Liverpool FC Forum

Effes wrote:Im outta here!

Bob - as though we'd have Masch and Yossi marking big players!!

Im not coming back.

Something I said?

They might not mark the biggest players but odds are they'd have to mark players that are bigger than they are? 

Bad Bob wrote:

tonyeh wrote:

Bad Bob wrote:Look, for the millionth time--both systems have their inherent strengths and weaknesses.  One is not "obviously" better than the other, though many proponents of man marking make it sound that way.  Moaning about the system almost always misses the point anyway.  Most set piece goals are the result of poor execution by the players working the system rather than the system itself.  We conceded a goal from a corner today using zonal marking and Bolton conceded two goals from corners using man marking.  All three goals, though, were down to poor execution.

On paper Bob, the "zonal marking" system sounds fine. But in practice it has proven to be a liability.

On the pitch, it is the poor cousin to man marking, at least for Liverpool.

I'm talking specificaly about set pieces here, not general defence.

Nonsense.  If zonal marking were as much of a problem as you make it out we'd be leaking goals right left and centre.  Yet, our keeper has played his entire Liverpool career under this system, facing multiple set pieces virtually every game, and yet still managed to be the fastest keeper to reach 50 clean sheets with the club, while winning the Premiership Golden Gloves award three seasons running for most clean sheets in the league.  Simply put, the numbers do not and never have supported the misconception that the zonal marking system is broken.

bigmick wrote:It is a bit of an ongoing debate this one, and although I'm an advocate of zonal marking I don't go in for the blanket throwing which inevitably comes in whenever anyone tries to debate it. Clearly at the moment we are conceding far too many goals and chances from set-pieces, so it's only reasonable that fans and no doubt the coaching staff are looking at it.

As many have said (including me), it doesn't matter what system you employ if people don't perform the basics of defending properly. By that we mean obviously attacking the ball, staying goal side, not letting attackers run off you unimpeded etc. This is where we are obviously going wrong, the basics aren't being deployed properly. Is the sytem contributing though? Well it's debateable certainly, but certainly zonal marking does to some extent pass the blame onto someone else when very often the real culprit goes unnoticed.

Two goals today and two very different scenarios. First goal for me is 100% Kuyt's fault. I know without reading the match thread many will blame Insua for not winning the header back post against the Swedish centre forward who's name escapes me, but what chance has a 5 ft feck all full back got from a standing start against a big centre forward who gets a run from five yards away? Zero is the answer. He runs off Kuyt unimpeded, unchallenged and unchecked and wins the header with ease. Like Johnson against Tottenham for Bassong's header (when most blamed Carragher), Kuyt MUST be stronger here and take responsibility. Just because we are defending in zones, it does not mean when the ball drifts out of your zone it's feck all to do with you.

The second goal was an absolutely terrible goal to concede and I think but I'm not sure, it was Kuyt again. ball travels sixty yards and Davis does well to back into the Greek and win the knockdown. Can't really fault the Greek fella too much here, Davis has made a good living out of doing this and if the delievery is good (which it was and is with Taylor) it's hard to stop. He knocks it down though, and Avi Cohens boy runs onto it completely unmarked and buries it. Who the feck was picking him up? I couldn't really see it on the telly despite a couple of watches, but I do think it was Kuyt. Whoever it was, needs a fecking rocket up his erse because that is schoolboy stuff.

Not systems, players. That said, if it means we become more resilient by a change while we sort things out, it makes sense.

aCe' wrote:The best header of the ball we have is probably Torres.... he isnt a small player and has a good jump on him and will always put his head in if needed.... To me he should be covering close to the near post, and not in the deep position he seems to occupy now... anything headed towards the near post, hes the first man to deal with it... 2 men down the posts... our best header of the ball amongst the defenders to man mark the best header the opposition has and everyone else can mark zones as they currently do...

Bad Bob wrote:It was Masch who didn't track Cohen for the 2nd, Mick.

s@int wrote:

Bad Bob wrote:

tonyeh wrote:

Bad Bob wrote:Look, for the millionth time--both systems have their inherent strengths and weaknesses.  One is not "obviously" better than the other, though many proponents of man marking make it sound that way.  Moaning about the system almost always misses the point anyway.  Most set piece goals are the result of poor execution by the players working the system rather than the system itself.  We conceded a goal from a corner today using zonal marking and Bolton conceded two goals from corners using man marking.  All three goals, though, were down to poor execution.

On paper Bob, the "zonal marking" system sounds fine. But in practice it has proven to be a liability.

On the pitch, it is the poor cousin to man marking, at least for Liverpool.

I'm talking specificaly about set pieces here, not general defence.

Nonsense.  If zonal marking were as much of a problem as you make it out we'd be leaking goals right left and centre.  Yet, our keeper has played his entire Liverpool career under this system, facing multiple set pieces virtually every game, and yet still managed to be the fastest keeper to reach 50 clean sheets with the club, while winning the Premiership Golden Gloves award three seasons running for most clean sheets in the league.  Simply put, the numbers do not and never have supported the misconception that the zonal marking system is broken.

A few points here Bob, and I am just talking about set pieces NOT OPEN PLAY mate.

1/We have EVERYONE BACK for set pieces so our stats are likely to be ok compared to teams that leave players up field, but maybe we don't gain the benefit of keeping defenders defending rather than attacking our goal ,or the quick breakaway attack as we more often than not clear the ball straight to the opposition as we have no one up field.

2/As a top 4 club we tend to have more possession and conceed less corners and freekicks in dangerous areas than the majority of teams.

3/ If you compare the number of goals we conceed from set plays to the other top 4 sides we conceed many more, especially when you take direct shots at goal out of the equation.i.e. we conceed many more from crosses. 

4/ We depend too much on NONDEFENDERS such as Torres, Riera etc who are more used to finding space rather than trying to block off or deny space.

5/ Its much easier to deny someone a run on the ball when man marking rather than zonal marking, as once the player runs through a zone its more difficult to pick them up, than it would be to run with them.   

We always used to play zonal marking in the past , but we always man marked for set plays, the big problem with the old way was the transition at set plays from MAN MARKING BACK TO ZONAL.

All systems have flaws but maybe the time has come to re assess our system ?

Some interesting thoughts, mate, and I think some have merit.  Quick question, though: do you have any numbers to back up what you say in #3?  I'd need to see some proof before I bought into that one. 

Bad Bob wrote:

aCe' wrote:The best header of the ball we have is probably Torres.... he isnt a small player and has a good jump on him and will always put his head in if needed.... To me he should be covering close to the near post, and not in the deep position he seems to occupy now... anything headed towards the near post, hes the first man to deal with it... 2 men down the posts... our best header of the ball amongst the defenders to man mark the best header the opposition has and everyone else can mark zones as they currently do...

Ace, wasn't it Torres on the near post against Villa the other night, when Davis scored?

aCe' wrote:

Bad Bob wrote:

aCe' wrote:The best header of the ball we have is probably Torres.... he isnt a small player and has a good jump on him and will always put his head in if needed.... To me he should be covering close to the near post, and not in the deep position he seems to occupy now... anything headed towards the near post, hes the first man to deal with it... 2 men down the posts... our best header of the ball amongst the defenders to man mark the best header the opposition has and everyone else can mark zones as they currently do...

Ace, wasn't it Torres on the near post against Villa the other night, when Davis scored?

I thought it was Carra with Torres trying to chase him down... could be the other way round though im not sure...