I just thought I'd start a discussion on this little understood tactic ... zonal to me is far superior when done properly. Unfortunately the opposition's players are reluctant to share their runs and preconceived evasion tactics with our defence and time and time again we see specific man markers blocked off enabling 6'6" dangermen to get round the back/front/middle virtually unhindered for a freebie hit on goal; well zonal marking is designed to limit that particular danger ... Although of course it means players can end up mismatched at least the ball will always be challenged for. Of course with the better players crossing to a sixpence a perfectly timed run is always likely to succeed but in theory zonal means those runs should always be at least partially blocked. Naturally it takes some getting used to and of course the opposition can change tactics against it but statistics show it to be a much safer system generally. Pundits never notice but you can actually have a combination of both.
That's a good case for zonal marking GF although it always looks a bit 'random' to me. Please let's have a man on the post too though (preferably both).
Arsenal were doing it yesterday too. The way some bang on about it on here you'd think Wally was the only disciple of zonal marking.
Statistics again ... when this was brought up before, according to Aidy Boothroyd they showed a marked increase in conceded goals however I've never seen one supporting document nor one statistic showing the chances of a successful counter. I rather suspect it very much has to do with the quality and personnel of the opposition and the way they react to the danger. Note: I understand your thinking but if we had real pace on the counter it would probably be better used when the opposition's players are all pushed up rather than them having one or two hanging back for cover.
It's not even about catching them on the counter. Its quite simply to stop the ball from keep coming back, and back, and back at us again. Whether it's just to hold the ball up for while or just have someone up there that could put pressure on whoever picks up the ball up from the clearance so that they have to go back to their keeper, it will allow us to get out and relieve some pressure. The only way we are able to stop this at the moment is if Gomes catches the ball, or if they head it behind for a goal kick.
In that case leaving someone up top relies on them randomly receiving the ball and getting it under control - easy for defenders and the respite would be short lived ... The real key is in positioning, reactions and getting control of 2nd balls.
It doesn't matter if they 'randomly' receive the ball. The fact they are there means they can put pressure on the opposition, maybe forcing them to go backwards, maybe forcing them into mistakes. Rather, we sit back and say "come on, have another go". Oh, and you say the respite will be short lived? There's the main point for me. There will be some respite. A little respite is better than none at all. Reactions and 2nd balls have nothing to do with this. That is always the key regardless of whether we leave a man forward or not, so not sure how that is relevant to what we're talking about now. We need to react first and get the second balls all over the pitch anyway.
A football pitch is 75m wide, I'm not quite sure what you expect? ... Once again I'll say the key is getting control of the ball and categorically not hoofing it upfield and no it's not always that easy.
But... that is all we do when we clear from corners, hoof it upfield. At least with someone up there we have a chance of stopping it from coming back. Getting it under control on the edge of the box is fine, but with nobody ahead of the player who does get it under control they always end up hoofing it... to nobody. I do get your points and understand where you are coming from but I just have to disagree I'm afraid.
Last season at home to WBA, QSF tried something I always thought was a good shout. WBA had parked the bus and at one point they had a corner we put 4 or 5 players up the pitch; the team taking the corner would always have one more outfield player staying behind to prevent the break.
The man on the post issue is another raised frequently by pundits, as it is very obvious when a goal is conceded that could have been stopped. However what is less obvious, is the threat of having one (or two) less men in the box defending the ball coming in, or the threat of the second ball with the inability to catch anyone offside. Either way, Soccernomics explored how little a chance a corner actually gives. I think a throw in near the box has a better probability of scoring than a corner.
Unfortunately unless you're top six there isn't a one size fits all solution. Perfect defenders like Koscielny and Kompany(was) are thin on the ground.
Nice that WBA accommodated us but if it were to become a regular tactic the oppos would train for this and take advantage. Notwithstanding I like the tactic but you need a keeper that can cover ground.
Zonal marking does work well when done properly. It does scare the crap out of me though I must admit!
You'll probably find what you need amongst this lot https://www.google.co.uk/#q=pro+zone+football I'm only going off something some manager said years ago (Wenger I think).
Didn't Leicester do this with Vardy last season? Have Niang or Success up top and attack leaving the defence a chance to push out.
Maybe sometimes but to me Vardy usually started his runs from quite deep. However he was usually on his motorbike as soon as possession even looked like being turned over ... Any opposition that had pushed up had zero chance of catching him.
Zonal marking worked a treat against Arsenal with the way they set up for corners. They never looked like scoring from one all game. It's something I think we've gotten noticeably better at since its introduction as a tactic and I would like to stick with it. We have a tall, physical team in general so I don't think there's all that much need to do man marking unless they've got a giant like Zlatan on their team.
Didn't know where to put this so this thread fits well. Maritimo in Portugal are sitting in 6th place in the Portugese league, despite only scoring 19 goals in 23 games. 8 of those goals have been from corners - i've done an article analysing exactly how they've done that: http://www.eatsleepdrinkfootball.com/match-analysis/maritimo-set-pieces/ - teams should definitely use a mixed system imo. Man marking to counter certain goal threats whilst the rest cover zonally.
