Quote Originally Posted by Tactician View Post
Some users have said that:
(1) zonal marking is best for playing against stronger opponents;
(2) man-on-marking is best for playing against weaker opponents.

This does not make any sense, if both points are considered. If (1) is correct, then (2) is not correct. If zonal marking is best for facing stronger opponents, then why should it not be even better for facing weaker opponents?
I don't think so as I think man marking needs better quality than your opponent in order to win the ball and start counter attack
So in zonal marking you may outnumber attackers and this would be your last hope to stop his stronger attack but without a counter attack ( sometimes )
Against weaker teams your defender is strongrer so he can get the ball easily without the need of many defenders so it would give more chances to attack

To sum up, man marking needs quality so one defender can take the ball easily and start a counter attack and this means more goals
Zonal marking Outnumber attackers and this may take more time so many defenders would can take the ball again or throw it away ( in live animation matches ) and this maybe useful against stronger teams.

However this is only my opinion
I have less experience than all of you as I have been playing the game for only 2 months and I'm discussing this to learn more