• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Crystal Palace V Manchester United match Thread

It would be nice to have a centre half who defends corners by thumping headers away from the danger zone a la Scott Dann or, for those with longer memories, Eric Young.
We currently employ zonal marking and look very vulnerable.
It will be illuminating to see how we deal with Tarkowski, Calvert Lewin and Keane (or Branthwaite) at the weekend from McNeil's whipped set pieces.
I may have to shut my eyes and cross my fingers.
I'm very skeptical of zonal marking. It seems to be too easy to overload areas which become impossible to defend. If the opposition have a known threat from set pieces then put the most capable defender on him rather than leave it to whoever is responsible for the zone he happens to attack.
 
I'm very skeptical of zonal marking. It seems to be too easy to overload areas which become impossible to defend. If the opposition have a known threat from set pieces then put the most capable defender on him rather than leave it to whoever is responsible for the zone he happens to attack.

One thing I hate about zonal marking is it seems to leave the defence looking rather static and weak. If you have players standing almost still, within a small/limited area, any run at them surely renders them vulnerable? Speaking with a very rudimentary understanding of physics!
 
One thing I hate about zonal marking is it seems to leave the defence looking rather static and weak. If you have players standing almost still, within a small/limited area, any run at them surely renders them vulnerable? Speaking with a very rudimentary understanding of physics!
100% and was what happened yesterday. The look on Lacroix’ face as he stood and watched someone rushing in for free header rather summed it up. When you play with three centre half’s you should dominate defensive set pieces but we look pretty shocking at times.

I much prefer man to man although there is so much holding and blocking now I can understand why zonal has its appeal.
 
One thing I hate about zonal marking is it seems to leave the defence looking rather static and weak. If you have players standing almost still, within a small/limited area, any run at them surely renders them vulnerable? Speaking with a very rudimentary understanding of physics!
Liverpool deployed the 'Zonal Marking' system in the days when Alan Hansen was playing and the club won Championships.They did of course have Bruce Grobbelaar who would come to collect crosses.
Liverpool under Benitez used this system.

Howard Wilkinson used the 'Zonal Marking' system for more than 30 years in football and implemented it in many of the England teams when he was technical director at the FA.

I have had several conversation about the pros and cons of 'Zonal Marking' over the years.
 
It’s one of those situations that seems to make sense but in practice doesn’t often work. It removes responsibility from the players. ‘He was your man’ doesn’t exist.
However it’s all a bit academic when your keeper is stuck to the line.
 
It’s one of those situations that seems to make sense but in practice doesn’t often work. It removes responsibility from the players. ‘He was your man’ doesn’t exist.
However it’s all a bit academic when your keeper is stuck to the line.
I tend to take a pragmatic view of this and don't mind what system we use as long as it works and doesn't allow the 2 free headers which United were allowed on Saturday.
If we repeat this against Everton (Tarkowski) and Liverpool ( Van Dyke) we won't get away with it .
 
Whether you go zonal or man to man there’s always a way to exploit it, especially these days with set piece coaches. Even if you have a keeper who comes for the ball the opposition put in blockers and you then have to try to counter them which leaves space. Tall centre backs who like to attack the ball are probably the most valuable asset in both boxes.
 
We have badly missed having a 'fit' Wharton all season. His injury problems seem to be some sort of secret within the club. Groin strain seems the most likely, but it must be bad as it seems to be hanging around. We really need to focus on getting him back to 100% fitness. If that means surgery and/or rest we should be addressing full repair as priority.
A fit Wharton is a very valuable commodity for our top level performance. Although we can manage without him as we saw in the second half, the first half showed there is no gain playing him half fit.
Sending him out with painkiller injections is not working. This really is priority for us.
 
We have badly missed having a 'fit' Wharton all season. His injury problems seem to be some sort of secret within the club. Groin strain seems the most likely, but it must be bad as it seems to be hanging around. We really need to focus on getting him back to 100% fitness. If that means surgery and/or rest we should be addressing full repair as priority.
A fit Wharton is a very valuable commodity for our top level performance. Although we can manage without him as we saw in the second half, the first half showed there is no gain playing him half fit.
Sending him out with painkiller injections is not working. This really is priority for us.
I thought I read somewhere this is growing pains, he is still a young lad. If so we will have to manage his fitness until he stops growing.
 
It’s one of those situations that seems to make sense but in practice doesn’t often work. It removes responsibility from the players. ‘He was your man’ doesn’t exist.
However it’s all a bit academic when your keeper is stuck to the line.
Defenders are given an area to cover and should the ball reach them, it is up to the defender to clear the danger, accordingly the area assigned to them is their responsibility.
 
Defenders are given an area to cover and should the ball reach them, it is up to the defender to clear the danger, accordingly the area assigned to them is their responsibility.

The problem is that when the ball is played to the boundary line between zones defenders are often unsure who should go for it so either both or neither get involved.
 
The problem is that when the ball is played to the boundary line between zones defenders are often unsure who should go for it so either both or neither get involved.

I have heard it said that Zonal Marking is difficult to coach, more complex than the alternative system of defending.
Defenders defending zonally have to be brave, communicate with one another in addition to adapting to situations.
 
The problem is that when the ball is played to the boundary line between zones defenders are often unsure who should go for it so either both or neither get involved.

It is too easy for a well drilled side to overcome zonal marking. I remember Dave Bassett as Wimbledon in the old 3rd division days summed it up simply. He said he went to watch the opposition and notice from the programme cover picture they defended zonally. He then instructed 2 players to attack the same zone - they scored twice. And that was almost 40 years ago!

Zonal marking has a place and has been mentioned can work if you have a goalie who commands his areas - we do not (as so few goalies do these days).

As with most things a mix seems to be best some zonal (e.g. near pot/corner of 6 yard box), some man marking and some blocking.

Why no one was ear marked to block or mark DeLigt was so amateurish - not only is the bloke about 6 ft 4, he scored only last week.

We need to be better drilled both defending and attacking set pieces. Look at Arsenal yesterday (and last week.. and the week before). Someone stands 'innocently' directly behind the goalie so if he back pedals the two will 'accidently' collide. Their best header, Gabriel makes a late run to the back post and the rest is history. No hit and hope involved - a clear training ground routine.
 
I couldn't get a ticket so watched on Sky where Lacroix looked awful so I was surprised to hear those of you who went to the match thought he played well....you don't get the whole perspective on TV.
There were times when he looked like a rabbit in the headlights! He needs to adapt to the speed of thought and reactions in the Premiership and the change for him to zonal marking...and he needs to adapt quickly if we are to continue with two in midfield.
I really do think he will come good...and hopefully it won't take too long.
 
It is too easy for a well drilled side to overcome zonal marking. I remember Dave Bassett as Wimbledon in the old 3rd division days summed it up simply. He said he went to watch the opposition and notice from the programme cover picture they defended zonally. He then instructed 2 players to attack the same zone - they scored twice. And that was almost 40 years ago!

Zonal marking has a place and has been mentioned can work if you have a goalie who commands his areas - we do not (as so few goalies do these days).

As with most things a mix seems to be best some zonal (e.g. near pot/corner of 6 yard box), some man marking and some blocking.

Why no one was ear marked to block or mark DeLigt was so amateurish - not only is the bloke about 6 ft 4, he scored only last week.

We need to be better drilled both defending and attacking set pieces. Look at Arsenal yesterday (and last week.. and the week before). Someone stands 'innocently' directly behind the goalie so if he back pedals the two will 'accidently' collide. Their best header, Gabriel makes a late run to the back post and the rest is history. No hit and hope involved - a clear training ground routine.
Part of the problem is that we don't have dominant aerial defenders.
Anderson was probably our best (and even he didn't excel).
Most of our current squad fail to even get off the ground and Arsenal would potentially have a field day against us with their prowess on corners.
I go to games just hoping that we don't concede corners.
 
I couldn't get a ticket so watched on Sky where Lacroix looked awful so I was surprised to hear those of you who went to the match thought he played well....you don't get the whole perspective on TV.
There were times when he looked like a rabbit in the headlights! He needs to adapt to the speed of thought and reactions in the Premiership and the change for him to zonal marking...and he needs to adapt quickly if we are to continue with two in midfield.
I really do think he will come good...and hopefully it won't take too long.
I wasn't overly impressed but perhaps it was a reflection of the team rather than him individually as he came out top in most stats compared to our other defenders including most interceptions, most aerial duels won and most likely to appear in a French-based detective series.
 
I wasn't overly impressed but perhaps it was a reflection of the team rather than him individually as he came out top in most stats compared to our other defenders including most interceptions, most aerial duels won and most likely to appear in a French-based detective series.
Add that to his long pass accuracy stat from earlier in the season.

He's still not where we want him to be, but compared to the QPR game I thought he looked miles better.

Much more confident coming to win the ball, instead of waiting to see how play developed. The stats back that up
 
Part of the problem is that we don't have dominant aerial defenders.
Anderson was probably our best (and even he didn't excel).
Most of our current squad fail to even get off the ground and Arsenal would potentially have a field day against us with their prowess on corners.
I go to games just hoping that we don't concede corners.
I also go to games and look through my fingers when the opponents get a corner. I was more concerned that Maguire would come on and score from a corner than I was we would score because he was defending. As for our corners, they are still poor :-(
 
Back
Top