Now, i wasnt one for jumping on the bandwagon, but...

[Guest]

Humans implement systems and humans make errors.

[Vermilion]

funny really, with all the goals conceded every week by clubs using man marking there hasn't been any questions/inquests about that system, maybe utd would have been better with zonal when they played us.

[dom9]

I read somewhere that we have not conceded a goal from a corner in the league this season. Can anybody recall such a goal? I'm having trouble myself.

[Craig_H]

I read somewhere that we have not conceded a goal from a corner in the league this season. Can anybody recall such a goal? I'm having trouble myself.

Middlesbrough away.

[bertie]

funny really, with all the goals conceded every week by clubs using man marking there hasn't been any questions/inquests about that system, maybe utd would have been better with zonal when they played us.

Torres 2nd goal yesterday. Blackburn use the good ole traditional "British" system of man to man marking. And hey presto.... Samba got skinned. We scored. Ngog Goal. Same again!

You didn't hear Mr. Gray, SSN, The Sun, The Mail or even our very own Craig H come out waffling about how "man to man marking blah blah blah.." Tools.

[The Glove]

If we conceed 4 goals all season and 2 of them come from a corner, then the stat would say we conceed 50% of our goals from a corner. The stat forgets to mention we let in next to **** all as it is.

Is there a stat of a team that doesnt use zonal marking and how many goals they conceed from corners?

[dww]

The stat is a blatant red herring. The fact remains though that we do often look more vulnerable from set pieces than we do from open play. I think part of it is that we don't have many strong headers in the team none of the CMs of fullbacks are strong in that area and Torres for all his qualities is no Heskey or even Crouch in that regard.

It would be interesting to look at Arsenal first and second half of the season as (I believe) they play at least a part zonal system and have a midget defense yet second half of the season have tightened up a great deal in terms of conceding in general and from corners/crosses in particular.

[BG1973]

SSN put up an interesting stat today.

I've never had a problem with our zonal marking system, i've always said that it's not the system, it's how well you perform it. And i still stand by that.

However, according to SSN, we have the highest percentage in terms of how many goals conceded have come from set piece situations. Ours is the highest in the PL.

It was something like 47% of all goals conceded by Liverpool, have come from set pieces.

Is there actually an issue there? Not with zonal marking, but maybe with how good we actually are at it?

If not, is that stat a concern at all? I dont like the idea of us being 'top' of that particular table.

misleading stats.

47% of our goals conceded from set pieces might be 10 or something. But west brom may have conceded 25 odd from set pieces.

[Mattshark]

misleading stats.

47% of our goals conceded from set pieces might be 10 or something. But west brom may have conceded 25 odd from set pieces.

Exactly we have only conceded 21 league goals all season, it is hardly a shocking amount. Only Chelsea have conceded less with 20 conceded.


Wonder what percentage of Chelsea's goals conceded came from set pieces?

[Fierce]

Havent read the rest of the thread, seems to have descended into inter-fighting like so many others........

So in response to Craigs valid post (dig at Rafa?! Didn't see it meself), I personally think that we have the zonal system locked down for everything bar set pieces, which maybe is the most important aspect. I think that a hybrid system is needed and is actually being worked on. That zonal should be used to an extent, but that clearly certain dangers should be nullified even if its in contrast to the system we're meant to be using

[dww]

Havent read the rest of the thread, seems to have descended into inter-fighting like so many others........

So in response to Craigs valid post (dig at Rafa?! Didn't see it meself), I personally think that we have the zonal system locked down for everything bar set pieces, which maybe is the most important aspect. I think that a hybrid system is needed and is actually being worked on. That zonal should be used to an extent, but that clearly certain dangers should be nullified even if its in contrast to the system we're meant to be using

I think people have conflated Craig and the people at Sky (who I believe originated the stat). The original piece was pretty clearly an attempt to use a misleading stat to justify a continued tedious attack on Rafa's methods.

It is however a valid point to discuss and while it was an unfortunate way to introduce it I don't think it was intended as an attack by Craig.

I'm not sure about your idea of a hybrid system. On occasion we have appeared to do it but I don't think it has been particularly effective. The problem for me is that either way we lack really strong headers and moving the better players from the important zones to marking individuals weakens the over system too much to my mind given our overall lack of skilled aerial defenders. The alternative of getting Insua and the like to man mark at corners seems even worse.

Not claiming to have a solution but I do think the best thing is to have a well organised system with a settled defense. It is conceivable that the problem this season is that Skrtel, Agger and Insua are young and still learning while Aurelio has been in and out of the team with injury.

[Fierce]

I think people have conflated Craig and the people at Sky (who I believe originated the stat). The original piece was pretty clearly an attempt to use a misleading stat to justify a continued tedious attack on Rafa's methods.

It is however a valid point to discuss and while it was an unfortunate way to introduce it I don't think it was intended as an attack by Craig.

Fair do's. I didn't actually read the rest properly, its a little tiring seeing people fighting amongst themselves. Maybe with that in mind I didn't take the OP as an attack on Rafa. Then again, I am a little drunk so I doubt my brain is as sharp as it usually is*

I'm not sure about your idea of a hybrid system. On occasion we have appeared to do it but I don't think it has been particularly effective. The problem for me is that either way we lack really strong headers and moving the better players from the important zones to marking individuals weakens the over system too much to my mind given our overall lack of skilled aerial defenders. The alternative of getting Insua and the like to man mark at corners seems even worse.

Not claiming to have a solution but I do think the best thing is to have a well organised system with a settled defense. It is conceivable that the problem this season is that Skrtel, Agger and Insua are young and still learning while Aurelio has been in and out of the team with injury.

Maybe a hybrid system was the wrong descriptive. What I mean is that I'm not 100% sure that the zonal system is totally effective when followed exactly to the letter. Ie, I think that there could and possibly should be an amalgamation of the traditional defensive style and the newer European inspired zonal. Or rather, the zonal style could encompass more trad methods if you know what I mean.

See your point about aerially strong defenders, which is essentially what is required for defending corners and/or free kicks into the area, where headed goals are gonna be far more likely. But with that in mind, pure zonal allows for gaps or spaces for players to exploit. Whether or not those gaps allow for a chance on goal is another point, but the very nature of zonal marking cant totally eliminate risk, which was sort of my badly expressed point







* Shut it you