Defending at corners...

[RedRock]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

You wont be able to quantify that. 

Because the former can be used to protect the ball winners. Man marking takes the best headers out of the game. Some teams can block off the ball winners or mark them, which some teams called pinning. 

You dont defnd purely on marking man to man. It is relatively easy to combastv and create mismatches etc.

Quantifying that …. possibly not, possibly so. 
 

However, looking at the mess that was Reading’s goal from a corner, it’s blindingly obvious -to me at least - that Atkinson zonally marking open space with no opponent within 3 yards off him is beyond ridiculous. Particularly so, when 5 yards ahead of him there are a bunch of Reading players rising unchallenged for a cross.

[Davefevs]

4 hours ago, Cowshed said:

You wont be able to quantify that. 

Because the former can be used to protect the ball winners. Man marking takes the best headers out of the game. Some teams can block off the ball winners or mark them, which some teams called pinning. 

You dont defnd purely on marking man to man. It is relatively easy to combastv and create mismatches etc.

Since starting watching basketball properly around the same time City got back into the championship, it is easy to see how m2m can be picked off with screens and pick n rolls.  The same happens in football.

A good set of movement and delivery by our opponents against either m2m, zonal or combo can result in a goal conceded.

On our offensive end, we need to get our delivery better.

Edited October 24, 2022 by Davefevs

[Cowshed]

12 hours ago, RedRock said:

Quantifying that …. possibly not, possibly so. 
 

However, looking at the mess that was Reading’s goal from a corner, it’s blindingly obvious -to me at least - that Atkinson zonally marking open space with no opponent within 3 yards off him is beyond ridiculous. Particularly so, when 5 yards ahead of him there are a bunch of Reading players rising unchallenged for a cross.

The errors are collective. The errors and its multiple errors are the zonal markers are too deep and the lack of blocking and players goal side to effect runners. The scorer doesnt have to work that hard to score. If that zonal line (?) steps a metre the picture changes.

 

Edited October 24, 2022 by Cowshed

[Clutton Caveman]

On 23/10/2022 at 10:48, 2015 said:

We gave away far too many cheap corners yesterday it was asking Reading to just go and score from one. 

We need to go man for man at marking from corners and scrap zonal, but my issue is that our players are just not aggressive enough - see Reading when defending our set plays. 

I think we went to zonal marking because NP said we had too many unreliable markers

[2015]

1 minute ago, Clutton Caveman said:

I think we went to zonal marking because NP said we had too many unreliable markers

That is a pretty embarassing thing to admit when discussing Championship level defenders.

[Cowshed]

2 hours ago, 2015 said:

That is a pretty embarassing thing to admit when discussing Championship level defenders.

How many teams in the championship, or at elite levels dont use hybrid systems? Those decisions are pragmatism. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Had a quick look.

We've conceded 4-5 goals from corners in the League this season, 100 corners conceded.

Clearly set pieces are more than just corners but looked through quickly the BBC text commentary and unless I've missed any, those are the figures I reached albeit not looked in depth.

[ProfitInMyPocket]

7 hours ago, Clutton Caveman said:

I think we went to zonal marking because NP said we had too many unreliable markers

He isn't wrong either, our lot aren't aggressive enough in those situations to defend man for man hence why we mark zonally.

[Mr Popodopolous]

On 23/10/2022 at 17:41, spudski said:

Not sure where you've got that quote from...but shouldn't we be ' robust at defending? '

Defending has now become an art in itself...as in not defending...but more not offering a body shape that can be conceived as 'unnatural'.

Defenders are now scared to defend.

Who  try's to block or tackle these days without their hands behind their back?

Yet naturally trying to jump or defend...is now deemed as an unnatural position.

It's a ****** up situation.

Was picking up on a comment by Owers on Saturday.

He basically said, that Reading were rather robust against us and yeah he or one of the guests on Sound of the City tonight contrasted it to our approach, also added that penalties at our level don't tend to get given when grappling at corners etc, more likely the ref warns but concessions of penalties from it apparently are quite rare.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Was picking up on a comment by Owers on Saturday.

He basically said, that Reading were rather robust against us and yeah he or one of the guests on Sound of the City tonight contrasted it to our approach, also added that penalties at our level don't tend to get given when grappling at corners etc, more likely the ref warns but concessions of penalties from it apparently are quite rare.

Just listening at the mo’….good / interesting conversation. I’d like to see Klose / Kalas on the right of Naismith, and Atkinson on the left.  Two CBs who like to attack the aerial ball, wherever they are on the pitch.  That’s not to diss Vyner’s performances this season, he’s improving, but as a CF I’m having an easier afternoon / evening than if Kalas is coming through me in the air, and physical on the deck.

[spudski]

Surely we have to change what we are doing when defending corners?

After what imo, a performance that deserved a win yesterday, we shot ourselves in the foot again when defending a corner.

What are we thinking? 

We zonal mark...and have a couple players trying to block the runners.

Yesterday we allowed three players to be unmarked. 2 on edge of box, 1 at the back of the 18 yard box.

If our players do their job and win the header, which they did, where's the ball most likely to drop? Exactly where Swansea put their 3 unmarked players.

It's not rocket science. 

This is such poor coaching imo. 

Look how Swansea marked at corners. They aren't a big physical side. Yet they marked well. 

We are shooting ourselves in the foot so many times this season.

Something needs to change. 

Man Mark, bloke runners, create room for Max, mark players outside box. 

[Davefevs]

Corner 1:

Wells covering man on edge of box (out of pic). Tame header won by Darling, O’Leary drops cap on it.

Corner 2:

Wells covering Fulton. O’Leary palms away for a throw.

Corner 3:

Wells splits both players on edge of box. Sykes heads clear at near post.

Corner 4:

Wells splits again. O’Leary punches under pressure, Semenyo and Dasilva complete the clearance.

Corner 5:

Ditto Wells although closely marking one player. Ball goes over everyone and Wells latches onto it earning us a throw.

Corner 6:

Ditto Wells. Ntcham now on. First contact by Swansea but tamely for a goal kick.

Corner 7:

Bell now on and splitting two (one out of picture). Vyner wins header for another corner at back post.

Corner 8:

ditto Bell  no3 in space but Tanner can cover. As the ball comes over…

Bell has backed away from the split  no3 still in space  Vyner wins header, Ntcham with aid of deflection, scores.

Corner 9:

Bell splits. Deep corner, Darling wins, Tanner heads behind.

Corner 10:

Bell splits, Dasilva in a position to close Ntcham. Headed away, Dasilva half clears.

Corner 11:

Same as corner 10, Dasilva in touch with Ntcham. King and Williams subbed in on this corner too, rare to make subs on corners. Volleyed away by Sykes.

So, I think we defended them pretty well in the main. The set up generally ok, bearing in mind Nige says we can’t man mark. What do you do?

 

[spudski]

Thanks for that post @Davefevs 

I can clearly see the problem.

imo zonal marking is a waste of men.

It marks space. 

The opposition just place men away from the marked areas. 

They put a few in amongst the zonal marking defenders, to keep those defenders occupied.

Then they put men into areas where no defender is marking. Usually back post or just outside the area.

You can clearly see in the photographs in order, how Swansea changed their tactic. They started in amongst the zonal areas, then later looked to go into the areas that aren't marked.

If a team finds your weakness, then surely you have to adjust accordingly.

Even if the ball is played into the marked zonal area, and we win the header, the ball will most likely drop to the three unmarked players on and around the edge of the box. It invites a shot on target.

 

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, spudski said:

Thanks for that post @Davefevs 

I can clearly see the problem.

But the issue is how do you resolve it, especially if you can’t trust your defenders to man mark?

imo zonal marking is a waste of men.

It marks space. 

The opposition just place men away from the marked areas. 

They put a few in amongst the zonal marking defenders, to keep those defenders occupied.

Then they put men into areas where no defender is marking. Usually back post or just outside the area.

You can clearly see in the photographs in order, how Swansea changed their tactic. They started in amongst the zonal areas, then later looked to go into the areas that aren't marked.

but even those two corners from Pato from S82 with a man free at the back post were still aimed on top of O’Leary!  Manning’s from the other side were deeper and we marked deeper as a result of them stationing their big men deeper.  I’d prefer Tanner to be deeper on corners 8 / 11.

If a team finds your weakness, then surely you have to adjust accordingly.

Which I think we did in the main.  The goal was from a mid-goals corner, not from them going deep.

Even if the ball is played into the marked zonal area, and we win the header, the ball will most likely drop to the three unmarked players on and around the edge of the box. It invites a shot on target.

there were only ever two on the edge of the box, and the intention was for Wells / Bell to split them.

Every goal conceded can usually be attributed to a mistake(s) somewhere in its passage of play.

Our set up has compromises.  Man-marking does too.   If you (in your new role as set-piece coach) decide to move away from Zonal to man-marking, are you gonna take the rap when our defender gets blocked and someone scores from a free header?  All 3 Swansea CBs are bigger than ours.

 

 

[Cowshed]

48 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Corner 1:

Wells covering man on edge of box (out of pic). Tame header won by Darling, O’Leary drops cap on it.

Corner 2:

Wells covering Fulton. O’Leary palms away for a throw.

Corner 3:

Wells splits both players on edge of box. Sykes heads clear at near post.

Corner 4:

Wells splits again. O’Leary punches under pressure, Semenyo and Dasilva complete the clearance.

Corner 5:

Ditto Wells although closely marking one player. Ball goes over everyone and Wells latches onto it earning us a throw.

Corner 6:

Ditto Wells. Ntcham now on. First contact by Swansea but tamely for a goal kick.

Corner 7:

Bell now on and splitting two (one out of picture). Vyner wins header for another corner at back post.

Corner 8:

ditto Bell  no3 in space but Tanner can cover. As the ball comes over…

Bell has backed away from the split  no3 still in space  Vyner wins header, Ntcham with aid of deflection, scores.

Corner 9:

Bell splits. Deep corner, Darling wins, Tanner heads behind.

Corner 10:

Bell splits, Dasilva in a position to close Ntcham. Headed away, Dasilva half clears.

Corner 11:

Same as corner 10, Dasilva in touch with Ntcham. King and Williams subbed in on this corner too, rare to make subs on corners. Volleyed away by Sykes.

So, I think we defended them pretty well in the main. The set up generally ok, bearing in mind Nige says we can’t man mark. What do you do?

 

Step up. City get consistently unnecessarily deep, which is obviously an opinion but zonal marking has to be the control of space, Dropping creates more space, lines do not have to rigid and they can respond to how much space the opposition leaves.

Corner one the team is high. Three the zonal markers are dropping (why?) and eleven they have dropped (why again?). This concedes control of space, and can create advantage for the opposition who have more space for runners, stepping the line ups denys the opposition space for runs on the defending zonal line.

Edited October 30, 2022 by Cowshed

[spudski]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

Quick response fella, as I now have lunch to go to.

Swansea were far more likely to win the second ball from their positioning. They have a 50/50 chance with the first ball, but much higher percentage margin of winning the second ball because of their positioning.

[Midred]

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

Didn't Nige say that they chose zonal marking as the players wern't good enough for man marking?  Is this due to lack of height or physical strength? Seems odd at championship level.

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, Midred said:

Didn't Nige say that they chose zonal marking as the players wern't good enough for man marking?  Is this due to lack of height or physical strength? Seems odd at championship level.

Some of that, but also mental / concentration too no doubt.

[spudski]

3 hours ago, Midred said:

Didn't Nige say that they chose zonal marking as the players wern't good enough for man marking?  Is this due to lack of height or physical strength? Seems odd at championship level.

Problem is...imo...we are even worse at zonal marking

[Red-Robbo]

The delivery Pato provided was considerably better than Swansea's other corner takers. Their effort that curved away from the box and ended up halfway up our half was my favourite.  As soon as Paterson came on however, dead balls were more of a problem for us. 

[OliOTIB]

The bit I never understood is how Pearson and Fleming were defenders but we cant defend set pieces, or in fact not too well at all.

However I felt encouraged by the 3 cbs yesterday especially Pring, considering him and Tanner are notoriously full backs. 

[Davefevs]

35 minutes ago, OliOTIB said:

The bit I never understood is how Pearson and Fleming were defenders but we cant defend set pieces, or in fact not too well at all.

However I felt encouraged by the 3 cbs yesterday especially Pring, considering him and Tanner are notoriously full backs. 

It’s not that difficult to understand…they aren’t the ones taking to the pitch!!!  I know that’s said half tongue in cheek, half facetiously, but it’s a fact.  They can coach, set them up, etc, etc, but if the players can’t execute, there ain’t much more they can do.  Nige was an old fashioned ball winner, he wasn’t that tall, but he was physical and good in the air.  Fleming was a terrier, a 100 percenter.

Atkinson is the closest we have to an aerial ball winner, and he’s not fully dominant, like a Flint or a Baker…and we conceded from set plays with them too.  Kalas has moments where he looks awesome in the air, but it’s moments, not more.

Nige wanted a CB, we couldn’t afford one…we try to do the best with what we have.

We’ve also missed Martin a bit too, but I can’t imagine some of the posters on here would want Nige to pick him over the other forwards…just for his defensive play.

Maybe we wheel and deal in January and bring one in.

[WECANDO]

Why not zonal mark but send two players to mark those opposition players hovering on the edge of our penalty area. Would have stopped their equaliser.

[Davefevs]

12 minutes ago, WECANDO said:

Why not zonal mark but send two players to mark those opposition players hovering on the edge of our penalty area. Would have stopped their equaliser.

Might not have won the first ball on that corner and others with one less in the zone.

Newton’s Third Law and all that!

Don’t get me wrong, despite mine and @spudski’s differing views, I don’t think our current set up is optimal either.  Every set up is a compromise in some shape or form.

In a utopian world, we have players who have been briefed about opposition corners, can identify their triggers and set-ups, and are smart enough to adjust to each one in-game / real-time.  That’s not gonna happen in this current squad.  You still might concede to the perfect delivery, or concede to a fluke though.

[Cowshed]

12 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Might not have won the first ball on that corner and others with one less in the zone.

Newton’s Third Law and all that!

Don’t get me wrong, despite mine and @spudski’s differing views, I don’t think our current set up is optimal either.  Every set up is a compromise in some shape or form.

In a utopian world, we have players who have been briefed about opposition corners, can identify their triggers and set-ups, and are smart enough to adjust to each one in-game / real-time.  That’s not gonna happen in this current squad.  You still might concede to the perfect delivery, or concede to a fluke though.

I would expect a non league team to be able to adjust its line, I will go further youth teams can see a identified trigger to efficiently step up and down.

Your pics. Players react to one Swansea entering the six yard box. A player is making that adjustment and his team mates should be working off that adjustment and its trigger, or they are just reacting and making it up.  

I would question what the defending principles are. Set pieces should be governed by principles, players knowing their reactions and roles. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 31, 2022 by Cowshed

[Tomo]

Any like for like examples of how Swansea shaped up for our corners? A comparison? 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Tomo said:

Any like for like examples of how Swansea shaped up for our corners? A comparison? 

Corner 1:

Aimed to midgoals area, good delivery but headed away by Cabango.

Corner 2:

Taken short, Scott hits it straight at on-rushing defender.  The clip didn’t show the set up, but Swansea open to the 2v1 as defender slow to move out to support his teammate.

Corner 3:

Sykes starts at far post, marked my Obafemi

Then he bends around the central markers / blockers.

Loses Obafemi who is blocked by Vyner.

Unfortunately his glance is so slight, it doesn’t go on goal.  But a classic example of where m2m marking fails…a really simple run around a block.  Good delivery, Shane Sykes didn’t get a better connection.

Corner 4:

Pring blocks Darling, who wrestles him to the ground, but Vyner gets away from his man.  The delivery is just too high for a free Zak, and they head the ball away.

Corner 5:

Great flat delivery from Dasilva.

Just evades Vyner at near post, gets a touch off their player and goes out other side for another corner.

Corner 6:

Another short one…cue the groans.

Well worked, Scott gets a shot off but it’s blocked.

Corner 7:

Deep delivery, James loses out to Darling at far post but we retain ball through Pring.

 

All in all, our corners were well delivered (bar the first short one), and on another day, we might well score.

We see a couple of examples where m2m has its flaws too.

[spudski]

Much prefer the way Swansea set up for corners.

Gives the keeper loads more room.

6 yard area covered well in 'zones'

Every opposition marked individually outside of six yard box.

Also having one man positioned on his own, near post, just off 6 yard box,  to clear under hit corners, which we've done frequently in the past. 

 

[Davefevs]

29 minutes ago, spudski said:

Much prefer the way Swansea set up for corners.

Gives the keeper loads more room.

6 yard area covered well in 'zones'

Every opposition marked individually outside of six yard box.

Also having one man positioned on his own, near post, just off 6 yard box,  to clear under hit corners, which we've done frequently in the past. 

 

Believe it or not, that’s what we did at the start of last season until Xmas, and the only goal we conceded was O’Hare (Coventry away).  But we got sussed out!!!

I wrote this last December.  Maybe I shouldn’t have!!

Helps when you have Baker, Kalas, Atkinson and Martin to attack the 6 yard ball.

[Clutton Caveman]

16 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Might not have won the first ball on that corner and others with one less in the zone.

Newton’s Third Law and all that!

Don’t get me wrong, despite mine and @spudski’s differing views, I don’t think our current set up is optimal either.  Every set up is a compromise in some shape or form.

In a utopian world, we have players who have been briefed about opposition corners, can identify their triggers and set-ups, and are smart enough to adjust to each one in-game / real-time.  That’s not gonna happen in this current squad.  You still might concede to the perfect delivery, or concede to a fluke though.

When we leave a fast player up the pitch most times the opposition mark him with 2 players. I would like to see us leave 2 up the field standing on half way on each touch line.  I think the opposition would bring at least 3 back and each time Max catches the ball a break is on.