Goal-side comparison
There is a general acceptance that being goal-side is important in football and the zonal shape is testimony to the need for players to get behind the ball as a collective unit. However, embedded in this zonal shape is the secondary objective, which is to play the offside trap. So all zonal shapes will have a flat backline. This is significant as the nature of a flat back line effectively abandons the principle of goal side in the most crucial part of the field, which is in front of goal. This means any opposing forward can position themselves alongside the defenders in the backline. Worst still, the attacker is facing the goal and the defender has their back to it.
This type of defensive strategy is purely in the name of playing the offside trap. It is quite astonishing that the whole of football, without any exceptions, choose to base their entire defensive policy around the offside trap. This forced inability for defenders in the backline of defence to apply good defensive technique, the first principle of which is being goal-side, then permeates other aspects of their defensive play where the playing of offside may not be a factor (see blog: Being goal-side).
This mentality extends to all parts of the team. For players who are not in the backline of defence, they know that there is always someone else to cover for them so their commitment to retaining a goal-side position isn’t always convincing. This manifests itself in players going to ground trying to win the ball or simply not tracking a player. This highlights the importance of individual responsibility when it comes to defending.
All this is further exacerbated by the zonal system that does not clearly match player against opposition player. The matching process instigates pride for the defender in doing a good job on their respective marker. The individual defender comes to own the process. This is one advantage of playing a man-to-man defensive system. Each player knows their exact task and is accountable for their opposite number. This is also helpful for the coach who can see which players are making errors consistently.
The real problem with zonal defending is one of ownership. The players themselves don’t always know, in advance, who is responsible for marking a particular opponent before they get the ball. Time and again offensive players are getting free because there has not been an allocation of marking responsibility. This is the problem. This is how it is.
It is difficult to underestimate the importance of individual defence. The only way I can convey the significance of maintaining a goal-side position on one’s opponent is by looking at the emphasis placed on this aspect of the game in another sport, the sport of basketball.
Defence in basketball
The general principles of playing defence are the same for both sports. It is true that in basketball the ball is played with the hands as opposed to the feet and there are some minor differences in defensive technique with regard to this but the stock-in-trade one-versus-one scenarios are virtually identical.
The essence of defending in basketball is for the defender to stay between the player you are marking and the basket. There is a particularly good reason for this in basketball, as the defence will have the rebounding advantage when a shot goes up. The inside position allows the defender to box-out his marker’s route to the basket. If the defence secure the ball they will be looking to fast-break.
It is a commonly accepted principle in basketball that the player with the ball has the initiative. The offensive player makes the moves and the defender has to react to them. This is the same in football. The odds are stacked against the defender in any one-versus-one situation. The team man-to-man defensive system attempts to avoid this isolation by providing support to the player defending the ball. This is what really distinguishes team man-to-man from the more familiar term in football of ‘man-marking’.
A typical defensive position for a defender in basketball is to be semi-crouched with one foot slightly in front of the other, weight on the balls of the feet and evenly distributed. The emphasis is on trying to maintain a basket-side position. It is not necessarily to try to win the ball. Occasionally, this may be possible but it is not the objective. This is where the principles of defending in basketball maybe in complete contrast to football.
The basketball player has to learn how to move about the court and the technique for this could be considered ungainly. With their feet shoulder-width apart and adopting a virtual sitting-down position the defender is able to make quick, shuffling movements and thereby stay in touch with the sudden movement of an opponent. In order to shuffle quickly it is vital to be in a low position. This movement is an anathema to most footballers. One player who has had some experience is John Terry who has commented, in a fairly suspicious tone, of the crab-like movements. The point is, it gets the job done.
Basketball teams will devote significant parts of a training session to defence. Drills in defensive stance and moving in this position form part of every session. The defender needs to be able to move as quickly as the attacking player in order to maintain a basket-side position. This is the golden rule. Always stay between your marker and the basket.
Maintaining a basket-side position enables the defender to try and force the attacker either towards the sidelines or towards a fellow defender. Most players have particular characteristics in their play, which, as defenders, it is important to weigh up. These can vary from a particular type of dummy, for example in football a step-over, to a particular side a player likes to go that will favour either their left or right foot in the case of football.
Being goal-side enables the defender to try to edge the attacker towards their unfavoured side. Of course, the attacking player still has the irritating presence of the defender to contend with. This is where the team man-to-man comes into its own when the assistance from another defender is available.
The whole business of learning to master defensive technique is best done through the playing of man-to-man defence. The reason for this is the clarity provided by knowing the identity of the person you are to be responsible for. This enables the defender to plan in advance their movement and body position before their marker even receives the ball. In so doing, the defender can be marking their opponent as they receive the ball, rather than once they have gained control of it. There can be immediate pressure on the ball. The body language is much more tigerish. It’s not an amble towards the ball once the player has gained control of it. A whole new level of intensity ensues.
It is far more difficult to achieve these objectives with zonal defending due to the fact that there is no obvious matching of defender with opponent. A matching process will occur but usually only after the opponent has received the ball. Defenders in football can easily find themselves marking different opponents during one phase of play.
The zone defence in basketball is more manageable mainly because of the smaller area and fewer players to organise. Even so, there is a ‘passing-over’ process where the defenders will have to assume responsibility for the marking of a particular player and then pass this responsibility to a teammate if this same player moves to another part of the zone. Defensive players are therefore constantly talking to one another and making sure that the opposition player in possession of the ball is being marked and is accounted for by a particular defender.
Playing zone defence in football
In football, this ‘passing-over’ process is virtually impossible to implement. A forward can move through zones within the defensive format so quickly that if the ball arrives in a particular part of, say, the penalty box there is a good chance that they will not be marked and the identity of the defender that should have been marking the forward is also likely to be unknown at that point.
Add to this the constraint of trying to play for offside and the restrictions this imposes regarding the movement of defenders all makes the defender’s job a particularly difficult one. This is why, despite all the best intentions, opposition players invariably find themselves unmarked, but not only in front of goal in the midfield areas as well. These are quite often the players providing the killer assist.
The playing of offside and the zonal system of defence compliment each other perfectly in football. But, in playing with a flat backline you are effectively placing more trust in the officials and their ability to make the correct decisions according to the laws of the game than you are in your own players’ defensive technique.
Basics of defending
If you think about the purpose of any defensive strategy, its primary objective is not to concede goals. To have the best chance of achieving this, opposition players ought to be marked, as far as possible. The question, therefore, is which system best delivers on the marking of opponents?
An analysis of Premier League goals scored in the first week of the season revealed that some 64% of goals were conceded where players were completely unmarked (see blog dated Nov. 6 2018). This figure is not a one-off. A similar survey carried out on the first week’s games in the 2015-16 season was 67%. These are high percentages for goals to be conceded in this way. They are certainly high enough to provoke thought and discussion.
Is it time to start thinking about things in a different way?
No offence intended 