KopTalk.com Forums Football Liverpool FC Forum man to man vs zonal marking

very little difference between all, zonal is is doing your own job in your zone and not leaving it for others , man to man can leave gaps in my opinion nothing in the two both good both can be bad .

Combination is best in theory, but can't see it working in practice...I mean, in comes the corner and your colleagues need to know what you are covering.

A zone can't score, but a man can and if he's properly contained your job's done. Problem comes in where the defender is too slow for his man...

Someone has pointed out that the stats actually favour zonal. People act like no one concedes goals from corners where there is man marking but for that to work you need every player to not lose his man for a split second and that can happen ridiculously easy especially with teams using screens and the likes.

stats my arse

Did you not see how easy it was for Terry to lose Agger on Sunday? And then there was no one in the area he ran to to at least compete with him?

Why do you bother? It's too complicated for EMP to understand this. He just thinks he knows it all.

It doesn't matter what anybody thinks about zonal, I myself used to think it was the biggest joke going, but there are hard FACTS, not just pointless stats, that zonal marking concedes less goals from set pieces. I was shocked at the news. But like i said, I think it's just easy to remember comical defending when zonal marking does fail as it seems like a man is totally free. But it happens less than you think.


Unless you're City.

no player wants to look a joke, a manager employing zonal makes his team look foolish and is asking for his p45..

hard facts my arse.....who completed these hard facts?nasa was it. the only fact is zonal marking is stupid. when mourinho,fergie,hiddink top coaches that know about defending start using zonal then people might have a point.
when its left to cookie ego-centric fella's like mankini and rafa then u just know its a whole load of nonsense

So Agger didn't look foolish at all did he? Those coaches all favour man marking and thats their choice but that doesn't make it automatically the best option. Each has their own merits and faults. The problem with both is that you are often times relying on players who have no desire to attack or head the ball coming in to do a job which can make the effort of 8 other players defending a set piece null

yes he did.but he is to blame..not the manager..when the manager looks like a fool for making his players look like idiots then its downhill from there.