Our problems using Zonal marking

We are conceding soft goals from corners and other free kicks and long throws. why?
To me zonal marking doesnt work especially from long throw ins.
We just dont have the quality of players to do this. I thought Ellis was at fault for the first goal last night but ive watched it again along with loads of similar situations over the last few weeks. Its clear we are zonal marking.
Last night we ended up with Griffiths zonal marking the area where their guy headed it in from. This is crazy, the lad just doesnt have that kind of defensive heading ability in his game. Having said that I do think Ellis and Rawlinson are ok dealing with high ball headers coming straight at them down the pitch from goal kicks or goalie drop kicks but are far less able to dealing with pacey crosses coming in from wide positions or corners. These situations are really costing us.
The best header of a ball in the club is Turner without a doubt. He was the best defender last night compared to Ellis and Rawlinson.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kelton

We are conceding soft goals from corners and other free kicks and long throws. why?
To me zonal marking doesnt work especially from long throw ins.
We just dont have the quality of players to do this. I thought Ellis was at fault for the first goal last night but ive watched it again along with loads of similar situations over the last few weeks. Its clear we are zonal marking.
Last night we ended up with Griffiths zonal marking the area where their guy headed it in from. This is crazy, the lad just doesnt have that kind of defensive heading ability in his game. Having said that I do think Ellis and Rawlinson are ok dealing with high ball headers coming straight at them down the pitch from goal kicks or goalie drop kicks but are far less able to dealing with pacey crosses coming in from wide positions or corners. These situations are really costing us.
The best header of a ball in the club is Turner without a doubt. He was the best defender last night compared to Ellis and Rawlinson.

---

Turner is absolutely fine against the type of threat that Eastleigh offer. Which even though they won wasn't a lot. However stick him against anyone with pace and put it over his head and we are stuffed. If Turner is the best header of a ball why did he miss that sitter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by queenslandpie

Turner is absolutely fine against the type of threat that Eastleigh offer. Which even though they won wasn't a lot. However stick him against anyone with pace and put it over his head and we are stuffed. If Turner is the best header of a ball why did he miss that sitter?

---

The miss is a good point but it was hooked off the line. In terms of defensive heading Turner just deals with them all. The goal were nowt to do with him.
Pacey wingers will give any CB in this league trouble when your playing 3 at the back if you chip is over the back of them. Thats the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kelton

We are conceding soft goals from corners and other free kicks and long throws. why?
To me zonal marking doesnt work especially from long throw ins.
We just dont have the quality of players to do this. I thought Ellis was at fault for the first goal last night but ive watched it again along with loads of similar situations over the last few weeks. Its clear we are zonal marking.
Last night we ended up with Griffiths zonal marking the area where their guy headed it in from. This is crazy, the lad just doesnt have that kind of defensive heading ability in his game. Having said that I do think Ellis and Rawlinson are ok dealing with high ball headers coming straight at them down the pitch from goal kicks or goalie drop kicks but are far less able to dealing with pacey crosses coming in from wide positions or corners. These situations are really costing us.
The best header of a ball in the club is Turner without a doubt. He was the best defender last night compared to Ellis and Rawlinson.

---

Yes the first goal was Griffiths being beaten in the aerial battle. That's not to apportion blame on Griffiths as it would have been better if Turner, Ellis or Rawlinson had been in the position Griffiths was. It came across to me that we were trying to keep a high line prior to the cross so any Eastleigh player would be offside as Turner who is further forward does raise his hand and looks to the line.

Kelton, you remind me of the poster Kelsdyke who spent most of his time lobbying on here for Jon Stead...
Now, almost all your posts are defenses for Turner...

It's as if you're the same person, and you've got skin in the game, like Turner moved into his house and you're the gardener for both XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_anticlough

Kelton, you remind me of the poster Kelsdyke who spent most of his time lobbying on here for Jon Stead...
Now, almost all your posts are defenses for Turner...

It's as if you're the same person, and you've got skin in the game, like Turner moved into his house and you're the gardener for both XD

---

No idea I came across that way tbh as I think ive spent most of the last month sobering people up as to the performances of Rawlinson and more recently Ellis. They have both played most of the last 10 or so games while we are conceding at leas5 2 goals a game in most of them. That has been my beef ..... we cannot win games if we concede 2 a game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kelton

No idea I came across that way tbh as I think ive spent most of the last month sobering people up as to the performances of Rawlinson and more recently Ellis. They have both played most of the last 10 or so games while we are conceding at leas5 2 goals a game in most of them. That has been my beef ..... we cannot win games if we concede 2 a game.

---

True. I don't think players like that enjoy being in a 3, it confuses them and they end up taking less responsibility. Also, they don't have enough foot / turning speed or comfort in possession to play wide in the 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_anticlough

True. I don't think players like that enjoy being in a 3, it confuses them and they end up taking less responsibility. Also, they don't have enough foot / turning speed or comfort in possession to play wide in the 3.

---

Since we have played at this level the strongest and best defence at the club and in this league in my opinion is four at the back consisting of DKE, Lacey, Rawlinson, Brinkley with Slocombe in goal.

Ellis is capable and good enough to rotate between Rawlinson and Lacey during these multiple games per week. Chicksen has shown he can be rotated on the left. Brindley has been a loss. If we are going back to basics to be solid at the back it’s a flat back four for me.

I suspect that the three centre halves is to give us some extra height in the team. We are a pretty small team overall with just the three centre backs and Wootton providing any real height. The midfield the other night must be the smallest in the league, not to mention DKE at full back!
However, I agree with MM, we have looked the most secure with the back four of Brindley, Rawlinson, Lacey and DKE with adequate cover coming from Ellis & Chicksen.