isn't it a bit like zonal marking?

in that it only gets commented on when something goes wrong.

When a team that uses man-to-man marking, for instance, concedes from a corner you never ever hear commentators remark that man-to-man is to blame. But when teams using zonal marking concede from a corner commentators go on about it endlessly, despite the fact that statistically teams using zonal are no worse at defending corners than teams using man-to-man.

No-one ever says that a team did badly because they WEREN'T employing a technical director, but if a team that does emply one starts doing badly...

Posted By: mr carra on May 20th 2014 at 10:12:15

Message Thread

So if we are going to appoint a technical director, why not appoint a head coach (NCFC) - Maillot Jaune, May 20, 10:00:49
- All seems a bit bizarre (NCFC) - inutero, May 20, 10:20:32
  - but under a DoF you have continuity of philosophy you can choose managers to fit that (NCFC) - Maillot Jaune, May 20, 10:33:53
- it doesn't never work (NCFC) - jAC, May 20, 10:06:38
  - that was kind of my badly worded point... it can work if implemented properly (NCFC) - Maillot Jaune, May 20, 10:20:12
  - It doesn't always doesn't ever work either. Newcastle etc. (n/m) (NCFC) - Pit, May 20, 10:12:16
    - It sometimes doesn't not always fail to occasionally not fail though. (n/m) (NCFC) - Arizona Bay, May 20, 12:01:49
  - isn't it a bit like zonal marking? (NCFC) - mr carra, May 20, 10:12:15
    - Exactly this. (NCFC) - Tricky Hawes, May 20, 10:19:08
  - and at least half the top 6 of the championship (NCFC) - jAC, May 20, 10:11:11

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.