Liverpool FC Forum

by **JoeTerp** » Sun Mar 15, 2009 4:51 pm

not a bad job on set pieces either. During the game I was nervous on every corner because of how great their players are in the air, but we seemed well organized and aggressive

by **Effes** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:41 pm

Open for discussion again I guess.

Their first goal reminded me of Cahill's goal in the Derby at Anfield.
Our defenders too static.

by **GYBS** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:44 pm

so three months ago against everton was the last time we defended a set peice poorly ?

by **Simari** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:46 pm

Not tonight, it wasn't zonal marking - just overall, a very, very poor performance.

Players not up for it, Chelsea wanted it more.

We still have one of the stingiest defenses in the league and that is over an entire season, so zonal marking is working just as well as man to man.

by **oreilly** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:48 pm

I think on the night Chelsea wanted it more.............Do we have the squad for 2 major trophies

We all know which one the fans want more..........

Gerrard didnt have his best game ; Torres took the goal well but ran out of steam......
As for zonal ----puffff it works the majority of the time so give it a rest

by **Redman in wales** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 9:58 pm

Every team in the world concedes goals from set pieces, whether they man mark or zonal mark.

We conceeded 2 goals tonight from set pieces, yes we were zonal marking, but we were also zonal marking in the previous 2 games against chelsea, the 2 games against real madrid and against utd away and the only goal we conceeded in those 5 games against those top sides was a penalty.

I think zonal marking does work, and I guarantee that if we were man marking, at some point in the season, we would have conceeded a goal from a set piece... would that be the fault of man marking as a system??

by **tonyeh** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:22 pm

There are no guarantees with either system, that's a fact.

But, out of the twio systems "znal marking" is easily the weaker one.

If someone had been tasked with picking up Ivanovic tonight and not a "zone", that game probably would have ended 1-1.

by **GYBS** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:27 pm

if its the weaker one then how come zonal has been proved to have a better defensive record ? how come when we moved to zonal marking from man marking our defensive went to extremle solid and helped pepe win golden gloves for two seasons was it ??

by **tonyeh** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:34 pm

But, as Owzat has already stated in this thread. Is our "defensive record" telling the whole story?

How many near misses have been given away from zonal marking? How many half chances?

The justification for zonal marking is that that all areas are marled. However, the reality is that they just aren't. And sometimes zones can be flooded by opposition players leaving the zonal marker overwhelmed and often oppostion players can zip in and out of "zones" exploiting the inherent weakness. What does the defender defend then? The player or the zone? Does he follow the player into the next zone? Or does he leave him?

We've been dumped out of the CL tonight because of zonal marking. Without it, that game would probably have ended 1-1.

Man marking is by far the better system.

by **GYBS** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:39 pm

rubbish - the players were poor tonight at makring - it could of easily been 3-1 with man marking if they defended as poor as they did tonight - it was poor defending from the lot of them not the system . saying the system is at fault is the andy gray lazyness excuse as opposed to realising its the players at fault tonight cause they were poor - the lot of them .

by **Redman in wales** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:47 pm

tonyeh wrote:The justification for zonal marking is that that all areas are marled. However, the reality is that they just aren't.

correct.

however... the justification for man-marking is that all men are marked. ..... but the reality is that they aren't. Goals are still conceeded.

by **Redman in wales** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:49 pm

goals are conceeded by defensive errors (happens in both zonal and man marking) or striking brilliance (or luck

)

by **tonyeh** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:51 pm

Redman in wales wrote:
tonyeh wrote:The justification for zonal marking is that that all areas are marled. However, the reality is that they just aren't.

correct.

however... the justification for man-marking is that all men are marked. ..... but the reality is that they aren't. Goals are still conceeded.

Of course. What, you want people to say that no goals can be conceded by man marking?

by **tonyeh** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:52 pm

Ivanovic got two goals tonight, because Liverpool players were marking zones...and not him.

by **GYBS** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:52 pm

tonyeh wrote:
Redman in wales wrote:
tonyeh wrote:The justification for zonal marking is that that all areas are marled. However, the reality is that they just aren't.

correct.

however... the justification for man-marking is that all men are marked. ..... but the reality is that they aren't. Goals are still conceeded.

Of course. What, you want people to say that no goals can be conceded by man marking?

and we have conceeded less since we moved to zonal marking - just as other teams have .

Liverpool FC Forum

Zonal marking... - The discussion thread!

Who is online