Marking on Set Pieces

[abc]

Gordon Strachan on Sky explaining the difference to that monkey Keys.

 

Top stuff there, making a reference to Andy Gray's ramblings, that when Turner scored that it was a "great header" but made no reference to the very poor man marking from the Wolves defender. Also said that if it was zonal Turner would not have been able to stoop down low and get a free header into the corner.

 

He talks to his players and asks them what system they prefer, and then they implement it. Not sure if Rafa being so detail oriented and meticulous with preparation will ever have a similar approach, but I have noticed in certain matches that he a few of our players try to pick up danger men.

Edited September 27, 2009 by abc

[anny road]

i didnt see it

 

but I spoke to Ste Jordan about it...Well actually he was arguing with hsi cousin (who was slagging zonal off)

 

And he was saying its BS

 

he said there are good and bad points to both system, but it is down to being confident and knowing what your job is, and executing it properly

[muleskinner]

Both systems work if they are carried out correctly, it has been proven over and over again.

[Gray - YPC]

Both systems work if they are carried out correctly, it has been proven over and over again.

Is the right answer.

 

Chelsea conceded one goal, and very nearly a second, whilst using man-marking yesterday.

 

One other factor to consider is that compared to most teams we're actually quite a small team. We haven't got a team of giants, so by definition we''re likely to concede a couple more set-pieces a season compared to some teams, but we get the benefit in open play.

[Rory Fitzgerald]

Just rewound it on Sky+ to listen to it;

 

Strachan: I ask my players what they prefer. I've worked with players when we do zonal marking and then he goes off to his country for the internationals and they operate a man-for-man system and he comes and says "I denaey like 'hat system". It takes too long to explain to most people it but basically, most goals from direct headers are scored within the width of the goals so you put your best headers of the ball withiin that area but its more than that and takes alot longer to explain it.

 

Keys: Do you agree that zonal marking gives players excuses

 

Strachan: No, not at all, there is alot of responsibility, alot of responsibility. But as I say it takes longer to explain. But you've got Andy with these machines, I cannae compete with these machines *laughs*

 

Keys: How come Turner gets so far for that header

 

Strachan: Probably someone slept, when you get subs in the game sometimes players get confused in the game that they forget who they are picking up. Before the game they know who it is, but during the game there can be confusion. It looks like the defender lost Turner in the crowd and that can happen when you man-for-man mark. But in zonal marking, Turner is bending down to head it and at zonal, that wont happen, you might get out-jumped in that area but you wont concede from someone bending down.

[lfc4eva99]

Both systems work if they are carried out correctly, it has been proven over and over again.

 

Bang on. Its funny that so many people just join the anti zonal bandwagon after listening to the so called pundits, we have made zonal work before and we will again, if you dont mark your man or your zone well , your going to concede.

[Kahnee]

Both systems work if they are carried out correctly, it has been proven over and over again.

 

b******s. Zonal is rubbish and man marking is fool proof. How can Andy Gray and Jim Beglin be wrong?

[stressederic]

Fortunately Keys was able to make a laughing comment during The Last Word to Andy Gray about how "Wolves only needed to mark along the 6 yard box and that's fine then" in regards to Michael Turner's goal.

 

Cretin.

[Rimbeux]

To be fair it is a good talking point and the more people actually discuss it properly on the tellybox the less knee jerk nonsense will be talked about it. I'm sure people do wonder why someone would insist on using something so many people believe is flawed and it's good to have informed explanation

[abc]

To be fair it is a good talking point and the more people actually discuss it properly on the tellybox the less knee jerk nonsense will be talked about it. I'm sure people do wonder why someone would insist on using something so many people believe is flawed and it's good to have informed explanation

 

If people just stop and think "hold on, maybe they know something that I don't - that's why they are paid £2.5m a year coaching/managing and I'm on £25k doing my thing" they'd be a bit less impulsive.

 

The amount of fans out there who are poisoned by the Sky commentary is mind-boggling.

[Rimbeux]

If people just stop and think "hold on, maybe they know something that I don't - that's why they are paid £2.5m a year coaching/managing and I'm on £25k doing my thing" they'd be a bit less impulsive.

 

The amount of fans out there who are poisoned by the Sky commentary is mind-boggling.

 

 

How often do you get the line about it being a simple game that is complicated by some? Unfortunately it's an over-riding undercurrent with many of the ex-pros we have to endure

[meepins]

How often do you get the line about it being a simple game that is complicated by some? Unfortunately it's an over-riding undercurrent with many of the ex-pros we have to endure

Forget tactics. Just send them out and let the players express themselves.

[Rory Fitzgerald]

But zones dont score goals, players do

 

Anyway combining what Anny Road said (both systems work once its executed properly) and Strachan (I see what my players are most comfortable with), it simply comes down to a matter of preference, doesnt it ?

[Maldini]

Andy Gray is a c***.

[carrafan]

but I have noticed in certain matches that he a few of our players try to pick up danger men.

 

We've always used a combination of zonal and man marking. Thats why almost our entire team is defending set pieces to pull that off.

 

But in such a situation it becomes easier to forget who you're marking and sometimes the opposition end up having a big player being marked by our fullback or someone.

 

These no nothing pundits act all smug and suggest that we should have more players upfield to act as a threat but the simple fact is that without defensive numbers in the box, it becomes even tougher to pull our system off. Also, we our one of the best counter attacking sides from a set piece with the likes of Masch and Kuyt, Gerrard and Babel being genuine outlets on the counter. So i dont see where we lose out.

 

 

We've also played the offside trap all the time under Benitez and have caught out the likes of Henry and Defoe, players with real pace in them offside without fail in many games. Commentators still go, 'it only takes a mistake to get the trap wrong and have their player one on one with Pepe' but thats it. Mistakes cost teams goals and we're very comfortable playing the offside trap and hence reducing the gap between defence and midfield and midfield and Nando.

 

Pundits are stupid and its hilarious to see Rafa having goes at them from time to time.

Edited September 27, 2009 by carrafan

[Swipe]

I love the line all the pundits are now throwing out about how with man to man, you have someone to blame if a goal is conceded.

 

What f***ing use is that? Doesn't stop it happening time and time again up and down the country.

 

f***ing nonsense.

 

It all boils down to zonal marking being thought of as a foregin football tactical device, used by a foreign manager that for some reason is extremely unpopular with huge sections of the british media.

[Rory Fitzgerald]

It all boils down to zonal marking being thought of as a foregin football tactical device, used by a foreign manager that for some reason is extremely unpopular with huge sections of the british media.

 

Thats why its great to see someone like Strachan come out in defence of it and let Keys know that its not something you can explain in 30 seconds with just as many words (despite the diagnosis that Jamie Redknapp can dispense on any matter of football) but rather there are plenty of dimensions to just 1 system.

[Nerik]

FACT: The majority of top football teams nowadays use zonal marking

FACT: The majority of pundits/commentators who slag zonal marking played in an era when zonal marking was hardly used or did not play the game at top level at all.

[Rory Fitzgerald]

FACT: The majority of top football teams nowadays use zonal marking

FACT: The majority of pundits/commentators who slag zonal marking played in an era when zonal marking was hardly used or did not play the game at top level at all.

 

Err, Rafa, is that you ?

[Maldini]

We used zonal marking under Joe Fagan as well.

[JRC]

I love the line all the pundits are now throwing out about how with man to man, you have someone to blame if a goal is conceded.

 

What f***ing use is that? Doesn't stop it happening time and time again up and down the country.

 

f***ing nonsense.

 

It all boils down to zonal marking being thought of as a foregin football tactical device, used by a foreign manager that for some reason is extremely unpopular with huge sections of the british media.

Your logic is exemplary. Additionally, do these pundits really believe that when we concede from a corner, Rafa - so thorough and detailed, perfectionist, practically anal - just shrugs his shoulders and says "Never mind, lads, no-one to criticize because we went zonal - you're all out of the frame"?

[Nerik]

Err, Rafa, is that you ?

 

Well, you know it could be. It is one of the possibilities. A quality one.

[abc]

It all boils down to zonal marking being thought of as a foregin football tactical device, used by a foreign manager that for some reason is extremely unpopular with huge sections of the british media.

 

Yup, yet people ignore that Lee Dixon (and I think someone else from that Arsenal back five) came out and said that during their Graham 1-0 days they used to mark zones on set pieces...

[Sion]

what annoys me is the 'you know who to blame with man marking'. Ignoring the statements complete pointlessness, you can usually easily tell who is to blame with zonal. The player not attacking his area.

Edited September 28, 2009 by Sion

[Stevie H]

i wish people would stop calling it zonal marking. it's zonal defending.