Zonal Marking.

[Tosh]

Have to agree with what Phil Sproson says in today's Sentinel. I've never understood this tactic, especially at our level and agree it must be ditched asap.

 

http://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/port-vale-legend-says-zonal-marking-may-have-to-go/story-29977185-detail/story.html

[Tomo]

To be honest I remember this coming up not long ago, & I've seen it discussed in various places.

 

For me it's not always the system that's important, it's the players in them. As long as there is somebody always attacking the ball & throwing themselves at it giving 100% when there's a set piece etc, then you shouldn't have any major problems.

 

Usually when you watch goals conceded back, it's down to either a half arsed attempt at defending/blocking/whatever, rather than being out of position. IMO it's just more down to consistency & effort at this level & L2, rather than the more technical stuff.

[valeparklife]

Statistically, fewer goals are conceded with zonal marking compared to man marking. Which is why managers utilise it.

 

For me, I prefer man marking because it's better that the players take responsibility as it's easier to pass the buck with zonal marking.

[Tosh]

 

Usually when you watch goals conceded back, it's down to either a half arsed attempt at defending/blocking/whatever, rather than being out of position. IMO it's just more down to consistency & effort at this level & L2, rather than the more technical stuff.

I think it's because marking a space instead of an opponent you take away that contest and leaves players unsure and flat on adrenaline and are left looking around like the uninvited guest at a party.

[PV1973]

Zonal marking allows the opposition the chance to get a run at the ball, whereas the defenders start flat footed. Look at when the oppositon have a free kick or a corner they'll have 3 or 4 players running into the box and that gives them a massive advantage over defenders standing still ten yards away from a player.

[Fosse69]

Which is the best system to use when the defenders are smaller than the attackers?

[PV1973]

Which is the best system to use when the defenders are smaller than the attackers?

I think we should do a mix of both. Man mark players and have one or two free who can attack the ball if necessary. It doesn't matter so much about the height, its also about strength and blocking players off and getting close so they can't get a run on you. At the moment purely zonal IMO doesn't work, as we saw with their goals Saturday.

[SFBT]

Slightly off topic, but a major difference was that Taylor rarely cleared the first man.

It increases the chance of scoring if you get the ball in the mix.

[Class personified]

Slightly off topic, but a major difference was that Taylor rarely cleared the first man.

It increases the chance of scoring if you get the ball in the mix.

Stay on topic SFBT. You are always slagging off people who go off at tangents and then you do the same.

[Tomo]

Slightly off topic, but a major difference was that Taylor rarely cleared the first man.

It increases the chance of scoring if you get the ball in the mix.

 

Yeah, despite the goal & assist, for me he was one of the few that had a bad game Saturday. Majority of his balls were useless, although he's usually pretty good with them so just an off day I guess.

[Tomo]

Zonal marking is ok providing you stick your best header of the ball on the edge of the 6 yard box and tell him to just attack the ball and head it clear. A man on each post helps as well another bugbear of mine when teams don't do it (as well as not leaving a player up on the half way line in an attacking position whilst I'm having a rant..... )

 

To be honest, whatever marking system we use, on either defensive or attacking set pieces, it has always annoyed me how Vale never put people in the most important areas, whether it be someone on the back post when attacking to nod it back across, or one defending each post etc. In recent years, nearly every time we set up for a ball to come in, I find myself pointing out gaps or places where we should have players. Maybe it's not just Vale though...

[Essex Vale]

Zonal marking itself is not necessarily bad, it is how it is executed. For the first goal Kiko allowed the man in his zone a free header, whilst he (Kiko) was flat footed and did not jump or put any pressure on the ball in his zone. For the second goal Northampton lined up 4 players (rather like a Basketball player weave where you deliberately screen a player out of the game). Vale put their two central defenders, Smith and Streete against this 4 man weave. Unsurprisingly the defenders were prevented from attacking the ball. When the ball dropped loose a man moved from Kiko's zone to collect the ball and was unchallenged to score.

 

It is not rocket science. Zonal marking is not a bad strategy but you must pick up a man in your zone and you must block their run and jump, however, the player in the zone where the attacker started his run and jump has to do this, if he doesn't the man in the zone where the attacker moves into it is left looking a little deficient.

 

However, at all levels of the game a high percentage of goals are scored from dead balls so we have to accept that failure to defend properly, or luck, or a brilliant strategy to break the defence will result in lots of goals from these free kicks

[Thevalefan]

To be honest I remember this coming up not long ago, & I've seen it discussed in various places.

 

For me it's not always the system that's important, it's the players in them. As long as there is somebody always attacking the ball & throwing themselves at it giving 100% when there's a set piece etc, then you shouldn't have any major problems.

 

Usually when you watch goals conceded back, it's down to either a half arsed attempt at defending/blocking/whatever, rather than being out of position. IMO it's just more down to consistency & effort at this level & L2, rather than the more technical stuff.

 

I am a full believer in man-marking all game.

 

Allocate a player to mark, watch him. Speak with your mate when you need cover, communicate but he's your man.

 

Any problems then become clearly visible and the manager can apply tactics to help out.

 

Not only that, man-marking means more accountability. More accountability means players need to perform better or be found out.

 

As you say Tomo - ball pressure is the best tactic used and that is proved by cup-upsets over years and years.

 

Zonal marking allows the other team to play the game of football they want, with us defending the set pieces or runs.. rather than cutting the threat out sooner.