Everyone back for Opposition Corners

[Andy @ Allerton]

Anyone else get annoyed by this?

 

I'd like to see two of our pacier players that aren't too good in the air to be kind of near the halfway line.

 

For two attacking players to be up there encourages at least two defenders (probably three) to be covering them.

 

This usually means that the best headers (Their Defenders) are out of the way and as we're a physically big side this should allow us to defend the corner and also adds the possibility of being able to get the ball out quickly and counter-attack - whereas usually if we manage to clear the first ball in - as there is no one out there - it usually comes right back in - causing more problems.

 

I was unhappy with this system when Houllier used it and I'm not too keen on it now either.

[psl]

I agree and I don't understand why people like Rafa, who have forgotten considerably more about football then I'll ever know, continue to do it. I'm sure there's a very good set of reasons that he instructs the team to defend this way however.

Edited January 15, 2007 by psl

[johngibo YPC]

 

 

This usually means that the best headers (Their Defenders) are out of the way

 

 

i disagree that they would send there best headers of the ball back. Say if an opposition left two up front for our corner. We would still send Sami/Crouch up. It would be the like of Finnan who would stay back. #

We are very good at defending corners. I don't personally see the point of sacrificing this even slightly for a greater chance of a fast break, There are plenty of opportunities in agame to attack.

 

Me and my dad have this conversation every game by the way. He is very much in your camp

[RP]

 

This usually means that the best headers (Their Defenders) are out of the way

 

So we push Bellamy out when we are playing Chelsea and they will leave Terry and/orCarvalho back to cover him?? Get on the phone to Rafa now.

 

 

Genius.

[Rory Fitzgerald]

I agree with the line of thinking in this thread. I dont agree that they would leave their best headers back, more likely their full backs and a midfield maybe but thats just a small point.

 

I'd like to see Bellamy and Gonzalez take a high line or whoever has the pace, Pennant etc etc.

 

I think the benefits are, the chance of the fast attack as was pointed out, but also, when we clear a ball it enables the guys who hang back time to get another ball floated back into the box whereas our strikers could probably pressure them and enable us to clear our box and get out.

 

Actually, now that I think about it.

 

1 in goal

2 on the posts

2 up the field

 

That leaves 6 in the box. I think we normally apply 3-4 across the 6 yard box and 3 to cover runners, so maybe it doesnt stretch to leaving 2 up front.............................

[Leo No.8]

I hate it as well.

 

When have you ever seen Bellamy for example clear a corner. It's pointless having a player who isn't great in the air standing in your own box when you could have him standing on the half way line where he'll worry the opposition more.

 

Strikers who are decent in the air of course should be used to defend corners, but we pulled Owen back for years, now we're doing the same with Bellamy. I've never understood why modern managers all seem to favour this approach.

 

Leave your little nippy striker on the half way line, it just makes sense.

[Guest Kev]

We've being doing this for years, it started under Ged.

 

I hate it as well.

[Tosh]

11 zones need defending (badly)

[IcelandicFan]

I think Chelsea have everyone back when they defend corners. Drogba is very good in the air and he clears the ball with headers very often for Chelsea when they defend corners.

 

I don´t see a problem with everyone back to defend a corner.

[Raj]

Nearly every team that defends using a Zonal Marking system, employ 11 men, in or around the box. This is very common.

 

On a related note, did anyone watch Goals on Sunday? Kamara was banging on about how bad West Ham were on set pieces and that Curbishley needed to sort it out. Nigel Worthington commented that zonal marking at set pieces was a far superior method of defending set pieces and that Pro Zone stats were very supportive, compared to a man marking system. Seemed to shut up Kamara, who has been going on about how crap zonal marking is for ages.

[jimmylibel]

I'm only guessing but I think it also has to do with the way teams break from a corner. When you have one man left up front at the half way line it tends to be one of the smaller players anyway (the others are needed for defending). So when the ball breaks the temptation is to play it to them as soon as possible. However smaller players (in general) are not necessarily the best at holding up the ball.

 

There is also the large gap that then exists in the play and what seems to happen is that the ball is lost, the opposition can pump another ball in and it is more dangerous for the outrushing defence.

 

However, breaking from the edge of the box generally allows you to play shorter, easier balls into space - allows more of your teammates to support the break, means you're playing facing goal as opposed to having your back to it and also means their last men back are forced to come out to the attacking player eventually leaving more space in behind.

 

Again this is pure speculation - I have no stats to back this theory up.

Edited January 15, 2007 by jimmylibel

[Rory Fitzgerald]

I'm only guessing but I think it also has to do with the way teams break from a corner. When you have one man left up front at the half way line it tends to be one of the smaller players anyway (the others are needed for defending). So when the ball breaks the temptation is to play it to them as soon as possible. However smaller players (in general) are not necessarily the best at holding up the ball.

 

There is also the large gap that then exists in the play and what seems to happen is that the ball is lost, the opposition can pump another ball in and it is more dangerous for the outrushing defence.

 

However, breaking from the edge of the box generally allows you to play shorter, easier balls into space - allows more of your teammates to support the break, means you're playing facing goal as opposed to having your back to it and also means their last men back are forced to come out to the attacking player eventually leaving more space in behind.

 

Again this is pure speculation - I have no stats to back this theory up.

 

For Christs sake man, research OPTA Stats, we need figures, percentages, pie-charts and bar graphs with 3-D graphics and stimulating colours !!!!!

[theredfella]

Anyone else get annoyed by this?

 

I'd like to see two of our pacier players that aren't too good in the air to be kind of near the halfway line.

 

For two attacking players to be up there encourages at least two defenders (probably three) to be covering them.

 

This usually means that the best headers (Their Defenders) are out of the way and as we're a physically big side this should allow us to defend the corner and also adds the possibility of being able to get the ball out quickly and counter-attack - whereas usually if we manage to clear the first ball in - as there is no one out there - it usually comes right back in - causing more problems.

 

I was unhappy with this system when Houllier used it and I'm not too keen on it now either.

 

Well said, couldn't agree more.

[12twelve]

Chelsea leaves Makelele up front for their corners. That's probably worse than having 11 men back.

[realtarragona]

Works for me as long as we keep defending corners well.

[JRC]

 

On a related note, did anyone watch Goals on Sunday? Kamara was banging on about how bad West Ham were on set pieces and that Curbishley needed to sort it out. Nigel Worthington commented that zonal marking at set pieces was a far superior method of defending set pieces and that Pro Zone stats were very supportive, compared to a man marking system. Seemed to shut up Kamara, who has been going on about how crap zonal marking is for ages.

 

I saw the start of that conversation, and in fact Kamara suggested himself that WH may be better off going Zonal (although he admitted he didn't like it). They showed the unholy mess as the players tried to Man Mark, and Fulham pushed and shoved them around so much, admiitedly with good movement, that no-one in the WH defence was actually watching for the ball to come in. An instructive piece of Video, for sure.

[Knox_Harrington]

Agree with Jimmy. A lot of sense in there.

 

On the zonal/man front my theory on it is that ex-players don't like zonal because it's difficult to implement and quite anti-football in many ways. At some point in their career they will have had a manager want to try it but they probably will have struggled - as we did at first. The reason I say "anti-football" is that with man marking you have your man, you win your battle, job done. It's the one-on-one competitiveness that footballers, all sportspeople, quite like as opposed to "cleverness".

[Ripley]

I'm only guessing but I think it also has to do with the way teams break from a corner. When you have one man left up front at the half way line it tends to be one of the smaller players anyway (the others are needed for defending). So when the ball breaks the temptation is to play it to them as soon as possible. However smaller players (in general) are not necessarily the best at holding up the ball.

 

There is also the large gap that then exists in the play and what seems to happen is that the ball is lost, the opposition can pump another ball in and it is more dangerous for the outrushing defence.

 

However, breaking from the edge of the box generally allows you to play shorter, easier balls into space - allows more of your teammates to support the break, means you're playing facing goal as opposed to having your back to it and also means their last men back are forced to come out to the attacking player eventually leaving more space in behind.

 

Again this is pure speculation - I have no stats to back this theory up.

Riise goal in the Community Shield was a good example of the supported break rather clearing in the direction of a player left up only for it to come right back.

 

Better to claim good possession from an opposition corner than have it come right back at you.

[psl]

But shouldn't we be able to break with the players we have and still have someone on the half way line to provide another option? The players shouldn't have to resort to kicking it up to some short a*** on the half way line?

 

We should be able to keep a speedy player on the half way line, providing a threat and a further (but not only) passing option.

[andyg]

Was watching the Chelsea/Wigan game on tv and the commentator mentioned a couple of times, that when Wigan had a corner Chelsea has 3 players on the halfway line - they were either confident they would handle the corner easily or were just plain arogant (they were 1-0 up at the time if that makes any difference).

[Gray - YPC]

Here's my school of thought... (and I'll be honest, I'd leave at least 1 player up as well).

 

When defending a corner you don't care too much where the ball goes... as long as you get it clear. Accuracy is not the issue... clearing it is.

 

When attacking a corner you not only need to win the header but need to get some degree of accuracy with it to be able to score.

 

As such, if you've got a packed penalty box there is a lot less change of someone getting a free header compared with if there's less players there, where a bit of movement could result in a free header.

 

I think this is also the reason why on a lot of our set-pieces we don't try and score with the first header, but look to win a header on the back post and it's that header that puts the ball in the danger area. That way, we don't need such accuracy on the first header for it to be a chance in front of goal.

 

Probably total rubbish, but I think it's a logical reason!

[jimmylibel]

But shouldn't we be able to break with the players we have and still have someone on the half way line to provide another option? The players shouldn't have to resort to kicking it up to some short a*** on the half way line?

 

We should be able to keep a speedy player on the half way line, providing a threat and a further (but not only) passing option.

 

Depends on your view of players but I'd say Rafa think they might be too tempted to take what looks like the 'easy option' of pumping it long.

 

Course it might also be that Rafa's view of zonal marking involves players being outside the box as much as in it and that we need to numbers to best cover all the ground.

[_00_deathscar]

I think this is also the reason why on a lot of our set-pieces we don't try and score with the first header, but look to win a header on the back post and it's that header that puts the ball in the danger area. That way, we don't need such accuracy on the first header for it to be a chance in front of goal.

 

Perhaps, but it's probably more likely that we just have the worst corner kick takers...ever...

[Rory Fitzgerald]

Here's my school of thought... (and I'll be honest, I'd leave at least 1 player up as well).

 

When defending a corner you don't care too much where the ball goes... as long as you get it clear. Accuracy is not the issue... clearing it is.

 

When attacking a corner you not only need to win the header but need to get some degree of accuracy with it to be able to score.

 

As such, if you've got a packed penalty box there is a lot less change of someone getting a free header compared with if there's less players there, where a bit of movement could result in a free header.

 

I think this is also the reason why on a lot of our set-pieces we don't try and score with the first header, but look to win a header on the back post and it's that header that puts the ball in the danger area. That way, we don't need such accuracy on the first header for it to be a chance in front of goal.

 

Probably total rubbish, but I think it's a logical reason!

 

There is a general stigma attached to conceding goals from set-pieces from all quarters so that could be the reason why they pack the box out.

[RafaShanks]

Perhaps, but it's probably more likely that we just have the worst corner kick takers...ever...

 

Oh how we have missed Gary Mac.