Football is a game of small margins.
Over time, that realization has lent itself to increased focus on set-pieces, with clubs across
the world beginning to delegate more resources to improving their routines and analysis.
FC Midtjylland of the Danish Superliga and Brentford of the Premier League,
Matthew Benham’s clubs, are well known for their emphasis on set-pieces,
but there’s been an emergence of specialized set-piece coaches in much
larger European clubs too. This season alone clubs Manchester United, Arsenal
and Aston Villa have all employed new coaches tasked with improving their dead-ball success.
Innovation is not simply limited to attacking variations however, as increased effectiveness
in offensive routines has also led to increased awareness in defensive schemes - and which setups
have the best chances to successfully prevent a scoring opportunity or a goal.
So, what are they? What are, for instance, the different ways to defend a corner?
Man-marking, zonal-marking and hybrid defending
(a mix of both man-marking and zonal-marking) are the three main systems
when defending against a corner-kick, but what are their respective strengths and weaknesses?
Perhaps the most traditional of the three systems, pure man-marking setups are becoming
less common. Originally used due to the simplicity of implementing the system,
more and more teams have found ways to exploit opponents who use man-marking defenses on corners.
In a man-marking setup,
each defending player is tasked with marking an attacking player on the opposing team,
and it becomes their responsibility to ensure that their marker is unable to make contact with the
incoming corner, whether by out jumping them, or simply blocking off their route to the ball. Many
managers favoured the accountability it places upon each of the defenders to do their jobs.
Another benefit is that it allows for the defending team to tactically assign their best
aerial players to mark the most dangerous aerial threats on the attacking team.
For example, if the attacking team has a tall, powerful striker known for being a
threat on set-pieces, the defending team can than choose their best defender to mark them.
Though the setup is still utilized by some clubs,
increased attention to detail and smart corner routines have made these setups
somewhat obsolete. By setting up their players in what is known as “packs” or “stacks”,
attacking sides have found clever ways to gain an advantage over their markers.
Defending players have a harder time maintaining close distances to their men
and can be blocked off through various attacking routines which are designed to create space
and separation. One other potential weakness is the lack of support if
one player fails to do their job correctly and their marker is able to move freely in the box.
A zonal marking system requires the defenders to have responsibility for
a ´zone´ within the penalty box as opposed to an opposition player.
Though there are various ways of splitting the zones up, a typical set-up would be two
lines of players, in either a 4—4 or 5-3 shape around the 6-yard box.
Zonal-marking can help to ensure that a defensive player is positioned in
all of the most dangerous areas of the box when the corner arrives,
and allow the defense to contend the attacking players in an aerial challenge.
It does have its disadvantages though. A well-placed corner can create some uncertainties
for the defense to deal with. Players may be indecisive when the corner arrives around their
zone, and may be slow to react, or expect their teammate to challenge for the ball,
leaving the attacking player free. An alternative problem which may arise from the uncertainty - is
if multiple players from neighboring zones contest the for the ball at the same time
and crash into each other, making it more difficult for clean contact on the ball.
The lack of defined responsibility can be a problem.
Another weakness which may appear is when an attacking team is well prepared to face
a zonal marking system. Teams have begun to take advantage of the fact that the defenders
have responsibility for certain zones by overloading them and creating situations
where the attacking team outnumbers the defending team in the most dangerous areas.
Quickly becoming the preferred setup for many clubs, a hybrid-system is a combination of both
man-marking and zonal-marking. Taking various principles from each of the systems,
a hybrid-system typically assigns 3-5 players with zonal responsibility,
and the rest with either man-marking assignments or positioned in an area to counter-attack.
In this setup, the zonal players will generally lineup around the 6-yard box covering the width
of the goal. These are often the most dominant aerial players in the side, who´s only assignment
is to be the first player to the ball and clear the danger. The remaining players are often tasked
with marking the most dangerous threats on the attacking team, their primary goal is to make
it difficult for the attacking players to reach and attack the ball. These types of setups also
work best when the goalkeeper is adept at coming off their line and claiming crosses.
The weakness of the man-marking and zonal-marking systems may also appear
in the hybrid-system. There will always be players able to make a free run towards the
ball who are not being marked, attacking overloads in various zones may also occur,
and since the best aerial players are often in the zonal areas defending,
it will often leave man-marking mismatches in favor of the attacking side.
There’s no perfect solution. Each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses,
and application depends on the coach, obviously, but also team personnel and individual strengths
and weaknesses. And preparation is obviously key too, because as set-piece innovation gathers pace,
it’s increasingly important for a team to know what they have to defend against.