but is zonal marking contributing to our defensive problems? Bent won an easy header against Fox in the build up to Villa's goal. Ok Fox didn't compete but it was a mismatch. We've seen other strikers target our smaller fullbacks, e.g Van Persie, and Lambert has done so frequently. I can see the benefit of zonal marking in keeping shape but is there are argument for man to man marking, if only at corners and free kicks?

The Zonal Marking from corners is a problem because we do not have enough 6'+ markers in our team, imo we only have 3.

 

As others have said their No20 was allowed to have a free run and header to at least 3 or their 4 corners, because our "zonal marker" has been left flat footed and was easily out-jumped. A midfield player really should be blocking his run to the ball or holding his shirt or giving him a very little push just as he starts his run.

 

The alternative is to go "man for man" but the problem will then be that we do not have enough 6'+ markers and if all are pulled to the near post it will leave a situation like the skates game last year where thorpe outjumps Morgan at the far post and heads the ball back across goal.

With the "man for man" setup it is also important that NO ONE switches off, and loses his man, for example imo in the past Rickie has been especially poor at man marking and is often caught ball watching at corners.

 

Basically imo we do not have enough 6'+ markers in the team to play man for man (and p.s. moyes will have noticed that for next week and he has some big players.) and therefore we zone mark (3 on the 6 yard box, 1 near, 1 middle and 1 far) with the full backs/midfields players trying to block runs and fill in the spaces.

[Crazy Diamond]

Perfect example of bad defending was from Ron Vlaar yesterday. I noticed it last night on Football First, to say he's ball watching for Puncheon's goal would be unkind to ball watchers.

 

Tony Adams picked it out on Goals on Sunday too.

[Graffito]

The Zonal Marking from corners is a problem because we do not have enough 6'+ markers in our team, imo we only have 3.

 

As others have said their No20 was allowed to have a free run and header to at least 3 or their 4 corners, because our "zonal marker" has been left flat footed and was easily out-jumped. A midfield player really should be blocking his run to the ball or holding his shirt or giving him a very little push just as he starts his run.

 

The alternative is to go "man for man" but the problem will then be that we do not have enough 6'+ markers and if all are pulled to the near post it will leave a situation like the skates game last year where thorpe outjumps Morgan at the far post and heads the ball back across goal.

With the "man for man" setup it is also important that NO ONE switches off, and loses his man, for example imo in the past Rickie has been especially poor at man marking and is often caught ball watching at corners.

 

Basically imo we do not have enough 6'+ markers in the team to play man for man (and p.s. moyes will have noticed that for next week and he has some big players.) and therefore we zone mark (3 on the 6 yard box, 1 near, 1 middle and 1 far) with the full backs/midfields players trying to block runs and fill in the spaces.

 

With man for man marking there is a danger, I agree, that markers will be pulled about thereby isolating a shorter defender, as in the e.g. you mention against the Skates but it seems to me the zonal system allows teams to do that anyway without the need to pull our defenders around, as I indicated in the OP. Is the solution then as simple as taller players, in particular taller full backs?

[david in sweden]

there is a lot of difference between the theory and reality of this idea.

 

 

A full back may be " patrolling " a certain area well enough and " containing" his man, but if the winger changes sides.... then the opposite FB may not be able to cope in the same way and it becomes even harder for someone of medium height to mark a taller man ...(see earlier post re-Lallana. and their giant no.20)

[Saint 76er]

Zonal marking sounds very American, whereas football always used to be man to man marking whereby all opponents were covered. In a zone thingy what happens if two or even three opponents come into your zone and does this mean you are swamped but other teammates are standing around with nothing to do? If they can follow their man into your zone then how is that zonal and not man to man and can teams not target the weakest zonal link to put extra pressure on an underperforming player?

 

Confused of Hampshire ...

[doc oli]

Arsenal showing just how crap zonal marking is

[RedArmy]

Telling Fox to man mark wouldn't make a single bit of difference, he's never anywhere near the left back area anyway. Unless it's to receive the ball so he can play a world cup final pass to nobody.

[DaveyR]

Zonal marking is not working that is emphatically clear so far. Unless we rapidly improve I suggest we go back to man marking

[This Charming Man]

I've never been a fan of it. Mark the man. Thanks to zonal marking, we had Lallana challenging that massive black fella on a corner yesterday and how he didn't score I don't know.

[paulwantsapint]

Is there also a case for leaving men up field ready for a quick counter if say lallana, puncheon & Ramirez all stay between box & half way opposition have to leave at least 3 back

[Graffito]

Telling Fox to man mark wouldn't make a single bit of difference, he's never anywhere near the left back area anyway. Unless it's to receive the ball so he can play a world cup final pass to nobody.

 

You'd stick him on the post.

[Graffito]

I've never been a fan of it. Mark the man. Thanks to zonal marking, we had Lallana challenging that massive black fella on a corner yesterday and how he didn't score I don't know.

 

I watched the highlights just now on Saints Player and Uncle Dave isnt keen either. I see the merits of zonal marking. It suits the kind of fluid systems teams use these days. There's a lot more man to man marking outside the PL and a lot more 442. I just think with Saints there's a case for mix and match, playing zonal with man to man marking at set pieces.

[max_saints]

everytime I hear a discussion on zonal marking it has never been positive and yet teams still use it. again today arsenal's zonal marking was brought up regarding lescotts goal. defenders become too static! the only way I can see zonal marking work is if we be less rigid about it and perhaps stick one or two players out of 'zones' to try to at least obstruct opposition from having a free run at the header

[RedArmy]

You'd stick him on the post.

I'd stick him on the bench.

[Saint_John]

With man for man marking there is a danger, I agree, that markers will be pulled about thereby isolating a shorter defender, as in the e.g. you mention against the Skates but it seems to me the zonal system allows teams to do that anyway without the need to pull our defenders around, as I indicated in the OP. Is the solution then as simple as taller players, in particular taller full backs?

The problem Saints would have with man for man marking at corners/set plays is that we have 5 or 6 players who offer NOTHING defending , e.g. Adam, Jason, S Davis, Clyne, Fox, Ward-P and ? Morgan.

Last year at least when we had Dean H and Guly (He plays the role at the near post VERY well - imo) it gave us the chance of playing man for man but when you have 5 or 6 players who offer nothing it makes it very difficult to man mark at corners. At least when Frazer came on yesterday we had an extra marker we could rely on.

 

It really is time that players like Morgan and Adam STEPPED up a level with their defensive duties.

 

For information I also don't like "Zonal Marking", it is second best to "man for man" (IMO).

HOWEVER we current do not have the players to play man for man, and therefore must try the make the best of what we have, which is "zonal marking".

[barney]

Fresh air never scored a goal.

Sums up zonal marking perfectly for me.

[Giordano]

We will concede needless goals with zonal marking if we carry on at this rate. I like the idea and i understand the statistics and I know we are not a huge team atm BUT it does worry me that we are so obviously ****e at defending corners atm. If i can see it so can Moyes.

 

What are the odds Fellaini, Zamora,Crouch, Fletcher and Carroll will score against us from a corner then in future? Pretty good id say given that we look vulnerable at EVERY corner and you just knew Bentebe (sp?) was going to go for every ball and probably win it as he did yesterday.

 

The plus side side looking forward with zonal marking is Gazzaniga. Once he gains fuller confidence and a tad more experience his assets of being an young athletic 6ft 5" mean he should command the six yard box better like for like than a 6ft 1" older KD - so those strong headers of the ball type forwards above should not have it so easy from close to the goal. If they can score a header from fifteen yards out fair play to them.

[positivepete]

Read this article, it will explain what we are trying to achieve. Zonal marking does work when executed correctly.

 

http://defensiveminded.wordpress.com/2011/08/07/barcelonas-zonal-marking-at-corners/

[syd_barrett_saint]

Another piece in defence of Zonal Marking/Defending:

 

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/blog/_/name/tacticsandanalysis/id/225?cc=3888

 

Of course, as it mentions, for this type of strategy to be effective, it needs to be properly coached, understood by all players, and executed by players with the talent/attributes/intelligence to do so...

 

...so perhaps zonal marking/defending can't work if you have a couple of full backs like Clyne and Fox who can't effectively protect their zone from aerial balls. The addition of Richardson in place of Fox might help that though.

[skintsaint]

again today arsenal's zonal marking was brought up regarding lescotts goal. defenders become too static!

 

Loved the fact that Arsenals goal came from a corner where Man Citeh were man marking but it was not brought up about it being at fault.

 

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

[Graffito]

Read this article, it will explain what we are trying to achieve. Zonal marking does work when executed correctly.

 

http://defensiveminded.wordpress.com/2011/08/07/barcelonas-zonal-marking-at-corners/

 

As with all these tactical theories which make a compelling case it's often in the execution they fail. But I believe Lambert said on the interview he did on Five Live's Monday Club that Saints used zonal marking successfully last year. So the quality of opposition is much better this season and I guess we are able to retain possession less well which means the ball is in the danger zones more frequently.

[Graffito]

Another piece in defence of Zonal Marking/Defending:

 

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/blog/_/name/tacticsandanalysis/id/225?cc=3888

 

Of course, as it mentions, for this type of strategy to be effective, it needs to be properly coached, understood by all players, and executed by players with the talent/attributes/intelligence to do so...

 

...so perhaps zonal marking/defending can't work if you have a couple of full backs like Clyne and Fox who can't effectively protect their zone from aerial balls. The addition of Richardson in place of Fox might help that though.

 

 

Taller fullbacks or maybe Lambert protecting the near post zone?

[gogo_saint]

Every top club/country uses zonal marking nowadays. When it goes wrong it looks bloody stupid, but in my opinion it's the only way for us to do it. Man to Man we aren't good enough in the air, and using Zonal Marking does cover more bases when defending. Either way we look shaky defending set pieces, hopefully if Gazzaniga keeps his place he can dominate the box more being taller than super kelv and that may improve us.

[Giordano]

Thank you, interesting piece.

[Kingsbridge Saint]

If the ball arrives in your area and you don't get there first you need your arse kicking as a defender. Perhaps we're just not physically up to it at the back. More time in the gym ladies. Or just go back to man marking and shirt pulling like most other sides do.

[Minty]

If the ball arrives in your area and you don't get there first you need your arse kicking as a defender.

 

Doesn't matter what the system is, this is ultimately the crux of it. Once the ball is in play, just get to the ball first. That does obviously require some judgement of the path of the ball, not just kamikaze rushing towards it wherever it goes, but as Nigel Adkins has said many times, football is a simple game, and this need not be an exception.

 

With regard to Benteke's free header in the second half last Saturday, although Adam was moving towards him and trying to (feebily) block his run, it is Yoshida who makes the run out from the 6-yard box to attack the ball, as you would expect one of the 'big 4' to do, but gets underneath the ball.

[Graffito]

Zonal relies on a keeper that dominates his 6 yard box. We haven't had that with Kelvin. Let's see how zonal marking goes with Gazzaniga and Boruc.

[The9]

Liverpool tried it a few years ago and it failed miserably, it leaves the defenders too static, a player who is on the move is going to out jump a player who is relatively static all day long.

 

That's as maybe, but when you coach zonal marking, you coach (basically) a 9 zone square, and every player moves towards the set-piece into their zone. If we're all standing still, as we were against Van Persie's header, it's because they're knackered and not doing what they're supposed to, not because of the system.

[Minty]

Zonal relies on a keeper that dominates his 6 yard box. We haven't had that with Kelvin. Let's see how zonal marking goes with Gazzaniga and Boruc.

Not sure how... as I said above, in ANY system, the crux of the matter is you still have attacking players trying to attack the ball, defensive players trying to beat them to it, and a goalkeeper who should try to catch the ball if it is feasible to do so... how does the system affect that?

[derry]

I think a mixture with the 2/3 best headers going for the ball and the other say 5/6 running interference and blocking the runs of the oppositions best headers rather than trying to mark them. That way the smaller players can block the taller players off. I also think that leaving 2/3 on the halfway line forces the opposition to keep 3/4 back reducing the chaos in the penalty area as usually it only leaves about 4/5 to pick up.

[Doctoroncall]

Not sure how... as I said above, in ANY system, the crux of the matter is you still have attacking players trying to attack the ball, defensive players trying to beat them to it, and a goalkeeper who should try to catch the ball if it is feasible to do so... how does the system affect that?

 

It doesn't. The system is to take account of the deficiencies in personal that we have in having shorter defenders/ not good headers of the ball.

 

The system is only as effective as the execution to reduce the likelihood of a goal. It also means having men in place for outlets to keep possession or the defence pushes out quickly to reduce the risk of opposition players able to get into a decent scoring position.

 

The defenders still need to move towards the ball in their zone - that is, can not to be static ball watchers and be reactive.

[Monk]

Never zonal mark from set pieces.

 

I have always used man marking when coaching set pieces.

[Saint Fan CaM]

Bent beat Fox to the ball twice in his zone when scoring Villa's goal which is probably why NA dropped him and put Clyne there. I think Fox has a real problem understanding the zonal marking issue and so gets caught. I think he'll be back for Everton though.