PDA

View Full Version : Man or Zonal Marking



HibeeMcGinn1
02-01-2010, 05:52 PM
After watching Liverpool concede a goal and look a bit dodgy at corners while Zonal Marking ive made my mind up now, I much prefer man marking. I know there will be arguments for both sides or even swapping back and forward in a match but man marking is alot branier. You can have the big defender against the big striker wheras if your big CH is at frontpost and the opponents big CF then moves to back post you could potentially be snookerd. Thoughts?

PISTOL1875
02-01-2010, 05:52 PM
Man marking every time..

Hibs Spain
02-01-2010, 05:57 PM
After watching Liverpool concede a goal and look a bit dodgy at corners while Zonal Marking ive made my mind up now, I much prefer man marking. I know there will be arguments for both sides or even swapping back and forward in a match but man marking is alot branier. You can have the big defender against the big striker wheras if your big CH is at frontpost and the opponents big CF then moves to back post you could potentially be snookerd. Thoughts?

Man marking every time.A few months ago Levein explained it in a way that is hard to argue against.

JoeT
02-01-2010, 05:59 PM
You never see a zone scoring a goal....

Gatecrasher
02-01-2010, 06:01 PM
Liverpool defence at corners and free kicks are proof zonal marking doesn't work

jgl07
02-01-2010, 06:04 PM
Liverpool defence at corners and free kicks are proof zonal marking doesn't work
Liverpool can't even mark a beach ball!

hibsdaft
02-01-2010, 06:12 PM
Liverpool had the best record on set pieces last year so its not cut and dried. they've been all over the shop this year generally in defence (you don't hear it because, he's English, but Carragher has most often been to blame).

that goal just now didn't seem down to ZM imo, more down to a lack of concentration from Lucas and Carragher.

the English journalists rip into ZM because its a useful stick to beat Rafa with, who they hate because he doesn't grovel to them or treat them like **** like Fergie (these are the only things they respond to - events on the pitch are secondary to these clowns). and simply because its fashionable to knock him too. absolutute **** tbh - i heard one Sun cockroach admit on 5 Live recently that they gave Rooney and the other English players an easy time on diving because he would be rude to them at press conferences if they did. absolute spineless *******s imo.

woody47
02-01-2010, 06:20 PM
Never a fan of zonal marking.
If you mark the man properly, he will never get a shot on target.

bobbyhibs1983
02-01-2010, 07:44 PM
Liverpool can't even mark a beach ball!

Now be fair the beach ball did make a fantastic run for it and caught the defence sleeping and what a strike, UNSTOPABLE imo

GreenCastle
02-01-2010, 08:09 PM
Stats show zonal marking you concede less.

Overall I would say it depends on your players in your team. If you have 11 Peter Crouches go zonal.

If you have 11 John Rankins it may not work.

However if you go zonal players have to take full responsbility to mark their area in front and behind - which doesn't always happen = Liverpool's problem.

Another problem with zonal is if a great ball is delivered in (not always the case from corners) and finds a gap - opposition players can have a running jump and possibley score.

Personally I would do zonal ( posts or back post) and player in the hole (edge of 6 yard box) then I would man mark the rest - the KEY is at the end of the day players have to be BRAVE and RESPONSIBLE to attack the ball.

Liverpool also bring everyone back into the box - which personally I don't like.

Regina Phalange
02-01-2010, 08:31 PM
Stats show zonal marking you concede less.

Overall I would say it depends on your players in your team. If you have 11 Peter Crouches go zonal.

If you have 11 John Rankins it may not work.

However if you go zonal players have to take full responsbility to mark their area in front and behind - which doesn't always happen = Liverpool's problem.

Another problem with zonal is if a great ball is delivered in (not always the case from corners) and finds a gap - opposition players can have a running jump and possibley score.

Personally I would do zonal ( posts or back post) and player in the hole (edge of 6 yard box) then I would man mark the rest - the KEY is at the end of the day players have to be BRAVE and RESPONSIBLE to attack the ball.

Liverpool also bring everyone back into the box - which personally I don't like.

Good post, you have that the wrong way round though. 11 big guys should always win their man to man contests, so go man on man. When you play zonally your best defenders are placed in the most dangerous attacking areas, allowing you to defend successfully even though you don't have the height advantage.

There is a serious stigma surrounding zonal marking, which comes from the tendency to blame the system for every goal. It isn't always easy (or even possible) to tell who should have dealt with a ball in a zonal system, and sometimes 2 or more players make could be at fault, so the system itself gets blamed. In a man marking system the man who was picking up the scorer is an easy target - the commentator never says "that goal could have been easily prevented by using zonal marking" even though it is often true.

Man marking has as many problems as zonal marking. How many times does a big centre forward get subbed on and score straight away, because no one takes charge and re-assigns the man markers. See the recent Dundee Utd Celtic game - IIRC Jon Daly comes on, misses a free header then scores minutes later, Caldwell tries to reorganise by picking up Daly and ends up leaving his man, Dods, who scores the winner. 1-0 up to 2-1 down because they used man marking, yet I didn't hear anyone discussing whether Mowbray should switch to zones. Zonal marking can be drilled in every week and constantly tweaked, players can practise 1 or more roles and that should mean that changes in your team or opposition subs should be easier to deal with.

Zonal marking and man marking each have their own merits and drawbacks, and some players have strengths better utilised in one or the other. If you had the choice between a perfectly implemented zonal system and a perfectly implemented man-to-man system, then the zonal one would give the tighter defence. The problem is that zonal marking is hard to execute even adequately. Personally, I would favour a mix, picking up their key threats and marking zones with the rest.

GreenCastle
02-01-2010, 08:37 PM
Good post, you have that the wrong way round though. 11 big guys should always win their man to man contests, so go man on man. When you play zonally your best defenders are placed in the most dangerous attacking areas, allowing you to defend successfully even though you don't have the height advantage.

There is a serious stigma surrounding zonal marking, which comes from the tendency to blame the system for every goal. It isn't always easy (or even possible) to tell who should have dealt with a ball in a zonal system, and sometimes 2 or more players make could be at fault, so the system itself gets blamed. In a man marking system the man who was picking up the scorer is an easy target - the commentator never says "that goal could have been easily prevented by using zonal marking" even though it is often true.

Man marking has as many problems as zonal marking. How many times does a big centre forward get subbed on and score straight away, because no one takes charge and re-assigns the man markers. See the recent Dundee Utd Celtic game - IIRC Jon Daly comes on, misses a free header then scores minutes later, Caldwell tries to reorganise by picking up Daly and ends up leaving his man, Dods, who scores the winner. 1-0 up to 2-1 down because they used man marking, yet I didn't hear anyone discussing whether Mowbray should switch to zones. Zonal marking can be drilled in every week and constantly tweaked, players can practise 1 or more roles and that should mean that changes in your team or opposition subs should be easier to deal with.

Zonal marking and man marking each have their own merits and drawbacks, and some players have strengths better utilised in one or the other. If you had the choice between a perfectly implemented zonal system and a perfectly implemented man-to-man system, then the zonal one would give the tighter defence. The problem is that zonal marking is hard to execute even adequately. Personally, I would favour a mix, picking up their key threats and marking zones with the rest.

Good stuff :agree:

I way I saw it with having tall players fill the zones - ball doesn't get over them into the gaps.

The smaller players can at least try and block the run (without cheating) and then challenge in the air to stop a goal.

I agree about having key players in certain areas though and how the so called experts don't know what they are talking about half the time :greengrin

thebakerboy
02-01-2010, 09:10 PM
IMHO it doesnt really matter if you have both posts covered and a brave keeper who ,if ball is in 6 yard box, takes the ball and everything in his way out cause he is the only player to get away with that. Also the players have to be awake to what is going on and have 1 eye on ball and the other on the opposition player they are marking/is in their zone.

Mr Magoo
02-01-2010, 09:26 PM
Lets just git right in tae them. Never mind zonal or man marking. They are pish and they know it and they are ****ing themselves!

Woody1985
02-01-2010, 09:58 PM
Liverpool had the best record on set pieces last year so its not cut and dried. they've been all over the shop this year generally in defence (you don't hear it because, he's English, but Carragher has most often been to blame).

that goal just now didn't seem down to ZM imo, more down to a lack of concentration from Lucas and Carragher.

the English journalists rip into ZM because its a useful stick to beat Rafa with, who they hate because he doesn't grovel to them or treat them like **** like Fergie (these are the only things they respond to - events on the pitch are secondary to these clowns). and simply because its fashionable to knock him too. absolutute **** tbh - i heard one Sun cockroach admit on 5 Live recently that they gave Rooney and the other English players an easy time on diving because he would be rude to them at press conferences if they did. absolute spineless *******s imo.

Self interest. You can sit here all you like and say that you wouldn't give a **** about reporting them but if it harmed your long term career and ability to live I'm sure you'd give some leeway.

Although I suspect the profession draws cocks.

greenlex
02-01-2010, 10:20 PM
Man Marking. What happens when there are two attacking players in your zone? Aye you are supposed to attack the ball but if player one is obstructing you? you aint gonna get to the ball. Man for man is best every time. if your man is hell bent on obstructing you then you have done your marking job.

hfc rd
02-01-2010, 10:52 PM
I prefer Man-Marking.