Zonal Marking: It's not as evil as you think it is

Zonal marking at corners – defending pre-assigned zones, rather than sticking to a specific opponent – is generally ridiculed in British circles. Pundits and commentators claiming to be experts of the game latch on to zonal marking errors and are quick to blame the entire idea and system. By doing so, they flaunt their ignorance to the world; and in turn, instill a similar ignorance in the large proportion of football viewership which is exposed only to English football.

Goals from corners can, more often than not, be put down to individual mistakes. Both zonal and man marking demand very high – and sometimes, unrealistic – levels of concentration from defenders and keepers alike. Blaming the system and the tactics of the manager is a rather bull headed approach, employed by those who only choose to see what is in front of their eyes when a little analysis will often point the finger at the real issue.

Take for instance, Celtic’s 0-3 loss at home to Milan. Celtic, normally very good at defending set pieces, conceded two goals from corners which turned the match on its head.

Kaka scores at Celtic Park to give Milan the lead.

Kaka, circled in red, scored the first from inside the six yard box. Celtic were using a mixture of zonal and man marking; the two players judged to be the greatest danger, Zapata and Balotelli were being blocked (circled in black) near the penalty spot but the setup was largely zonal. Celtic’s keeper, Fraser Forster could and should have come to collect the ball, seeing as the goal was scored from within his ‘zone’.

The error which led to Milan’s second goal was more subtle and is a very typical example of an individual error in a zonal marking setup.

Celtic set up for the corner which lead to Milan’s second.

Note the position of Swedish right back Mikael Lustig (circled in black) as the ball is played over everyone’s head.

Cristian Zapata scores Milan’s second of the night

Nocerino, at the back post, plays the ball back across goal and Zapata (who ironically, was one of the two players man marked in the build up to the first goal) has an easy tap in. This was possible however, because Lustig (again, circled in black) had now moved out of his zone. It is interesting to see that Zapata scores from the exact same position Lustig was originally in, in the first frame. Had Lustig held his position, he would have been able to clear the ball before Zapata could get a foot on it.

The commentator notes that Forster could have come to collect for the first goal, but is then quick to blame the system, commenting after the second that both goals were “all down to zonal marking”.

Then, in the post match highlights show, Glenn Hoddle goes on to say this.

“It’s that old adage of zonal. I hate it. I hate zonal from corners. I see it time and time again, teams getting goals scored against them. I just cannot understand, why clubs do that.”

He then proceeds to be confused as to why Celtic were defending zonally, claiming that “they don’t normally do that”. Celtic have, in fact, been defending zonally (at least in Europe) all season.

This coming from a former manager of the English national team. No wonder England fail to perform at major tournaments.