That's great! Particularly because it was player-driven.

If I can offer some advice, it is to instruct them that every 3rd or 4th corner, try a traditional kick rather than a short corner. Having set plays, plans, etc are great - but when the opposition team comes to expect things it's good to change it up, and you may just catch them off their guard because they'll be expecting what you've been routinely doing.

This is what my 11's team did last year. I like to keep the ball so used a lot of short corners and then used the odd "traditional" corner to keep the opposition on their toes.

Just hadn't thought too much about defending them.

I was doing completely zonal, using something I got out of 442 Performance.

Then others were using just a player on each goal post, and man marked, picked up players individually.

Eventually I've gone for that, then four players marking zones in front of the goal, with others picking up loose payers and one player in advanced position.

I like PV4s model though and will try it next time I coach a 11 v 11 team. There is little instruction from FFA NC on this, except to say don't spend much time on it.

Socceroos concede v Kuwait from a corner and didn't have a man on the post - which would have saved the goal.

Ange obviously has his reasons but it just doesn't make sense not to have a man on the posts.

2 goals in 2 games is a little concerning.

Yes a man on the post would've saved it but basic marking and positioning was the problem with that goal

First goal in the Tajikistan game could have easily been stopped by a bloke on the far post.

I'm no tactical genius but what are these coaches thinking by not having a bloke front and back post?

Some coaches would prefer to have the extra man on an opponent or to outnumber the opponents when the ball comes into the box. No decision will be perfect when it comes to defending in a corner. I have always let my keepers decide whether they would prefer a player on each post or just the front post. Then I tell the rest to mark and follow their man.

Unless there's 8 of them in the box there's always enough for a man on each post.

I hear you but the risk of a shit goal, and that 1st one dribbled over the line last night, outweighs any negatives if you ask me.

A player on the the far post the other night and Australia wouldn't have scored their first against the UAE.  Could have easily hacked it away.

Why?  Someone enlighten me.

And again.  

the stats from scoring at a corner are 1 in 49,
to counter attack from opposition corner and score is1 in 7 , so better to setup for a counter.

Defend first, attack later, IMO.

The system I drew up above ^^^^^^ IMO is still the best. The team I play in now, we have ditched one of the 2 zonal headers on the 6 yard box and use only 1 whom stands solo in the danger zone. I still like the 2 better. 

Your fullbacks / sweeper etc aren't going to counter so why not have them on the posts.  It'd be a rare team that has 10 players in the box defending a corner anyway.

@PV4.  Yes.  I'm a convert to zonal marking in the box. (With a tweak or 2.)

Decentric - did you ever use "my" system? Any feedback? Interested to hear from anyone whom took it and ran with it.