26 Oct 2015 12:19:16
Hello ed001 what do you think of the zonal marking we used yesterday at set pieces can't say i'm the biggest fan maybe i'm just a bit old fashioned with my view that man marking is best what do you think is best for the modern game?

{Ed001's Note - I don't think either work, what we use, as do most teams, is a mix of the two.}

1.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 12:56:13
Rafa used it effectively. I'm not blowing smoke up Rafa, but when he had Hyypia and Carra they managed Zonal marking without any problems. We had one of the best defences in the premier league a few years running.

It's not the system, it's the personnel and the coaching.
Current coaches haven't been there long enough yet.

2.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 13:31:59
I don`t think that`s true, Ron. I remeber clearly at the tail end of Rafa`s reign where we were conceding goals for fun due the zonal marking system and he was getting hammered in the media for it especially in his final season. All in all, teams always mix it up that way you don`t become predictable.

3.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 13:34:46
Gonna have to disagree Ron, under Rafa zonal marking quite frequently cost us goals and it was well publicized and very often criticized.
Less having a world class winger and a decent back up striker, zonal Marking cost us big time mate. Very often our players looked like lost sheep defending a set piece in the box. I remember it all too well pal.

4.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 13:59:28
Bla boa bla, both work if players within the system do their jobs. If they fail to you conceded. Simple.

5.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 15:12:35
Zonal marking resulted in numerous goals conceded at set pieces under Rafa.

We never picked up on runners and were often conceding silly goals as a result. Has to be a mix of the two!

6.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 15:17:55
@ Welsh - We conceded the least goals in the league from set pieces in 05-06 and 06-07 using zonal marking. And the 4th least in 04-05, 08-09 and 09-10. The only season where we shipped a lot of goals from set plays was 07-08. So even if they looked like lost sheep, it seems to have worked okay.

Problem is as follows:

You concede a goal when zonal marking a set play - Considered a systemic failure of zonal marking.
You concede a goal man marking from a set play - Considered a mistake by whoever lost their man or was beaten in the air by him. Man marking as a tactic gets no criticism.

"Man marking is better" assumes that no one will lose their man and even if they can't beat him in the air, they'll at least stop him from getting a good enough header to score or put it back in for someone else. That's not actually what happens though.

7.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 15:41:23
I noticed yesterday that 6ft 4 ish van dijk was being marked by Lucas. Not gunna be able to challenge. I always think there should be post players. One at the front post to clear the bad crosses, and the centre backs and likes of benteke and can need to be marking their danger men.

8.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 17:50:03
zonal marking is proven statistically to be more effective than man marking at set pieces. This is why we have a hybrid combination of the two today. Ex-players harp on that they don't like zonal marking but you have to remember that players aren't played to think.

9.) 26 Oct 2015
26 Oct 2015 17:54:06
This is what happens when a team doesn`t work on attacking and defending set pieces because if the team did, lucas will not be marking a giant like Van Dyke. When I played semi pro, we actually worked on set pieces and everyone knew who they had to pick up. I am 6ft 2" and NEVER would I have been marking a smaller player. Those are the things that pros should be working on and I can almost guarantee that our players don`t work on them as much as they should because they are dreadful at it as well as not being able to put in a corner that clears the first defender to save their lives. Hopefully, Klopp will fix this.