The weakness of a man marking midfield

[Bergen Blade]

The weakness of a man marking midfield was exploited for Aston Villa's first goal yesterday. The first photo shows that Monty is marking Bannan (blue circle); Williamson is marking Reo-Coker (yellow circle) and Britton is marking Pires (red circle). They are all ready to close down their men in case Walker passes the ball to them.

Walker is closed down by Ward, but skips past him and starts a sprint. None of the midfielders are in a position to cover for Ward, and they've no chance to catch him. As the second photo shows, Walker has acres of space, runs at Bartley who buys the dummy and there's also no rescue, no cover from Kozluk or Ertl.

I had a look at Manchester United and Liverpool's organisation and they were definitely zonal marking in midfield, which is becoming the norm, and for me the most effective way of doing it. I hope Adams will change it too when he has had a bit more time.

 

[Foxy]

Regardless of any tactical mismatch or flawed marking system, one major issue was there for all to see yesterday...

Aston Villa were faster and fitter than the Blades all over the pitch (even fat Dunn), which cost us big time.

Bartley should have closed down his man long before buying any dummy, I'd had time to shout at him to close him 4 or 5 times by this stage

 

[Bergen Blade]

Regardless of any tactical mismatch or flawed marking system, one major issue was there for all to see yesterday...

Aston Villa were faster and fitter than the Blades all over the pitch (even fat Dunn), which cost us big time.

Yes, and superior technically, but you should deal with that through organisation. To a degree we must accept individual limitations, but I see no reason why our organisation should be worse than the world's best teams.

 

[silverfox]

All the organisation we could have mastered would never have coped with the pace they had against us.

We are slow and weak......let's hope we can change that.

 

[muttsnuts]

Yes, and superior technically, but you should deal with that through organisation. To a degree we must accept individual limitations, but I see no reason why our organisation should be worse than the world's best teams.

Talking of technical ability, i thought monty had his worst game for a long time yesterday, and iam his biggest supporter. Talking about it with the lads after and all agreed it is time for him to move on, how much longer can we keep waiting for him to come good, same goes for quinn and the very disappointing simonsen.

 

[Bergen Blade]

All the organisation we could have mastered would never have coped with the pace they had against us.

We'll never know, but don't underestimate the value of good tactics and organisation. Norway went more than a year without a win and were 59th on the FIFA ranking in January 2009. We then changed our manager and less than two years later we are top of our group and 12th on the FIFA ranking. The players are roughly the same.

 

[raul]

The same FIFA rankings that had England 4th or 5th just before the WC?? Come on Bergs....

I share your concern though, but for me it's less about man v zonal marking, more about the decision making/reaction times when something has gone wrong. I'm not sure how you can coach this into people unless you are Valery Lobonowsky.

 

[JohnDenver]

I see no reason why our organisation should be worse than the world's best teams.

Good point in principle, but in practice players aren't world beaters for many reasons. Among them are an inability to listen to and absorb information. Not mention, as raul points out, the capacity for quick thought on the pitch.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

The same FIFA rankings that had England 4th or 5th just before the WC?? Come on Bergs....

The very same rankings that have Egypt as the 9th best side in the world. Laughable.

But the point is they jumped 40 spots on it, so there must have been some improvement.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Good point in principle, but in practice players aren't world beaters for many reasons. Among them are an inability to listen to and absorb information. Not mention, as raul points out, the capacity for quick thought on the pitch.

I think zonal marking is easier to understand. Roles are more clearly defined which makes decision making easier. Thick (or positionally poor) players would also work better within such a system.

 

[Sirius]

Yes, and superior technically, but you should deal with that through organisation. To a degree we must accept individual limitations, but I see no reason why our organisation should be worse than the world's best teams.

At least we should be able to make up for a lack of skill by being as fit or fitter than the opposition. No excuse IMO for players being unfit to compete. P.S. Who was the Zone man. ?

 

[Bergen Blade]

The same FIFA rankings that had England 4th or 5th just before the WC?? Come on Bergs....

I share your concern though, but for me it's less about man v zonal marking, more about the decision making/reaction times when something has gone wrong. I'm not sure how you can coach this into people unless you are Valery Lobonowsky.

Does England's position prove that Norway's defensive organisation did not improve in this period?

Regarding the decision making/reaction times, how would you have liked our midfielders to have lined up in the first photo?

 

[raul]

I'd have liked a spare man in there, but there are times during a game where men will not always be exactly where you'd like them. When KW beat his man, a goal wasn't on the cards, that it became so was more down to everyone deciding to stay on "their" man rather than stopping - by fair means or foul - development of the opportunity.

On the first point, a better comparison would be a list of last 5 games at 59th and last five games at 12th. I suspect a raft of games v Monkeytennisania, or Scotland are part of the reason.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Doesn't the co-efficient take that into account? ie: you would have to play chedloads of games against scotland or bhutan to boost your ranking?

 

[raul]

More chance of me understanding the Schleswig-Holstein question than anything cooked up by FIFA Highbs.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Tru dat.....

Here it is in all it's glory

I can't be arsed to explain all those different variables so here's a picture of a bunny with a pancake on it's head link instead

 

[Yossarian]

I'll tell you what else those two images show... their positional sense and movement is far better than ours. Based upon the first image, it's easy to work out which Blade is which on the bottom one. It's not so easy with the Villa players. Walker has not even galloped 10 yards, and you've already got one guy making himself a small garden of space on the wing, you've got people losing their markers, (our 'man-marking' routine going out the window, whilst not closing Walker down either), and players eager to join the attack. I can't even imagine how our midfielders would have reacted to Kozzy skipping past a couple of challenges.

 

[Bergen Blade]

On the first point, a better comparison would be a list of last 5 games at 59th and last five games at 12th.

5 last at 59th:

Ukraine 1-0 Norway
Norway 0-1 Holland
Scotland 0-0 Norway
Norway 2-2 Iceland
Norway 1-1 Ireland

5 last at 12th:
Ireland 1-2 Norway
Croatia 2-1 Norway
Cyprus 1-2 Norway
Norway 1-0 Portugal
Iceland 1-2 Norway

 

[Revolution]

I share your concern though, but for me it's less about man v zonal marking, more about the decision making/reaction times when something has gone wrong.

To me it's more about the incompetence that has left Robert Kozluk in a position to play a first team game for us.

Kozluk was primarily responsible for that goal. If a right back goes on a run into the oppostion half, he should expect to meet a challenge from the opposing left back at some stage.

But this is what you get when your only attempt to replace a poor quality left back (Taylor) is to sign the likes of Stephen Jordan, who has missed half or more of each of the last 3 seasons due to injury and was a cert to get injured again. Of course, this is also how the Ryan France signing turned out...

I might also add that I expect better from a goalkeeper than Simonsen provided on that goal.

 

[Bergen Blade]

I'd have liked a spare man in there, but there are times during a game where men will not always be exactly where you'd like them. When KW beat his man, a goal wasn't on the cards, that it became so was more down to everyone deciding to stay on "their" man rather than stopping - by fair means or foul - development of the opportunity.

In a strict man marking system the spare man also have to mind his man. In a system that mixes the two the players have to continually decide when to stay close to his man, and when to cover for the one pressing the opposition player on the ball. It is these decisions that are difficult to make during games, especially against good teams that have good movement and skilful players with the ability to beat his man. Britton is closest in the situation, but he knows he will not be doing what's asked of him if he's not aggressive and quick to close down Pires in case Walker passes to him.

When Walker decides to go on a run it's all panic with us, and my worry is that we'll always have a little handicap, it's always going to be a little more difficult and demanding if we stick to this system. It is also my belief that it has negative consequences for us going forward, not least by the manager realising he needs work horses at the expense of skilful, attacking players to carry it through, hence Blackwell's teams without wingers etc.

---------- Post added at 09:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:56 AM ----------

To me it's more about the incompetence that has left Robert Kozluk in a position to play a first team game for us.

Kozluk was primarily responsible for that goal. If a right back goes on a run into the oppostion half, he should expect to meet a challenge from the opposing left back at some stage.

I might also add that I expect better from a goalkeeper than Simonsen provided on that goal.

Kozluk can claim that Albrighton is his man and that Ward should never have been beaten. But again it's these dilemmas, these decisions that our players have to make in situations when they're outnumbering us and running. If Kozluk had decided to close down Walker he will have left his man unmarked and would most certainly got the blame. Blaming Kozluk primarily is like saying that it's ok that the situation in photo no 2 arises.

 

[Revolution]

Kozluk can claim that Albrighton is his man and that Ward should never have been beaten. But again it's these dilemmas, these decisions that our players have to make in situations when they're outnumbering us and running. If Kozluk had decided to close down Walker he will have left his man unmarked and would most certainly got the blame. Blaming Kozluk primarily is like saying that it's ok that the situation in photo no 2 arises.

Well, speaking personally if I'm Kozluk and it's a choice between stopping the man with the ball getting in a shot or staying wide to cut out the pass, I'm going to come inside.

 

[boo radley]

Good discussion.
Please explain your zonal marking system?

 

[Bergen Blade]

Good discussion.
Please explain your zonal marking system?

A rough guide explaining both:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zonal_marking#Zonal_marking

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Kozluk can claim that Albrighton is his man and that Ward should never have been beaten. But again it's these dilemmas, these decisions that our players have to make in situations when they're outnumbering us and running. If Kozluk had decided to close down Walker he will have left his man unmarked and would most certainly got the blame. Blaming Kozluk primarily is like saying that it's ok that the situation in photo no 2 arises.

Well, speaking personally if I'm Kozluk and it's a choice between stopping the man with the ball getting in a shot or staying wide to cut out the pass, I'm going to come inside.

If i was kozzy i would have thought that Bartley would have took him out before he got a chance to take the shot.

 

[boo radley]

A rough guide explaining both:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zonal_marking#Zonal_marking

So with regard to your first picture can you explain where you believe our players should have been?

I am not disagreeing with you. I think if you have a lack of pace zonal marking is better.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

Monty is marking Bannan (blue circle)

Really

Looks like they're all ball watching !

 

[Bergen Blade]

So with regard to your first picture can you explain where you believe our players should have been?

In a zonal marking midfield they should have formed a straight line across the pitch just behind (to the left of) the referee. Ward to push forward to close down Walker, the rest of them waiting behind, ready to deal with whatever happens next. You always aim to establish the 1st defender (closing down the man on the ball) with the 2nd defender covering behind him. The other Villa midfielders are irrelevant to our midfielders' position until they get the ball or move forward.

 

[Grecian2000]

Any goal that is scored by a player who has run 50 yards and only beaten ONE man (and that was in the first 2 yards) has quite a few things wrong defensively.
I wonder if there were any suspicious betting patterns regarding the "first scorer" market????

 

[Bergen Blade]

Really

Looks like they're all ball watching !

When Bannan moved back, Monty would often move up the pitch, thus his position is determined by the position of his man, rather than Monty's distance to his fellow midfielders. It's more or less the definition of midfield man marking. Same with Britton, he's more focused on getting close to Pires than covering behind Ward.

 

[Revolution]

Personally I think it should be zonal marking all the way, with one qualification - if the opposition have one forward or midfield player who is so much better than his peers that if you stop him you effectively stop the entire team, that's someone you should be man marking. We faced this problem in 2003-4, when a lot more teams started to man mark Michael Brown.