Firstly, lets look at what zonal marking actually is. If you ask the average bloke in the pub, you will probably get the answer "the defenders mark zones instead of players", which might be right, but is a huge oversimplification and shows why some people may be quick to criticise the system without understanding it. The idea of zonal marking is to cover as much area as possible, whilst also being flexible, so that dummy runs by attacking players don't create large spaces in the box. Another key aspect of the system is that defenders are supposed to cover an area a set number of yards in front and to the side of their starting position, NEVER BACKWARDS. This means defenders can and should attack the ball if it enters their 'zone', therefore they have to be responsible for judging whether the ball is there to be won or not. Commonly, there will be a number of players in a line across the 6 yard box, a 'first man' to cut out any low balls, players at the edge of the area to deal with a ball that is cut back, and to help with attacking breaks, and if the goalkeeper so chooses, men on the post. This is a debate for another day, but I will say this; Managers often get the blame if a goal is scored with no men guarding the posts, however this often up to the goalkeeper, something that was evident for anyone that watched the last instalment of Being: Liverpool where Pepe Reina stated he preferred a player on the edge of the area, rather than at the far post, a fact echoed by Rafa Benitez when asked why he switched from having players on the post to not in between his first and second season (the transition between Dudek and Reina)
Like any method of defending set pieces there are variations of zonal marking, whether that be semi-zonal- where key danger-men are man marked and the rest are zonally marked, or a difference in the number of men on the 6 yard line, or at the posts, however the principle remains the same.
The key to zonal marking, as argued by Martin Keown (who is a massive advocate of the system) is flexibility. In a recent article, he wrote "If you are facing Andy Carroll and he moves into a zone where you don't have one of your best headers, then you need to switch to make sure you have your best man there. If two opposition players come into your four metre zone, you have to drag another player in to help you. If your standing with nobody to mark in your zone, move to the edge of it to deny someone space who might later try to run in there." This is an aspect that is often overlooked when analysing its flaws, and may go some way to proving that it is the players that are at fault when a goal is conceded rather than the system. Furthermore, by setting up in a zonal marking system, defenders can track the flight of the ball, rather than just focusing on the player they are marking. Finally, with the increased influence of European styles of football, ie where possession football is encouraged, the system (if worked on properly in training) can lead to a fast and effective counter-attack, rather than hoofing the ball clear and having to deal with a second wave of attack.
There are however, several drawbacks, or limitations to using zonal marking. The point that is most commonly cited when criticising zonal marking is that due to the movement of the attacking players, there is a chance of players being unmarked, when in between two potential zone, a problem that was all to evident when the 5ft 10 Niklas Mosiander snuck in behind Joleon Lescott (6ft 1 1/2) and Vincent Kompany (6ft 2 1/2) to give Ajax a 2-1 lead against Man City last week. Another problem is that players can attack the ball with a running jump which may give them an advantage in their leap.
Of course, an issue with zonal marking is that when it goes wrong, it goes REALLY wrong, and can lead to an unmarked header, naturally exposing it to criticism. The question often posed by supporters of the system is why is every goal conceded from man-to-man marking is not scrutinised in the same way as zonal marking. This was a point Rafa Benitez raised in typically candid fashion in this clip when questioned about the system during his time as Liverpool boss.
Benitez is one of the main proponents of zonal marking and the effectiveness of the system during his Liverpool reign can be seen in the table below, where Liverpool had the best defensive record from set pieces, two season running, whilst being in the top 4 of the list in 5/6 of his seasons in charge. Even the one year (2007/8) where Liverpool fell short of this high standard, they still conceded the same amount of goals as the 2010/11 season when Hodgson/Dalglish were in charge.
This debate is unlikely to go away unless no goals are ever conceded from corners, but for some reason I think that isn't going to happen. Regardless of whether you favour zonal marking or the traditional man-to-man marking system, I'm sure you will agree comments like Souness's are a bit harsh. It seems that man-to-man is tried and tested and is the simplest route to go down, however if as a manager you are willing to take the risk of implementing zonal marking, and as long as you drill the method into the players well so that everybody knows their responsibilities, it can be a very effective tool.
Please feel free to leave your thoughts and comments in the box below!
No comments:
Post a Comment