Liverpool FC Forum

by **Effes** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:17 pm

"There is no ideal system, the best is the one which is best for your players." Arsène Wenger

This is what Im asking - is it the best system for us using our players?

We haven't got enough players who are great in the air - or even very good.

When zonal marking everyone is flat footed. They stand too static in each zone.
Too static to attack the ball.

Whereas when man marking, you run with the man, and get a running jump to the ball -
and even if you aren't great in the air, you can get physical and stop him from getting onto the ball.
It happens all the time in English league football and rarely is punished.

by **GYBS** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:20 pm

Effes wrote:[size=6]"There is no ideal system, the best is the one which is best for your players." Arsène Wenger[/b]

This is what Im asking - is it the best system for us using our players?

We haven't got enough players who are great in the air - or even very good.

When zonal marking everyone is flat footed. They stand too static in each zone.
Too static to attack the ball.

Whereas when man marking, you run with the man, and get a running jump to the ball -
and even if you aren't great in the air, you can get physical and stop him from getting onto the ball.
It happens all the time in English league football and rarely is punished.

and it all it takes is a bit of clever movement from the centre forward or anyone to loose their marker and he is free for a header - nsee it all the time . for me going to man marking will expose our lack of strength in the air even more

by **tonyeh** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:21 pm

Effes wrote:"There is no ideal system, the best is the one which is best for your players." Arsène Wenger

This is what Im asking - is it the best system for us using our players?

We haven't got enough players who are great in the air - or even very good.

When zonal marking everyone is flat footed. They stand too static in each zone.
Too static to attack the ball.

Whereas when man marking, you run with the man, and get a running jump to the ball -
and even if you aren't great in the air, you can get physical and stop him from getting onto the ball.
It happens all the time in English league football and rarely is punished.

Exactly and the best man wins the ball, whether it's red shirt or someone else.

Liverpool's use of ZM in defending corners simply looks like the wrong system to be using.

by **Effes** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:21 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
Effes wrote:I think where you are coming from Tony is this:

A defensive record which may be good doesn't reflect your defensive record against
crosses into the box from set pieces like corners or free kicks

And I agree.

The argument for me is - even though the theory of zonal marking
may be a good one.....

Is it the system that we should be using?

Okay, perhaps the overall defensive record does not afford a straightforward correlation to the success of zonal marking (although they surely must be related?). But, what do you make of Reina's clean sheet numbers? Surely, not conceding a goal is a measure of success when it comes to evaluating our zonal system since we undoubtedly face several corners or free kicks per game? If the system were flawed, surely he'd have a much harder time keeping clean sheets? And yet, his numbers are revealing:

2005-2006...20 clean sheets*
2006-2007...19 clean sheets*
2007-2008...18 clean sheets*
2008-2009...20 clean sheets

* = most in the league

Plus, he's the fastest keeper in club history to get to both 50 clean sheets and 100 clean sheets.

Surely, zonal marking can't be that flawed a system if our keeper is keeping that many clean sheets season after season?

I agree somewhat Bob - but we haven't got Sami anymore.
I know he didbnt play often last season, but he certainly contributed to previous seasons.

Read my previous post mate, where I quoted Arsene, I explain my concerns there.

by **Bad Bob** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:22 pm

tonyeh wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:
Effes wrote:I think where you are coming from Tony is this:

A defensive record which may be good doesn't reflect your defensive record against
crosses into the box from set pieces like corners or free kicks

And I agree.

The argument for me is - even though the theory of zonal marking
may be a good one.....

Is it the system that we should be using?

Okay, perhaps the overall defensive record does not afford a straightforward correlation to the success of zonal marking (although they surely must be related?). But, what do you make of Reina's clean sheet numbers? Surely, not conceding a goal is a measure of success when it comes to evaluating our zonal system since we undoubtedly face several corners or free kicks per game? If the system were flawed, surely he'd have a much harder time keeping clean sheets? And yet, his numbers are revealing:

2005-2006...20 clean sheets*
2006-2007...19 clean sheets*
2007-2008...18 clean sheets*
2008-2009...20 clean sheets

* = most in the league

Plus, he's the fastest keeper in club history to get to both 50 clean sheets and 100 clean sheets.

Surely, zonal marking can't be that flawed a system if our keeper is keeping that many clean sheets season after season?

But Reina's clean sheets aren't going to tell the whole story either Bob.

Well, no, they'll provide a different look at the situation. The big picture, if you will. One that isn't clouded by the same sense of frustration we all share we we concede stupid goals from set pieces. Look mate, I hate conceding goals too. Any goal we concede fecks me right off and that goes double for ones from set pieces like we saw today--with people switching off and giving them a soft tap in. Can't stand the sight of it. But, over the Rafa years I've seen us pile up a lot of clean sheets and a very, very good defensive record, all of which tells me that, by and large, the system works just fine. It's never going to be completely foolproof though: clever sides will concoct something special to outwit it or our lads will switch off occasionally, like they did again today. Rather than chuck the system and think we've sorted it, though, I'd rather Rafa address the real issue about why people aren't doing their jobs defending these things and why we're conceding so many stupid frees in the first place.

by **Effes** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:23 pm

GYBS wrote:
Effes wrote:[size=6]"There is no ideal system, the best is the one which is best for your players." Arsène Wenger[/b]

This is what Im asking - is it the best system for us using our players?

We haven't got enough players who are great in the air - or even very good.

When zonal marking everyone is flat footed. They stand too static in each zone.
Too static to attack the ball.

Whereas when man marking, you run with the man, and get a running jump to the ball -
and even if you aren't great in the air, you can get physical and stop him from getting onto the ball.
It happens all the time in English league football and rarely is punished.

and it all it takes is a bit of clever movement from the centre forward or anyone to loose their marker and he is free for a header - nsee it all the time . for me going to man marking will expose our lack of strength in the air even more

Which is why the old Liverpool used a hybrid system - half zonal and half man marking.

That's what I think we should do.

by **GYBS** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:25 pm

Effes wrote:
GYBS wrote:
Effes wrote:[size=6]"There is no ideal system, the best is the one which is best for your players." Arsène Wenger[/b]

This is what Im asking - is it the best system for us using our players?

We haven't got enough players who are great in the air - or even very good.

When zonal marking everyone is flat footed. They stand too static in each zone.
Too static to attack the ball.

Whereas when man marking, you run with the man, and get a running jump to the ball -
and even if you aren't great in the air, you can get physical and stop him from getting onto the ball.
It happens all the time in English league football and rarely is punished.

and it all it takes is a bit of clever movement from the centre forward or anyone to loose their marker and he is free for a header - nsee it all the time . for me going to man marking will expose our lack of strength in the air even more

Which is why the old Liverpool used a hybrid system - half zonal and half man marking.

That's what I think we should do.

players to man mark the runners and players to mark the zones within the six yard box ?

by **tonyeh** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:27 pm

Bad Bob wrote:
tonyeh wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:
Effes wrote:I think where you are coming from Tony is this:

A defensive record which may be good doesn't reflect your defensive record against
crosses into the box from set pieces like corners or free kicks

And I agree.

The argument for me is - even though the theory of zonal marking
may be a good one.....

Is it the system that we should be using?

Okay, perhaps the overall defensive record does not afford a straightforward correlation to the success of zonal marking (although they surely must be related?). But, what do you make of Reina's clean sheet numbers? Surely, not conceding a goal is a measure of success when it comes to evaluating our zonal system since we undoubtedly face several corners or free kicks per game? If the system were flawed, surely he'd have a much harder time keeping clean sheets? And yet, his numbers are revealing:

2005-2006...20 clean sheets*
2006-2007...19 clean sheets*
2007-2008...18 clean sheets*
2008-2009...20 clean sheets

* = most in the league

Plus, he's the fastest keeper in club history to get to both 50 clean sheets and 100 clean sheets.

Surely, zonal marking can't be that flawed a system if our keeper is keeping that many clean sheets season after season?

But Reina's clean sheets aren't going to tell the whole story either Bob.

Well, no, they'll provide a different look at the situation. The big picture, if you will. One that isn't clouded by the same sense of frustration we all share we we concede stupid goals from set pieces. Look mate, I hate conceding goals too. Any goal we concede fecks me right off and that goes double for ones from set pieces like we saw today--with people switching off and giving them a soft tap in. Can't stand the sight of it. But, over the Rafa years I've seen us pile up a lot of clean sheets and a very, very good defensive record, all of which tells me that, by and large, the system works just fine. It's never going to be completely foolproof though: clever sides will concoct something special to outwit it or our lads will switch off occasionally, like they did again today. Rather than chuck the system and think we've sorted it, though, I'd rather Rafa address the real issue about why people aren't doing their jobs defending these things and why we're conceding so many stupid frees in the first place.

But, it's a misleading picture.

It won't show how many times an opposition player got to a ball freely, but kicked it wide, or headed it over the bar. The problem is they still got to the ball.

It's not just about the concession of a goal Bob, but the fact that opposition players are given the freedom to attack the ball, while our lads are "stuck in a zone" as it were.

by **Effes** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:27 pm

I sometimes think Zonal Marking is too predictable i.e. opposing teams can "plan" a way of beating
the system.
Yes, I know the same can be said for man marking, but I think it's easier to find a weakness in zonal marking.

For example, the run to the near post just when the cross is hit - see Curtis v Villa, and Cahill v EFC)
The players on the near post are blind-sided.
By the time they notice a player has entered their zone, the cross is on it's way and it's too late.
For me, it's an achilles heel of ZM, and I dont know how you combat it.

by **Effes** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:27 pm

GYBS wrote:
Effes wrote:
GYBS wrote:
Effes wrote:[size=6]"There is no ideal system, the best is the one which is best for your players." Arsène Wenger[/b]

This is what Im asking - is it the best system for us using our players?

We haven't got enough players who are great in the air - or even very good.

When zonal marking everyone is flat footed. They stand too static in each zone.
Too static to attack the ball.

Whereas when man marking, you run with the man, and get a running jump to the ball -
and even if you aren't great in the air, you can get physical and stop him from getting onto the ball.
It happens all the time in English league football and rarely is punished.

and it all it takes is a bit of clever movement from the centre forward or anyone to loose their marker and he is free for a header - nsee it all the time . for me going to man marking will expose our lack of strength in the air even more

Which is why the old Liverpool used a hybrid system - half zonal and half man marking.

That's what I think we should do.

players to man mark the runners and players to mark the zones within the six yard box ?

Yes - sort of.

by **tonyeh** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:29 pm

Effes wrote:
GYBS wrote:
Effes wrote:[size=6]"There is no ideal system, the best is the one which is best for your players." Arsène Wenger[/b]

This is what Im asking - is it the best system for us using our players?

We haven't got enough players who are great in the air - or even very good.

When zonal marking everyone is flat footed. They stand too static in each zone.
Too static to attack the ball.

Whereas when man marking, you run with the man, and get a running jump to the ball -
and even if you aren't great in the air, you can get physical and stop him from getting onto the ball.
It happens all the time in English league football and rarely is punished.

and it all it takes is a bit of clever movement from the centre forward or anyone to loose their marker and he is free for a header - nsee it all the time . for me going to man marking will expose our lack of strength in the air even more

Which is why the old Liverpool used a hybrid system - half zonal and half man marking.

That's what I think we should do.

Agreed. It seems that the zonal marking system isn't the system Liverpool should be using for set pieces. Either the players are not up to using it correctly, or they're not getting coached in correctly.

I dread every corner we give away.

by **JC_81** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:31 pm

A few things that need to be considered by the 'zonal marking bashers' are...

1) Insua, Johnson and Kyrgiakos are relatively new to playing this system - 3 out of the back 4 today, and in previous games just Insua and Johnson (still half the back 4). It takes time to get used to.

2) As Bob's facts support, zonal marking hasn't been a problem in previous seasons. The media always drag it up when we concede from a set piece, but overall it is a system that I would argue has served us well.

3) Our team is probably now the smallest in terms of height that it has been under Benitez. Insua, Lucas, Mascherano and Benayoun are useless when it comes to defending set pieces, and it doesn't matter what system that's in. None of our centre halves, possibly with the exception of Krgiakos, are particularly dominant in the air either. Hyypia is badly missed in this area.

In summary, there are good reasons why the system has a few problems this season, and also good reasons why the team as a whole will be prone to conceding more from set pieces than previous seasons. For me the problems are more related to personnel than systems, and unfortunately all teams have weaknesses - this looks like ours. It doesn't mean we listen to the media hype and scrap a system that has worked well for us previously. Have a bit of patience.

by **Bad Bob** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:35 pm

Effes wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:
Effes wrote:I think where you are coming from Tony is this:

A defensive record which may be good doesn't reflect your defensive record against
crosses into the box from set pieces like corners or free kicks

And I agree.

The argument for me is - even though the theory of zonal marking
may be a good one.....

Is it the system that we should be using?

Okay, perhaps the overall defensive record does not afford a straightforward correlation to the success of zonal marking (although they surely must be related?). But, what do you make of Reina's clean sheet numbers? Surely, not conceding a goal is a measure of success when it comes to evaluating our zonal system since we undoubtedly face several corners or free kicks per game? If the system were flawed, surely he'd have a much harder time keeping clean sheets? And yet, his numbers are revealing:

2005-2006...20 clean sheets*
2006-2007...19 clean sheets*
2007-2008...18 clean sheets*
2008-2009...20 clean sheets

* = most in the league

Plus, he's the fastest keeper in club history to get to both 50 clean sheets and 100 clean sheets.

Surely, zonal marking can't be that flawed a system if our keeper is keeping that many clean sheets season after season?

I agree somewhat Bob - but we haven't got Sami anymore.
I know he didbnt play often last season, but he certainly contributed to previous seasons.

Read my previous post mate, where I quoted Arsene, I explain my concerns there.

True, mate, but, to be fair, how many of those games has Sami played for us over the last 2-3 years? I can't imagine what were seeing is a simple matter of losing Hyppia and the system falling apart. What we're seeing, IMO, is lads who have been drilled, drilled and drilled some more in zonal marking and who have performed excellently in the system in the past, dropping the ball so far. So, I say again, the problem lies with the execution.

(BTW, I think Scottbot's excellent point in the formation v. Bolton thread is equally relevant here: sometimes we are all guilty of getting too wrapped up in systems and formations. We get to talking like man marking or 4-4-2 or zonal or 4-2-3-1 are distinct beasts rather than variations on a common theme. I think the bottom line is whether we have 11 men on the pitch doing their jobs to the best of their ability regardless of what we call the system. For me, we're not quite there yet and that's what we should really be focusing on: getting the lads up closer to the peaks of their abilities in all departments of the game...including defending set pieces.)

by **Effes** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:36 pm

john craig wrote:3) Our team is probably now the smallest in terms of height that it has been under Benitez. Insua, Lucas, Mascherano and Benayoun are useless when it comes to defending set pieces, and it doesn't matter what system that's in. None of our centre halves, possibly with the exception of Krgiakos, are particularly dominant in the air either. Hyypia is badly missed in this area.

In summary, there are good reasons why the system has a few problems this season, and also good reasons why the team as a whole will be prone to conceding more from set pieces than previous seasons. For me the problems are more related to personnel than systems, and unfortunately all teams have weaknesses - this looks like ours. It doesn't mean we listen to the media hype and scrap a system that has worked well for us previously. Have a bit of patience.

Mate - have you read my previous posts ? (read the one with Wenger's quote)

Please - just read where I explain WHY I think zonal is maybe not the system for us BECAUSE
of what you say in bold.

Im convinced people just aren't taking it in.

by **Bad Bob** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 8:42 pm

Effes wrote:
john craig wrote:3) Our team is probably now the smallest in terms of height that it has been under Benitez. Insua, Lucas, Mascherano and Benayoun are useless when it comes to defending set pieces, and it doesn't matter what system that's in. None of our centre halves, possibly with the exception of Krgiakos, are particularly dominant in the air either. Hyypia is badly missed in this area.

In summary, there are good reasons why the system has a few problems this season, and also good reasons why the team as a whole will be prone to conceding more from set pieces than previous seasons. For me the problems are more related to personnel than systems, and unfortunately all teams have weaknesses - this looks like ours. It doesn't mean we listen to the media hype and scrap a system that has worked well for us previously. Have a bit of patience.

Mate - have you read my previous posts ? (read the one with Wenger's quote)

Please - just read where I explain WHY I think zonal is maybe not the system for us BECAUSE
of what you say in bold.

Im convinced people just aren't taking it in.

Okay, on this issue, is it clearly a better strategy to man mark with smaller players than it is to employ a zonal system? You seem to imply that it is, mate, but I think there's a lot more of a debate to that point. I think a lot of teams would salivate if we were to line up man marking at a corner, with the likes of Masch and Insua and Yossi looking to contain much bigger lads.

Liverpool FC Forum

Zonal marking... - The discussion thread!

Who is online