Who can remember the last time a real side went 424?

Why is it the standard response of nearly every manager from lippi to ramos?

You've never seen a team push their wingers forward?

A couple of times this season Manchester United have had Rooney, Berbatov, Ronaldo, and Tevez on the field. Could that not be seen as a front 4?

maybe it doesn't look like a neat 4-2-4 where 4 start up front, but during the attack many teams end up with 4 up front because of runs and such.

When i was playing under 16's football, the left and right midfielders were always told when we were attacking they effectively pushed up to join the strikers to make a front 4, and then got back and tucked in defensively when we were defending.

If they're in the formation as strikers that means they stay up there like a center forward and don't come back. You've seen 4 players flat up front like in fm?

When i was playing under 16's football, the left and right midfielders were always told when we were attacking they effectively pushed up to join the strikers to make a front 4, and then got back and tucked in defensively when we were defending.

Isn't that called playing out wide? :confused:

I agree that there could be more variation in the style of AI teams going all out attack.

it's the kind of thing that causes "cracking tactics" imo

It's not actually a formation that is used, more an effect that happens. If a side needs a goal they do sometimes push the wide players right up creating this 4-2-4 effect.

It's not actually a formation that is used, more an effect that happens. If a side needs a goal they do sometimes push the wide players right up creating this 4-2-4 effect.

as i said.. in reality the wingers don't STAY up front so it would be more of a 4-2-amr/aml-2, still: it shouldn't be 95% of manager's stock move

Isn't that called playing out wide? :confused:

I don't really get what there is to be confused about.

You play 4-4-2

When attacking, the wide players push up so the formation becomes 4-2-4

Its quite simple really.

Well thats just 4-4-2...................the whole point is about genuine 4-2-4 system, I dont see how wingers pushing on, as they're meant to, equates to 4-2-4.

My point was to merely illustrate that 4-2-4 or at least a scenario in which 4 players are in attacking positions, is used frequently within football matches.

It's not as clear-cut as on FM, but it still happens.

maybe it doesn't look like a neat 4-2-4 where 4 start up front, but during the attack many teams end up with 4 up front because of runs and such.

This post also says exactly what i have just said, yet i don't see it being questioned?

Mourinho has been doing this with Inter, I believe.

I remember that Wenger used to do it. When in trouble he would bring on Kanu and Wiltord to support Henry (I think) and Bergkamp and it was definitely a true 4-2-4 formation. It was some years ago, but it happened

luton did on saturday

Yeah, Mourinho has not only been doing 4 forwards, but up to even 5!

I remember and have a picture of them:

Three strikers: Adriano, Cruz, Ibrahimovic

Two very attacking wingers/half strikers: Quaresma, Mancini

And Mou got his win that day too, as shown... :-)

Man City Play 4-2-4 With Wright-Phillips and Petrov on wide as attacking Mids/Strikers!

I don't know why people doubt the existence of 4-2-4. Have you never seen a game where a team playing 4-4-2 pushes their wingers up and keeps them there in an attempt to get a goal?

Before wingers were given defensive responsibilities, many teams played 4-2-4 for the entire match. The 4-4-2 was created when wingers were given defensive duties. When teams push their wingers forward in search of a late goal, they are basically reversing this development so 4-2-4 is the correct representation of that formation.

4-2-4 wouldn’t be an issue if the AI’s version of it wasn’t a blatant cheat tactic (of the kind that would have fanboys and pseudo-gurus howling “cheat” if a human player came up with it) that scores the requires amount of goals unless an anti 4-2-4 cheat tactic set-up is introduced.

Even then you’re at the mercy of the game delaying your changes while the 4-2-4 cheat tactic does its evil work. You even have to do this if you’re a premier league team at home against conference opposition; such is the effectiveness of the 4-2-4. This is beyond stupid.

I know on FM7, I watch the game with the AI formation screen visible. The very nanosecond they change to 4-2-4 I hit “pause” and change to an anti 4-2-4 tactic. The AI usually implements my tactical changes while the AI team are running about celebrating yet another 4-2-4 cheat tactic goal.

I don’t know if this delay in tactical changes has been improved on FM9 or whether the AI is hardwired to ensure high profile team’s 4-2-4 is entirely irresistible.

The 4-2-4 suggests that the two wide attackers would stay forward no matter what. I dont think that is true of the modern game. There will always be some responsibility for these players to help out in midfield. Therefore, the 4-2-4 as it is represented in FM is a massive rareity in the real world.

i use 4-2-2-2 with my wingers moving up to make a 4-2-4..

Arsenal do it all the time when they need a goal: Bendtner wide right, various wide left but lately Vela.

The 4-2-4 suggests that the two wide attackers would stay forward no matter what. I dont think that is true of the modern game. There will always be some responsibility for these players to help out in midfield. Therefore, the 4-2-4 as it is represented in FM is a massive rareity in the real world.

What manager would have his wingers defending when his team needs a goal in the dying seconds?

To those who say it is a "cheat" tactic: changing your tactics to try and win a game isn't cheating. If you can't defend against a 4-2-4 that's your own fault.

Reading did against Derby last season (with Kitson, Lita, Long and Doyle). We also did (with Kitson, Ferdinand, Forster and Owusu) when we needed a goal a few years ago on the last day against Wigan.

What manager would have his wingers defending when his team needs a goal in the dying seconds?

To those who say it is a "cheat" tactic: changing your tactics to try and win a game isn't cheating. If you can't defend against a 4-2-4 that's your own fault.

Well if the manager doesn't give a crap about conceding another goal then why stop at just 4 up front? I've never understood by the AI can't just use a really attacking 4-4-2 with the wingers/widemen pushing right up the field with high mentallity and often forward runs. A team pusing it's wingers up is playing some variation of a 4-2-2-2 not a true 4-2-4.

The true 4-2-4 tactic should never be seen outside of a must win match, not every game when the AI is behind by one goal. It's a cup game, derby or title contender trying to break down a stubborn defensive tactic, I've seen relegation candidates using it in the first game of the season. I'd prefer to see more teams use a 4-3-3 if they need a goal, it's a good attacking tactic that you see a lot more then a true 4-2-4.

I have never needed an anti-424 tactic, sure i go a tad more defensive late on, but even when I forget or CBA to do that, they never seem to score more than a proportional amount.

i've got a pretty excellent counter to 4-2-4, I pretty much always seem to grab another goal when I use it in the last 10 mins if they are using 4-2-4.

i dont really have a problem with the pc using it and accept that its the representation of the ai manager instructing his team to go all out - however if they went all out by using just the sliders to tell a 4-4-2's wingers to be ultra attacking then it would be hard for the user to identify it (seeing as you can't see the ai slider instructions).

I've never understood by the AI can't just use a really attacking 4-4-2 with the wingers/widemen pushing right up the field with high mentallity and often forward runs.

A 4-2-4 is a really attacking 4-4-2. The only difference between the two is that in a 4-2-4 the wingers don't come back to defend when their team loses possession.

I agree with your point about it being over-used though. It is especially silly when teams that don't even play 4-4-2 go to 4-2-4.

Didn't Middlesbrough do it in their UEFA Cup run a few years ago?

I'm pretty sure they threw four strikers on the pitch and got a result in the closing minutes on more than one occasion.

Yeah they did, Dafuge. Loads of teams do it.

I've no real problem with AI managers doing it in FM as I usually score another goal or two on the counter

EDIT: I'm also sure Liverpool played it occasionally when they were playing 4-4-2 and then sent Babel on to the left.

Due to Babel and Kuyt's tendency to push forward it was effectively 4-2-4.

Like: Babel, Torres, Another FW(was Keane!), Kuyt

“To those who say it is a "cheat" tactic: changing your tactics to try and win a game isn't cheating. If you can't defend against a 4-2-4 that's your own fault.”

Ok, I’ll try and make it even easier.

A tactic that forces Man Utd into extreme measures against a conference team is a cheat tactic.

Whether or not you have an effective anti-4-2-4 AI tactic is 1: questionable that the AI’s tactic actually FORCES you to take said extreme measure, not matter who you are, and 2: leaves you entirely vulnerable from the time the AI goes to it’s cheat tactic to when the AI deigns to implement your anti-4-2-4 measures.

As I said before, your anti 4-2-4 tactic is usually implemented when the AI are running about celebrating their inevitable 4-2-4 cheat tactic goal.

Understand?

Any denial of this blatant fact is mere fanboyism. Sheer doormattery.

The 4-2-4 (at least until FM8) is an AI cheat. Accept it. Live with it.

I'm no fanboy. I've been pretty critical of the game's inadequacies, but opposition teams changing tactics during the course of a game isn't one of them.

Having your fullbacks stop making forward runs when the opposition plays four up front is hardly an "extreme measure." It's just common sense.

You're just not very good at FM. Accept it. Live with it.

Can I ask how many people watch football in the flesh rather than on TV?

I don't believe you can attend matches regularly and not believe that 4-2-4 exists. When teams are desperate to chase the game and get a goal back they often leave the wide players up and don't expect them to come back. It is a perfectly logical (though horribly flawed) gamble. When you watch on TV, you see about 1/3 of what is actually going on.

The only problem FM has is that it implements it too early. It is generally an injury time, desperation ploy. I can't think of too many teams implementing it with 10 minutes left.

I've never had a problem defending it personally. It just makes it easier to mark the wingers and to counter attack.

I've seen 4 forwards, or at least something like it before. What I can't figure out is why they wouldn't pull one of the defenders for a forward, instead of midfielders? Wouldn't a 3-4-3, or 3-3-4, make more sense than only having two midfielders? Your midfield would get totally overrun in that formation IRL. Also, the amount of space that is opened up for the AI forwards is totally unrealistic. Having 4 forwards would totally crowd the attacking zone, not leave the wide open gaps that we see the AI exploit.

I don't have any problem with 4-2-4 formation but the OPs point about the time it takes to implement tactics for human players is important. We really shouldn't have to wait for the ball to go out of play to make basic tactically changes, e.g. everyone forward/back etc.

4-2-4 wouldn’t be an issue if the AI’s version of it wasn’t a blatant cheat tactic (of the kind that would have fanboys and pseudo-gurus howling “cheat” if a human player came up with it) that scores the requires amount of goals unless an anti 4-2-4 cheat tactic set-up is introduced.

Bit of a self contradiction there, surely: if you can counter the tactic then it isn't a cheat. And why does having a tactic that works well against another tactic make someone a fanboy? I see it as me playing the game in front of me and not the game I wish I was playing.

And besides, it is in no way nearly as effective as it was in FM08. I remember I had a great tactic that countered it pretty much every time (unless I was playing Arsenal), but I've not had the need in FM09. Just play more defensively and at a slower pace. It ain't a cheat.

In reply to the OP, 4-2-4 a) exists in real life and b) works for the human user as often as the AI. Except I go 4-3-3, which I find more effective.

Luton do this every week, not joking.

Our manager seems to think more attackers = more goals = wins.

Well yes, but only if we can learn to defend.

Don't see why top real life managers wouldn't use it as long as their defence is in order.

A tactic that forces Man Utd into extreme measures against a conference team is a cheat tactic.

Whether or not you have an effective anti-4-2-4 AI tactic is 1: questionable that the AI’s tactic actually FORCES you to take said extreme measure, not matter who you are, and 2: leaves you entirely vulnerable from the time the AI goes to it’s cheat tactic to when the AI deigns to implement your anti-4-2-4 measures.

As I said before, your anti 4-2-4 tactic is usually implemented when the AI are running about celebrating their inevitable 4-2-4 cheat tactic goal.

Understand?

Any denial of this blatant fact is mere fanboyism. Sheer doormattery.

The 4-2-4 (at least until FM8) is an AI cheat. Accept it. Live with it.

Okay, I may be opening myself up to cries of fanboy here, but I have to agree with other posters on this - you are just not very good at this game.

Top level teams have struggled against inferior opposition many times over the years. A conference tactic that forces Man U or Chelsea or Arsenal into "extreme measures" is NOT, never has been, a "cheat" tactic. Not in real life, not in FM.

To say it's questionable that you should NEED to counter 4-2-4 is ridiculous. Whenever - in every game ever played all over the world - if you are playing against a team that is throwing a lot of players forward, no matter if you are Man U playing Bournmouth or vice versa, you are very likely to concede a goal if you do not change your tactics to accomodate this. It's the nature of football. HOWEVER, I do accept that the immediate effectiveness of the AI 4-2-4 in FM08 is rather TOO effective, it is not unrealistic or unreasonable to need to change your tactics in the face of it.

And to put your tactic in place in time, it's a simple case of watching for when they change their formation. It's easy. Pause the game, make your change, resume game. I never had an issue with it beyond two or three games a season.

To suggest anyone who disagrees with you is a fanboy is just childish. Grow up. People who continue to yell "cheat" about this are simply trying to play a different game to the one in front of them. It's possible - heck - EASY to counter.

As I said earlier, I can't deny the tactic is a bit TOO effective. But if so many people CAN counter it, then it cannot be a cheat. Unless "fanboys" get a special code to input or something.

Oh, just one more thing on this - if you can't be bothered countering it - or continue to assert that it's a cheat - then you can cheat right back by deleting it from the tactics folder on your hard drive.

Hope this helps.

Firstly, I have NEVER had a 4-2-4 against me, on FM09.

(I had to make that clear. It doesn't seem common at all, on 09)

Secondly, Rangers Vs. Zenit St. Petersburg - UEFA Cup Final.

Rangers put on 4 of their strikers, and had 7 men going forwards constantly.

Apart from 2CBs, and a Defensive-minded midfielder, everybody was up.

Mainly because they were desperate, but it happens.

Liverpool v's Wigan this year. finished 3-2 Liverpool

I agree that we need more variety in the way different AI managers attack when desperately in need of a goal but to suggest that 4-2-4 is a cheating tactic is ridiculous. What I don't understand though, is why the AI teams don't put big central defenders up front like teams sometimes do IRL when they've used all their subs.

Wise used to play 4-2-4 quite often when he was managing Leeds. Quite a few times he put on four strikers after only an hour into the game

Firstly, I have NEVER had a 4-2-4 against me, on FM09.

(I had to make that clear. It doesn't seem common at all, on 09)

Secondly, Rangers Vs. Zenit St. Petersburg - UEFA Cup Final.

Rangers put on 4 of their strikers, and had 7 men going forwards constantly.

Apart from 2CBs, and a Defensive-minded midfielder, everybody was up.

Mainly because they were desperate, but it happens.

I've never had a 4-2-4 palyed against me either. Previous versions I've seen it a few times but they never scored more than you would expect.

I don't really get what there is to be confused about.

You play 4-4-2

When attacking, the wide players push up so the formation becomes 4-2-4

Its quite simple really.

Nonsense.

Wingers moving forward to support an attack does not make a 4-4-2 into a 4-2-4, it's still 4-4-2. 4-2-4 only exists if the wingers hold their attacking line along-side the strikers without doing much in the way of chasing back to help the full back.

Its really quite common irl for teams to adopt this formation when chasing a goal late on with lots of long balls over the near empty midfield. I'm not sure of the point of this thread really:confused:

I read the comments below from the Southampton manager after tonights loss to Sheff Utd and thought of this thread, specifically the question, when do you ever see it in real life:

Second half we made the change to put Adam Lallana more in the midfield to distribute and Kayne McLaggon and Bradley Wright-Phillips wide to stretch it with four strikers. Jason Euell and Morgan Schneiderlin came on and JP Saeijs went as a striker near the end so we tried everything.

Note where it says 4 strikers in bold

yeah- ok, sometimes coaches put 4... 5 attacking players on the pitch, but it doesn't represent like it does in FM- with the 4 men staying up top like center forwards in a flat 4. sides still use wingers, they are AMR/AML's, they have 100% attacking responsibilities, but they come deeper to get the ball- in fm they just sit up there.

Add to that there is no variety...