Liverpool FC Forum

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:43 am

Bad Bob wrote:
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.

Only the evidence of my own eyes Bob

I had a look around and couldn't find anything, but we have conceded 7 goals from set plays this season....... as Chelsea and the mancs have only conceded 2 goals altogether, I am pretty confident that we have conceded more goals from set plays than they have this season

by **Bad Bob** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:56 am

s@int wrote:Only the evidence of my own eyes Bob

I had a look around and couldn't find anything, but we have conceded 7 goals from set plays this season....... as Chelsea and the mancs have only conceded 2 goals altogether, I am pretty confident that we have conceded more goals from set plays than they have this season

Don't doubt what you're saying at all, mate...for this season!

I was, of course, more curious how we've got on in previous seasons compared to our rivals. It would be a very interesting set of stats to compile, no doubt, but I'm not volunteering! :upside:

by **aCe'** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:03 am

Bad Bob wrote:
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...

Alright, I've found this clip. Check around the 3 minute mark. It looks like Torres starts in front of the near post but not exactly on the post...

Yea but still a little deeper than i would have thought he should have been... Torres was definitely in the wrong there... You'd want him to be positioned between the oppostion player and the goal, in that case he was chasing Davies from behind him and failed to make a telling challenge in the air... Carra was also at fault there losing his player in the first place and Johnson and Lucas were just caught doing nothing and not actually covering the near post...

Ideally, you'd have one of the two (preferably Johnson since hes the new guy and probably needs time to settle into the whole zonal marking thing) stood shoulders in the near post to cover the angle... You'd have Insua stood at the far post in a similar manner blocking the far post... As things stand, we're conceeding too many goals as has been pointed out from setpieces and particularly corners... Just try to commit as many bodies closer to the goal line... If we're not going to win the headers, we might aswell try and stop the ball from getting into the net having lost the header... Most teams do that regardless of whether they do zonal or man marking... Its cost us plenty of goals and it needs addressing whether we go with a zonal or man marking system...

And with regards to Saints point, im pretty sure we concede way more than Chelsea and Manutd do from set pieces... Both sides have better headers in their lineups and they cover their area, and challenge in the air better than we do..

Problem is, when players dont quite grasp the concept, theyre caught between attacking the ball and covering their man... We need to be better at both if we're to make the zonal marking thing work early on... In the long run im sure we'll deal with the whole thing better.. But for now, we need to figure out a better way of defending setpieces thats for sure...

by **account deleted by request** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:16 am

I got this of RAWK ..... NEAR ENOUGH 25% of our goals conceded came from set plays(.... seems a pretty high figure to me.

goals conceded from set pieces last season

man city, direct from free kick, won 3-2
spurs, carra og from corner lost 2-1
blackburn, from corner won 3-1
psv, from corner won 3-1
newcastle, from corner won 5-1
everton, from free kick drew 1-1
everton, from corner drew 1-1
portsmouth, from corner won 3-2
middlesboro, alonso og from corner
chelsea, 2 goals from corners lost 3-1
chelsea,direct from free kick drew 4-4

don't think i've forgotten any, as far as the league goes 6 goals were conceded from set pieces (not including elano's direct fk or any pens) out of 27 goals

by **LFC2007** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:38 am

Bad Bob wrote:..It looks like Torres starts in front of the near post but not exactly on the post...

by **LFC2007** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:43 am

bigmick wrote:Yeah I'm not sure I necessarily go with the need to man mark because we are smaller Bob to be honest. I do think that if you are at a hieght disadvantage, it becomes even more importanrt that you perform the basics properly, but I don't think that by definition that means you should man mark.

It's like a defender who has no pace. He has to be perfect in his positioning, every tackle has to be spot on and he often has to concede space to an attacker simply because he hasn't got the gears to compensate. Contrast that with a pacy defender who can "get himself out of trouble" by going through the gears, often the pace masks what is technically inferior play.

We're like that at set pieces. because we aren't commanding physically, we HAVE to do the basics right, and the main one we aren't doing is impeding blokes who run off us. We're letting people wander around in the box willy nilly, and we aren't big enough or strong enough to get away with the poor play.

I agree with this, btw.

by **Bad Bob** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:43 am

s@int wrote:I got this of RAWK ..... NEAR ENOUGH 25% of our goals conceded came from set plays(.... seems a pretty high figure to me.

goals conceded from set pieces last season

man city, direct from free kick, won 3-2
spurs, carra og from corner lost 2-1
blackburn, from corner won 3-1
psv, from corner won 3-1
newcastle, from corner won 5-1
everton, from free kick drew 1-1
everton, from corner drew 1-1
portsmouth, from corner won 3-2
middlesboro, alonso og from corner
chelsea, 2 goals from corners lost 3-1
chelsea,direct from free kick drew 4-4

don't think i've forgotten any, as far as the league goes 6 goals were conceded from set pieces (not including elano's direct fk or any pens) out of 27 goals

Hmmm, strokey beard time. :Oo:

by **bigmick** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:20 am

That said if you are going to concede 27 goals, it would be reasonable to assume at least some will come from set plays. You could even argue that for a big four team, it stands to reason you'll concede proportionally more of your goals this way because against the likes of Bolton, set plays are really the only time when they load up the numbers into your penalty area.

I remember when Bent scored on the first day of the season at Bolton Megson was gutted they'd conceded from a free kick. Despite accepting it was a brilliant header for bent to get above Kevin Davies (which it was) he came out with a stat about their defence. He said (and I'm not 100% on the numbers) that they didn't concede such a goal for feck knows how long, and had successfully defended 56 such situations, or in 56 games or something fecking ridiculous.

The problem we have is that not only are we conceding regularly, but we look liable to concede regularly. We aren't defending with any authority.

by **JoeTerp** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:33 am

If we match up with our best headers on their best headers from 1 to 11, its likely that against Bolton like teams we are going to have the disadvantage over the majority of the match ups (probably why we have such trouble scoring on set plays too). If we had to have any of Macsherano, Insua, Yossi, etc. man marking, although it would be against smaller players on the other team, their smaller players will be bigger than ours. In a zonal system is seems to me that you can mask some of these weaknesses because you can KNOW that your best headers of the ball will be in the positions on the pitch that are most dangerous to score from. In a man mark system, whoever El Greco was marking could just sit out at the back post and then leave us weak right in front of the 6 yard box in terms of dominant headers.

Also this running start business I am not buying. You also have a big disadvantage when you have to chase somebody around, when they know where and when they are supposed to be, but you have to react. You also have to spend a lot of time looking at the man you are following and might not get the best jump on the ball compared to someone who is only looking at the corner taker.

You are also a lot more susceptible to "pick" plays in a man marking system. ANd I would argue it is much easier to plan against a man marking team because all the usual plays will work against all the man marking teams and its just about beating your man on the day or not. You have to come up with all new ideas when coming up against a zonal team. And also, I don't think that we line up in the exact same zonal set up every time do we?

I think one of our problems seems to be a lack of communication on calling out runners.

Also, just want to point out that the post was one-sided because a lot of the arguments against ZM are already out there, I think that they systems are neutral and it has a lot more to do with execution

by **LFC2007** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 2:54 am

Good one, Joe, especially the last bit - execution is the key whatever the system.

Another couple of points. We generally need everybody back for set-plays because of our lack of aerial presence.

If you look at Villa's second we had two players on the edge of the area (just out of picture) who could have plugged that gaping channel that invited Davies into the run. In theory, that would have made us tighter as a unit - it would have made it harder for him to get a clear run ahead of Torres and Carragher. At the very least, it would have made for a more awkward header for the guy, which is more or less the second best outcome to winning the header outright.

Even without everyone back, we should have done much, much better as a unit. Leaving Torres' mistake aside the organisation and coordination of the zones wasn't right. Carragher should be standing goalside and closer to Torres, while Skrtel should be tucking in to boot. Lucas ought to be on the front post, and Gerrard, Johnson and Kuyt should be tucking in more, closing the space in the channel (why? because it's a key danger area). Once the zones are sorted the players then need to know what their primary roles are - where the danger is likely to come from and to anticipate it, so for Johnson and Torres, it would be the ball into the near post and the runs from behind - they need a shout too. If one of the players lets Davies get an easy run through - it has a direct knock-on effect for the others, because they are passing from one zone to another - one zone of responsibility to another. If drilled and executed well enough, this interdependency can be a major strength as it's hard for attackers to find space and thus the system isn't easily penetrated. If not, though, it can be a major weakness as spaces open up and players become exposed to said runs. So, the responsibility for defending the set play relies on a higher level of collective understanding, compared to the man-marking system that dictates 'your man, your responsibility'. It's a percentages game and for reasons outlined in previous discussions on this topic, as a general rule, I prefer the zonal system. Under a man-marking system I think we'd be exposed to more risk given our lack of aerial ability (technique and movement, that is) & physicality.

by **akumaface** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 4:28 am

LFC2007 wrote:
Bad Bob wrote:..It looks like Torres starts in front of the near post but not exactly on the post...

Actually, you will notice that we never cover any of the post during corners as it is part of the plan I believe. I recall there were several times that this had helped created offside when the opposite players got the ball in the end. But i could only recall 2 offside (only from my mind) from last season.

In the meantime, I don't believe in Zonal marking right for us as we look lost in many occasions. If we have someone like Sami, then it might work but it seems this year Carra's performances had dropped quite significantly even with Skrtel. Just hope Rafa will fix this or it will be a long season....

by **Octsky** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 6:13 am

our defense against set piece is a joke.
saw the replay for Bolton's first. there was 3 white shirts waiting on the line for the ball that is head across the goal. 2 missed and the final white managed to turn it in.
why are our defenders??
outside the 6-yard area, ball watching.

by **bigmick** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:32 am

LFC2007 wrote:

You could almost distill where we are going from by looking at these four pictures.

Picture 1: We don't set up too bad. We are about to be hit by a training ground routine which takes advantage of our predictability in set up (one of the undoubted flaws of defending zonally), but in the first picture we are Ok. I like Insua's position and the fact he is watching his man, and I like Johnsons awareness and body position too. The guy on the move (Sidwell) is going to pull Lucas out of position and create a hole for Davis, who is about to run off Kuyt (I think), completely unhindered. Carragher is alert to it and has left his man (Abonlahor possibly) and passed him onto Skyrtel.

Picture 2: Mission accomplished for Sidwell. He's gone in front of the near post and pulled Lucas in with him, creating a hole for Ashley Young to deliver it into. I'm not particularly blaming Lucas for that, although he could have left him to Johnson who is right onto it. Curtis Davis knows what's coming, and has ran off Kuyt and got infront of Carragher, and is about to attack the space better than Torres.

Picture 3: Ashley Young is right on the money. The ball is too high for Johnson and Lucas to be a factor, and too flat with too much pace for Carragher to get back right side. The drill is probably to try and hit Torres and let Curtis gamble on getting in front. The communication between Kuyt/Carragher/ Torres isn't good enough, and Torres's attack of the football isn't strong enough to compensate. As a side note, I like Skrtels position and he certainly hasn't ball watched this time. I am nervous about the fact a bloke appears top left of screen with nobody anywhere near him, and I don't like Reina's position either. On the night I thought he could have done better, and this picture confirms it. He's contemplating trying to come for it at this point, and gets trapped in no mans land. Davis arrives, and the football is about to arrive right on cue.

Picture 4: Davis is left with a fairly simple task. He is up early, in front of the two people who are jumping against him, and the goalkeeper is in no mans land. He need only divert it in the direction of the goal and it's 2-0, which is of course what he did.

I'd like Kuyt to work much harder to not allow Davis to run accross the goal unimpeded. I'd like the communication between the players to be much better, and I'd like the front man (Torres) to attack it with much more urgency. I'd also like the goalkeeper to be much more decisive. Any one of those things happen and it probably isn't a goal, but none did, so it was.

by **Alanay** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:40 am

I always questions this zonal marking, as more often than not, the defenders lost their guarding ground. On the first Bolton's goal yesterday, there were more white shirts inside the 6 yards than the reds.

by **Owzat** » Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:48 am

And one defender trying to mark them while the rest stood there watching. I just get the feeling they don't know how to apply the system half the time, when it does "work" it's merely because the way the ball falls rather than the system actually working. I'm sure Rafa must have watched their 1st goal and can't possibly expect us to believe that is how zonal marking is supposed to go, stick to man2man as CBs pick up strikers and the rest are allocated by abilities in the air corresponded to the man they are marking ie next best header marks their next best header, second best marks their second best..................... etc

We've shipped SEVEN goals in four games, and how many from set-pieces? Diaby must have been taking lessons from Lucas yesterday, the mancs got a match-turning penalty (again) and to be honest I reckon Shrek was looking for it a bit.

Liverpool FC Forum

Zonal marking... - The discussion thread!

Who is online