bigmick wrote:It's a fiunny one this, as it seems to me that the bloke who talks most about it (Andy Gray by all accounts) spent his whole career playing against people who were trying to stop him scoring a goal, without actually realising how they were trying to do it. Zonal marking as well know is far from new, most teams have employed it to a degree since the year dot. In actual fact the concept of zonal marking in it's most basic sense, is putting a man on the front post. He isn't usually picking anybody up, he is simply standing in a spot where experience tells us he might come into play. He therefore is marking the area around the front post, and is marking a zone, ie zonally. As I understand it, Mr Gray favours this and understands the concept, but not the irony of his stance.
The growth of the system in popularity over here has been led by Rafa though, of that there is no doubt. The roots of the "need" for such a system lie in refereeing interpretation I think. On the continent, they wrestle, defending without regard to the football and take man marking to almost its literal sense. In this country (or in England should I say), this is the one area of the game where the referees are much more strict that their European counterparts. If you do that in the Premiership, it's a penalty.
Equally, more balls are played into the area and contested as headers I think in England than elsewhere, and as such most teams have at least one towering centre half. If you are man marked by John Terry you simply wander off to the edge of the box, taking him with you and let your team-mate head it in. The classic way to counter that was to "pass him on" when your striker went a wandering, but it leads to comunication breakdowns and inevitably people get lost.
The other big plus for zonal marking as far as our particular manager is concerned is that is a fully transportable, self contained system in many ways. Teach a left back to pick up the front zone when corners come in from the right, and he should be able to do it just as well for the reserves as he does for the first team. Equally, it shouldn't make too much difference who he is defending alongside, or even in most cases defending against.
It is in this aspect of the defensive prowess of the team that the anti rotationers have had the most trouble believing their eyes. The efficiency of the defensive unit from set-pieces despite the rotation flies in the face of convention, and no amount of eye rubbing can disguise the face that it is the result of exceptional defensive coaching.
All in all I like the system. I have learnt much from watching Liverpool defend set-pieces over the last five years. When we look back at this period in the history of English football, it is this area which wil leave the longest legacy I think.
milou wrote:Firstly, I am humble enough to admit I am less knowledgeable in football than many of the posters here..![]()
So I have a simple (hopefully not SO naive) question to ask:
How does zonal-marking work when we have players of different heights being scattered all around "statically" (Of cos I don't mean totally static but you get my point) but your attackers (likely to be the taller ones) are free to run about and attack "weaker" areas covered by shorter players or less defensive players?
Say if Liverpool is playing Portsmouth.. Crouch can always move away from the taller & more defensive players (hyypia, carra) and attack spaces guarded by Insua (shorter) or Reira (more attacking than defensive) right?
Doesn't that make certain areas more "vulnerable"?
Return to Liverpool FC - General Discussion
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 67 guests