Many of our earliest memories of being introduced to playing soccer involve coaches reiterating the basics to us in the hope that they become routine.
One of these initial hammered-home points is man-marking. Coaches around the world teach amateur players, at the youth level and beyond, the mechanics of man-marking and why it’s so important to the sport we love.
So, what is man-marking in soccer? Should your team be using this approach?
What is man-marking in soccer?
Man-marking is when defenders are tasked with being as close as possible to an attacking player, usually from set-pieces, in an effort to prevent them from scoring or stop them from setting up a chance for a teammate.
Each defending player is assigned an attacking player for which they are responsible for shadowing at corners and free-kicks, mostly.
When the ball is in open play, the term ‘man coverage’ is preferred by many in the soccer industry because of the transient nature of open play. The word ‘marking’ implies a degree of closeness, whereas man coverage suggests that defenders are close by but not necessarily within arm’s reach of the attackers.
Where does the concept of man-marking come from?
It’s difficult to establish where man-marking’s genesis was, but we’ve seen how entrenched in soccer systems the use of man-marking has become over the years.
Many accredit Austrian manager Karl Rappan with being one of the first coaches to implement the use of man-marking by design in his tactical setups.
Rappan’s idea, when in charge of the Swiss side Servette, was to shift from the 2-3-5 formation that was commonplace in European football at the time.
The reason behind this is thought to be that his semi-professional side couldn’t match the fitness or technical levels of their professional rivals, so he built a defensive formation that would pave the way for successful man-marking.
Servette’s two wing-halves were converted into full-backs, and two of the attackers dropped into midfield, creating a 4-3-3.
His logic was that the full-backs would practically man-mark the opposition’s wide attackers to neutralize them.
Over time, rigid man-marking principles evolved as they became more frequently exploited. The term ‘flexible marking’ entered the soccer lexicon; this being the practice of man-marking your opponent until they enter another defender’s zone, who’d then take on the responsibility of man-marking them.
Think of flexible man-marking as a hybrid between man-marking and zonal marking, although the emphasis of concentrating on players rather than areas as defenders is key.
Two-time European Cup-winning manager Dettmar Cramer popularized the method of flexible man-marking during his successful spell on the continental stage with Bayern Munich during the 70s.
Examples of man-marking in soccer
Commonly, teams who worry about a specific member of the opposition will look to man-mark that player for the duration of the game.
So mobile and agile is the movement of Lionel Messi, for example, that opponents often assign one, or sometimes two, players to shadow the little magician all game. This is easier said than done, of course, given his justifiably elite reputation in the game.
There is interesting evidence of former Manchester United midfielder Park Ji-sung hassling Lionel Messi at every turn whenever they shared the field. Sir Alex Ferguson must’ve tasked Park, known for his industrious and unrelenting graft, which complemented his technical talent, with the unenviable job of hounding the Argentine.
Speaking of Argentines, ex-Leeds United manager Marcelo Bielsa, famed for his extremely intense training sessions where his players weren’t given a moment of respite, incorporated man-marking as part of his tactics to track Leeds’ opponent into submission.
The idea was that, through dedicating hours to exhausting fitness regimes, the relentless shadowing when out of possession would limit the options available to the opposing players, thus forcing them into panic and presenting Leeds with an opportunity to win the ball.
Is man-marking in soccer effective?
When performed optimally, man-marking can be a very effective method of defending.
British soccer in particular has long favored man-marking, traditionally viewing zonal marking with skepticism and doubt.
Soccer evolves, of course, so this doubt has adjusted itself somewhat. People within the game change, but many believe that man-marking is still the safest approach when marking from set plays.
When you consider the preparation that goes into games, you can see why some coaches and defenders prefer man-marking.
In elite-level soccer, most teams know the majority of the players who’ll be featuring for the opposition on matchday. Therefore, you can better prepare for the game by studying the players you want to mark or that you’ve been told you’ll be marking.
Obviously, you can prepare your zonal marking plans too, but not as specifically and personally as you can with man-marking, contributing to devising your defensive schemes.
Man-marking vs. zonal marking
An obvious advantage to man-marking is that the instructions are simple: you are assigned a player to mark, and you don’t lose track of them. This method of marking doesn’t require a great deal of tactical nous.
Zonal marking takes a lot of coordination, communication, and work on the training ground among defensive ranks and, therefore, is more vulnerable to something going wrong.
Coaches teaching youngsters the principles of defending are wary of using zonal marking tactics because children are less likely to comprehend the principles and discipline required to perform them effectively.
Basically, man-marking is taught to young players, in Britain at least, because it’s easier for them to follow their coach’s instructions. Consequently, when those youngsters eventually grow up, the basics of the man-marking philosophy are ingrained into them as second nature.
Yet proponents of zonal marking would argue that man-marking is too easily exploited by the opposition.
Hypothetically, if you’ve lined up in a 3-4-3 formation with a central defender man-marking a striker, the striker can manipulate the defensive line of three by dropping deep to drag a defender out of position.
If the defender abandons their man-marking instructions by not following the player trying to drag them out of position, then that attacker becomes free and unmarked in the midfield area.
Should the center-back drift forward to follow the player they’ve been assigned, a winger from the opposition can burst into the vacated space, perhaps catching their own marker by surprise.
Both are effective methods of marking in their own right but will be coached differently.
Five tips to get man-marking right
- Stay goal side – it’s crucial that defenders stay closer to their goal than the attackers they’re marking. Doing this makes it far less likely that the attacking player will have a genuine goalscoring opportunity as the defender acts as an obstacle.
- Communication – if you spot a player unmarked, don’t be afraid to verbalize to your teammates that somebody needs to attend to them.
- Focus – the last thing you want as a defender is the player you’re marking peeling away from you after a moment of distraction for them to punish you by scoring. Keep your eyes on your player.
- Be cautious – a lot of modern attackers will look to win a penalty if the chance presents itself. Staying strong is good but don’t overstep the mark; remember not to engage in shirt grabbing or wrestling.
- Keep on your toes – the attacker’s best chance to escape your marking is with bursts of movement. Therefore, stay agile and expect those darting runs at any moment.
Recap: Man-marking in soccer
Man-marking has been around for a long time, and it doesn’t look like it’s vanishing from soccer any time soon.
Ultimately, whichever way keeps the ball out of your defense’s net is the best approach to marking, but many in the industry still believe that man-marking is the way to go when defending set-pieces.