Zonal Marking

[nutty nigel 7,513]

Has anybody studied this zonal marking system we are playing this season? It seems to have worked up until yesterday. Do the same players mark the same zones eachtime and if so does that give the opposition an oppurtunity to do homework on it and attack our weakest defenders? Any thoughts?

[Middle of the Road 0]

This is a very complicated question involving a good understanding of football tactics way beyond the ordinary fans'' level of understanding.

I expect lots of replies from WOers.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

I put two new threads on here last night trying to discuss football and get away from attacks/defence of the club manager etc, but to no avail! It seems we can have 5 page threads about last seasons antics and petitions and marches but nobody wants to discuss football relevent to this season. I am neither a worthy out or a KTF what ever that may be, I don''t want to be in anyones gang, I just wanted to talk football!

[ZLF 271]

Its a toughie to answer.

The back four had been playing well and with 3 centrall midfielders should be getting more protection.  Do I see more players being left for free headers than last season?   No I dont think so which makes me think the choice of how to defend is almost irrelevant and its more down to players not challenging effectively.   

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,020]

Actually it is not that difficult to understand, as the name suggests zonal marking is about defending an area (as opposed to man marking). Zonal marking has been around for a long time and it relies on everybody understanding what their role is, for example you still need somebody to attack corners (from a defensive point of view), and somebody to clean up the "2nd ball". Operated correctly then zonal marking is fine, where it goes wrong is when players do not undertake the role given them, which inevitably leads to opposing players being left unmarked and with a free header (as per the Palace game).

[nutty nigel 7,513]

The fact that we have only conceded one goal from set plays suggests it does work and I also haven''t seen more players left with free headers although obviously before the ball is delivered more players appear unmarked.

What I was trying to get at was if we mark players we choose who are strongest defender marks but if we "mark space" can they choose to attack our weakest defender and has anyone noticed this happening?

[Canary02 0]

Hallelujah, a conversation that doesn''t come down to who''s the best supporter.

My opinion is that the zonal system, whilst not something the players will be used to as they''ve grown up on a diet of man-marking, can be very effective. Colin, with his more universal development as a defender in the Dutch league, seems to have benefitted more than most from this change. The biggest criticism against him last season was positionally, but this season he''s far more comfortable. The biggest danger is at corners though where an attacking player with a running start will inevitably get above a defender marking space who has a standing start to his jump, as Kuqi did on Saturday.

[Tumbleweed 106]

........so what happens when you have more than one player in the "zone" allocated to, say, Shackell? He can''t mark both. We saw this a few times on Saturday when Palace''s headers were getting closer and closer as they often had multiple jumpers in the same "zone". I guess I would like to understand a bit more about how it works in practice, as last season didn''t seem to me to be "man to man" marking, but "man to space" marking!

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,020]

The attached link gives a good insight into zonal marking versus man marking:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4685580.stm

[Saint Canary 0]

The whole point of the zonal system is that in theory it''s easier to keep your shape than man marking.  Players don’t get pulled around the pitch chasing people and it should be easier to keep the back line solid.  It should again (in theory) be quicker to set up and at free-kicks and corners instead of trying to "find" your man.

When defending corners players like Shackell and Doc should take the same "zone" every time.  Alan Hansen spoke about this in the World Cup when England played Sweden and Beckhams poor defending.  He mentioned that there are 3 key areas: near post, middle of the six yard box and someone in between.  These should be three of your best defenders/headers i.e. not Beckham on the near post!  The emphasis is then on these 3 getting to the ball first!

There would be nothing to stop the opposition (in theory) placing their best attacking threat in the zone of say Drury but in practice do you want this player at the back post?  The ball would have to get past your 3 best defenders and the goalie before said player is in the equation? 

 

[elppits 0]

As a coach of a Sunday league team i took it upon myself to fully learn the zonal system.Over our pre-season i invested time and effort teaching this new system.After 5 pre-season games and 3 league matches we are yet to concede from a corner.Yet last year with man marking i dreaded every single corner.Zonal marking requires the players to clearly understand their roles. It is when this fails that it doesnt work.Problem also is when zonal marking fails it looks very poor since it will normally result in unmarked players with free headers.

[blahblahblah 2]

Useless stat of the afternoon courtesy of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zonal_marking :

15 of the 16 teams that reached the knockout stages of the 2004 UEFA Champions League used zonal marking.

This suggests that it might be worth sticking with, maybe ?

 

[Hardhouse44 261]

[quote user="Middle of the Road"]

This is a very complicated question involving a good understanding of football tactics way beyond the ordinary fans'' level of understanding.

I expect lots of replies from WOers.

[/quote]How are things up there

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="Saint Canary"]

There would be nothing to stop the opposition (in theory) placing their best attacking threat in the zone of say Drury but in practice do you want this player at the back post?  The ball would have to get past your 3 best defenders and the goalie before said player is in the equation? 

 

[/quote]

That''s the point I was trying to get to Saint. I noticed the way Palace lined up for some of the set plays where their players appeared unmarked and wondered if there was any advantage in attacking the zone where we are weakest in the air in an attempt to at least win the first ball. However the goal they scored was more due to a quality delivery than poor marking of any sort.

[Yellow Rages 0]

One other point I would like to add to this tactic is that the three main defenders sit on the six yard line. This means that they are attacking the ball running away from goal rather that towards which is much harder to defend. The main responsibility is to attack the ball regardless of which attacker or how many their are. The starting position of these three is nearer to goal than most of the attacking players, so they are nearly always moving up field.

You cover both posts and one in the centre of the six yard line and one at each corner. You  have one on the penalty spot, also one deep for the overhit ball and one near for the underhit ball. These are normally in line with the six yard box as well. I''m the one on the penalty spot! My job is to also close down the semi cleared ball if needed and to gee up the lads before the corner comes in.

I too have played this tactic for a few years now and have conceded three goals from corners in the last three years. None in the first season of adopting it.

In summary, it''s a great system if you are disceplined enough to slot into regimental order.

 

[Branston Pickle 3,638]

Well, last season we were one of the poorest in this League at defending set pieces and sadly also one of the worst in scoring from them [there were stats in the QPR programme - I can''t find it at the moment to back up what I''m saying but it is true!] - I think it was 19 conceded from set plays up to that point, so something certainly wasn''t right.

I think the zonal system has worked pretty well, though of course it does depend on people knowing what they are doing: I do wonder whether the substitutions on Saturday - all attacking minded (though all sadly rather ineffective) - had a negative impact on the system, but it has to be said that we have looked much more solid at defending corners this season so things are looking ok from that standpoint. 

All that said, though, I am still rather concerned that we still don''t seem to have too many ideas coming from our own corners - we seem to hit the first man far too often and for some reason don''t often look like upsetting them defensively in the way that we were often all at sea last season....oh for a Malky-type player to be coming in on those crosses!!!

[GJD 0]

I think that a lot of problems from defending corners has to do with there not being too many dominating keepers that command their area and still actually come for a corner if it’s within reach of them.

Yes, I know the ball has changed and boot technology, but keepers need to instill faith in their defenders that if the ball is catchable, then they will be trying to do that, or at least tell them that they are not leaving the six yard area.

Communication and understanding is essential for good defending to corners and set pieces whatever system you play. That’s what Malky had in his game. He was a leader at set plays and we miss a defender like him at these situations.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]

 

All that said, though, I am still rather concerned that we still don''t seem to have too many ideas coming from our own corners - we seem to hit the first man far too often and for some reason don''t often look like upsetting them defensively in the way that we were often all at sea last season....oh for a Malky-type player to be coming in on those crosses!!!

[/quote]

I''m not sure if that''s cuz of lack of idea''s or lack of quality of the ball played in. I so often hear shouts of dismay that "we can''t even beat the first man" but taking a corner is not what it used to be. It''s a hell of a skill to beat the first man and not get the keeper. The Doc can do what Malky did and win a corner played long but then we really have to attack the second ball.

On another topic we haven''t scored direct from a free kick for something like three years and rarely look like doing so. Phil Mulryne was the last I believe and he scored many free kicks for us but I don''t remember him being so good at taking corners!

[Canary Boy 0]

Poor system...how can you defend against a zone?

[Bacon Roll 0]

as someone who has played a reasonable level of football i have operated under both systems.  Zonal is by far and away the most effective when it is correctly disciplined and everyone sticks to their job - the keep fact that was drummed into all players is that you attack the ball if it is in your zone - the key from the managements perspective is that they allocate correct players to correct zones.

On the negative side attacking players can get a run on ala kuqi on saturday, a running jump being far more effective than from standing still, lack of concentration from one team member failing to attack the ball also causes mayhem

The one uncontrolable flaw in both systems however is the dead ball taker, there are times when the quality of the ball is so good it makes defending it nigh on impossible.

great discussion point though - a refreshing change!

 

[Yellow Rages 0]

[quote user="Canary Boy"]Poor system...how can you defend against a zone?[/quote]

That''s just been explained to you by more than one other poster.

[Getting off the fence 0]

[quote user="Bacon Roll"]

as someone who has played a reasonable level of football i have operated under both systems.  Zonal is by far and away the most effective when it is correctly disciplined and everyone sticks to their job - the keep fact that was drummed into all players is that you attack the ball if it is in your zone - the key from the managements perspective is that they allocate correct players to correct zones.

On the negative side attacking players can get a run on ala kuqi on saturday, a running jump being far more effective than from standing still, lack of concentration from one team member failing to attack the ball also causes mayhem

The one uncontrolable flaw in both systems however is the dead ball taker, there are times when the quality of the ball is so good it makes defending it nigh on impossible.

great discussion point though - a refreshing change!

 

[/quote]

I only ever played at a relatively low level of football, and have never had experience of the zonal system. However, for what it is worth, it seems a bit "overcomable" to me. If 2 or 3 players are assigned a zone defensively, this must become apparent during the game. Why can''t the atttacking team just adjust its tactics accordingly - ie overload certain areas or move crosses to areas where the less efficient defenders are?

Having said that, our record is better this year ... but I still dread corners!

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote user="Getting off the fence"]

ie overload certain areas or move crosses to areas where the less efficient defenders are?

[/quote]

In answer to this.

There is no point overloading certain areas, your own players will just get in each others way.

You can put the ball in arrears were the less efficient defenders are but the chances of it getting past the zones with the better defenders and keeper are is low.  It also stands to reason that the weaker defenders will be in less dangerous positions.