Does zonal marking have a negative effect on your team's possession?

Like the title says. I wonder if man marking will make your team win the ball from opponent faster/more often.

Well, i haven´t messed around much with those (and mostly play just standard mixed), but in reality that is exactly one of the big differences between the 2. Man marking is often used when playing more agressive defense, zonal marking often when sitting back and allowing the oposition to keep the ball but keep it where it doesn´t hurt (in midfield).

From my own experience, man marking is more effective for regaining possession quickly, used with tight marking and with high closing down. Have all your players in your team to close down exactly the same (all they should have man marking and tight marking ticked in their personal instructions - even strikers), this will ensure your team really keep their shape and close down together as a unit and dont get dragged out of position.

Hmm, in another thread I was questioning why my 4-1-3-2 playing team struggles so much with possession, and now I think this might be the most obvious reason. I use zonal marking.

Let us know how u get on. I've always used zonal marking and had good success and even possession but maybe i could be even better?

More possession doesn't mean automatically better results though. I think I will stick with zonal marking, but tighter, and pressing more.

I use zonal exclusively and pretty much always win the possession battle. Best has been 79% possession with 92% passing. However, somewhere in the high 50s to high 60s is the standard.

My team have no problems getting more possession of the ball while using zonal marking.

I'll tend to use zonal marking when my formation doesn't align against the opposition (ie my back four will only have three attacking players to mark, or the number of central midfielders on each side differs). I'll either select individual players to switch to zonal or sometimes the whole team, if I want to make sure I keep my shape.