Zzzzzzzzzzonal again

[Neil Young]

I know, I know, we've discussed this subject a little already...

This has been at the back of my mind for a few days, since watching MOTD2 on Sunday.

A couple of observations on the two corner routines that were analysed where Kuyt and Agger blocked off markers (Agger for Kuyt's goal, and then later Kuyt doing the same for Agger). As Dixon said, it was obviously a training-ground routine.

1. Just for the record, no-one bothered to point out that these goals were scored when the opposition were using man marking. Ho hum, we're used to that - if a goal gets scored against zonal it's system failure, blah. blah, blah.
   
2. I was wondering though whether maybe this is the reason why Rafa (and plenty of other coaches) prefers zonal defending. In man-to-man, players get blocked off. In zonal that can't happen. So even if the attacker has the advantage of getting a run at the ball which, other things being equal, should make for a higher jump, they shouldn't get a free header as Kuyt did on Sunday.

So does anyone know enough about coaching to tell us the advantages of zonal, other than that the stats seem to show it's pretty effective?

[dww]

Looking at the Newcastle game an obvious advantage is the fact that someone is likely to be defending the area directly in front of the keeper - the precise position where a player has the most options and highest chance of beating the keeper.

[Jack D Rips]

Does anyone know if any other premiership teams use zonal marking?

[Rich]

I'd have thought the main advantage of Zonal is that it's less prone to individual error then man marking. Presumably its also easier to implement, the players know their positions and stick to them.

But I don't know enough about coaching so shouldn't have replied - I wholeheartedly apologise

[Neil Young]

I'd have thought the main advantage of Zonal is that it's less prone to individual error then man marking. Presumably its also easier to implement, the players know their positions and stick to them.

But I don't know enough about coaching so shouldn't have replied - I wholeheartedly apologise

No need, old boy.

[einar]

Zonal marking is the better system because in it the defender does not have to think about anything the attacking players do. All he has to think about is attacking the ball if it comes to him. Therefore there is far less chance of making a mistake. You can think of it as a mirror of the attacker.

What is important however is that the defenders think like a attacking players in that they have to attack the ball, and not just wait for it. Standing still in a zonal marking system is probably the most common mistake made.

Now if the defending players do they're jobs and attack the ball as it comes to they're zone, the attacking players will never get a free header on goal. So even if the attacker wins the header it is not going to be a free header so it will be very difficult to score.

[DannyMan2006]

There are clearly positives and negatives to both systems.

I think the best system is a combination of the two. Mark the three most likely attackers and then let your remaining players cover the zones. But even then I'm 100% sure that the system would leak goals every now and again.

A clever attacking player will always cause problems. The problems over the years for us is that the mistakes have happened in high profile games.

[Neil Young]

There are clearly positives and negatives to both systems.

I think the best system is a combination of the two. Mark the three most likely attackers and then let your remaining players cover the zones. But even then I'm 100% sure that the system would leak goals every now and again.

A clever attacking player will always cause problems. The problems over the years for us is that the mistakes have happened in high profile games.

If that's true then I don't see that as a problem really. The high profile games are likely to be against other top sides* who have the best players who are therefore most likely to cause us problems.



* OK, I'll give you Everton.

[einar]

There are clearly positives and negatives to both systems.

I think the best system is a combination of the two. Mark the three most likely attackers and then let your remaining players cover the zones. But even then I'm 100% sure that the system would leak goals every now and again.

A clever attacking player will always cause problems. The problems over the years for us is that the mistakes have happened in high profile games.

Name me a negative that only applies to the zonal marking system.

[Neil Young]

Name me a negative that only applies to the zonal marking system.

You don't get a run at the ball like the attacker does.

[Joe King]

Name me a negative that only applies to the zonal marking system.

It takes an awful lot of time and organisation and which can be exploited from a quick/short corner

[DannyMan2006]

You don't get a run at the ball like the attacker does.

Is right for me.

If the attacker times his run perfect, and the ball is delivered perfect, there is not much a Zonal system can do.

And as you pointed out above, this is only likely to happen against the very best. Or against teams with a player as clever as Tim Cahill.

[einar]

You don't get a run at the ball like the attacker does.

Is right for me.

If the attacker times his run perfect, and the ball is delivered perfect, there is not much a Zonal system can do.

And as you pointed out above, this is only likely to happen against the very best. Or against teams with a player as clever as Tim Cahill.

This IMHO wrong. The defender is supposed to attack the ball just like the attacking player. As I said in my post, the most common mistake in the zonal marking system is the defenders standing still. There should be nothing preventing a defender having a run at the ball except a block from someone and that, as we saw in the Newcastle game, applies to both systems.

[einar]

It takes an awful lot of time and organisation and which can be exploited from a quick/short corner

I´ll bet it takes far less time to go to your spot then to look for the man you are supposed to mark. He could be anywhere.

[Shaggy]

I remember reading this on the BBC website some years ago....


When defending set-pieces would you mark a player or operate a zonal system?

The Liverpool rearguard is one of the meanest around, but their defending regularly comes under scrutiny with boss Rafael Benitez favouring defending zones rather than marking players.

It doesn't always come off though with some players confused over their duties.

Former FA technical director Howard Wilkinson and ex-Liverpool defender Alan Hansen explain why they agree with Benitez's methods.


WHAT IS ZONAL DEFENDING?
"In zonal defending, you don't mark a man, you mark an area," said Hansen, winner of seven league championships.

As you can see in the diagram above, Liverpool set up their defence for a corner with four players across the six yard box and a further four ahead of them.

Between them, they are given an area to cover and should the ball reach them, it is up to the defender to clear the danger.

Hansen added: "The three most important areas are your man on the near post, a man in the middle of the six-yard box and a man between those two."


WHY DEFEND IN ZONES AND NOT MAN-TO-MAN?
Although it tends to be more popular in European football than in Britain, Hansen is a fan of the system but admits it is down to the players involved.

He said: "We always used zonal marking when I won championships with Liverpool.

"It was all about winning the first ball and if not, you've got to clean up the second ball.


Gallas slips between the Liverpool defence to score for Chelsea

"The other thing of course was having a goalkeeper (Bruce Grobbelaar) who we knew was going to come for crosses."

Wilkinson has used the zonal system for more than 30 years in football and implemented it in many of the England teams when he was technical director at the FA.

He said: "Zonal defending is based on the principle that when free-kicks are taken in the attacking third in wide positions or from corners, there is a dangerous space which can be identified.

"Within this area roughly three out of 100 goals are scored from the first touch.

Improve your defensive heading

"The system attempts to concentrate the best headers of the ball in that space. Your other players are in positions to defend the second ball.

"With man-to-man marking, attackers can drag defenders all over the place by taking them away from the danger area.

"It is a collective responsibility whereas man-for-man marking is based on personal responsibility."


THE CASE STUDY
"The problem with zonal marking is that because of the movement of the opposition, you're going to have men that are unmarked," said Hansen.

"When you start off you need to decide who picks up whom and who then lets the other men go."

Sometimes players follow the ball and attackers are able to find space.

Wilkinson adds: "It's a common fault with players defending balls delivered from wide. They get attracted to a ball that they can do nothing about.

"If you can't get there, get yourself between the posts and defend the goal in case there's a second ball to deal with."


ARGUMENTS AGAINST
The most common opposition to the system is that zones don't score, players do, so mark the player.

But Wilkinson explains there is a further layer to the argument.

He said: "Players score from dangerous zones. What do goalkeepers do on corners anyhow?

"They zone mark because until the ball is kicked they don't know where the ball will go.


Liverpool conceded seven goals at home in the 2006/07 season

"They don't concern themselves with players, they concern themselves with the ball because it's the ball that scores."

And he dismisses the notion that defenders have to compete with attackers who have a run on them.

"Attackers get a run on you whether you are zone defending or man-for-man marking," Wilkinson said.

More on football formations

"They always calls the shots. You start from a standing position but once the ball is in flight, you've got the distance the ball travels to get yourself moving.

"Lots of teams in the Premiership mark zones on the wide free-kick, because if you try and mark runners you end up running into each other and you can't jump anyway.

"You've got to remember that the higher up you go, the greater the quality of the delivery.

"That's one thing you can't do anything about, you have to assume that the people who are taking it can hit the button."


TEACHING THE SYSTEM
Liverpool's defending as a team has been widely praised with the team matching a club record for consecutive clean sheets in the league.

Wilkinson says: "Benitez's record, before he came to Liverpool and since he arrived, says that undoubtedly in achieving some things he's a master.

"I'd be careful about arguing with him on defending because his record isn't bad, particularly in Europe.

"It is a difficult thing to coach. It's more complex than man-to-man but it is more effective.

"But it's only more effective if it's covered comprehensively and players understand not only their roles but the roles of others."

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