Louis Van Gaal's 4-4-2 at AZ

Back in FM14, my first FM game, I successfully took Stockport County of the Conference North to win the FA Cup, Capital One Cup and Premier League title all in the same year, managing to do so in twenty-one seasons. Throughout that whole season we only lost one game domestically, against Huddersfield of all teams. I was mighty impressed, and went on to have some other minor success with other teams. However, FM15 started off quite badly for me, and it's taken me until now to really get into a save. I couldn't get any tactics to work, with any team, and I became disenfranchised with trying to do so. Inspired by members on these forums and the Neoseeker ones, I decided to try one more time to get things working, and this time I decided I was going to replicate an existing tactic that had succeeded in the real world.

I eventually settled on Louis Van Gaal, simply because there was a lot of literature on his work, he'd been to quite a few clubs (and succeeded at most of them) and I admired his no nonsense work ethic. Next I decided to indulge in my nostalgia a little and picked up Stockport County as the team I'd be working with. I knew the squad, I knew the staff and they were still stuck in the Conference North. This limited some of the tactics I could try out; the players weren't individually skilled enough to go for anything crazy, and I didn't have the budget to start buying players to fit in with some formations.

After a lot of reading, I decided to replicate Van Gaal's time at AZ. He'd spent the first few seasons there trying to create the Total Football style that had been the go-to style in The Netherlands and hadn't found success. When it came to the Eredivisie, Ajax, PSV and Feyenoord were the only real contenders, and the limited squad that he had at his disposal wasn't capable of playing the typically Dutch way to their level. After finishing 11th one season, he decided he was going to resign, but the players convinced him to stay on for just one more season, promising they would get behind whatever he asked them to do in order to succeed. It was then that Van Gaal decided to go against his roots and develop a system to combat the big boys in the league, and basically play a style of football better suited to the players he had at the club and their strengths. The media predicted, on average, that AZ would finish 6-7th that year, but instead they finished 1st. A tactical triumph.

It was this brand of counter-attacking football that I wanted to recreate, as I figured it was the most appropriate of all of Van Gaal's tactics for a Conference North side predicted to finish in 11th place. After some reading and video watching, I managed to pick out a few key features of how he got his players to play:

• Sitting deep and breaking out when the opposition make a mistake.
  
• Pressing and pressurising when not in possession, yes, but only in the team's own half.
  
• A tendency to cross the length of the pitch in three passes or fewer.
  
• A preference for players with two main attributes: Speed and strength. Players such as Edgar Davids, Robben, etc.
  
• Attacking transition is the key phase. Football has to be attractive to Van Gaal.
  
• Use the full pitch.
  

It also became clear that, at least when the players weren't on the ball, the formation was essentially a flat 4-4-2, something that I believe is very much out of favour with the big teams these days. I was more than happy to go with this, however, as it suited the players I had and I felt it offered both defence and offence in equal measure. The transition between not having the ball and having it was a little more difficult to nail down, but I did find this .gif that illustrates it perfectly:

A 4-4-2 that snaps into quite the narrow tactic when the team has possession. I've read that Van Gaal hates the term 'counter-attack', and probably thinks that a manager of his calibre is above that kind of play, but, as far as I could see, that's exactly what this was. And it worked. Quite spectacularly.

Implementing this into Football Manager was quite difficult, as I'm by no means a tactical expert. I think the only advantage I have over other players is that I never experienced creating tactics using the 'sliders' of old, and so I've never had to adapt. Other than that, though, I'm pretty basic when it comes to tactics. I imagine I got very lucky when it came to Stockport in FM14, and that showed through my constant struggles with FM15. My first attempt at replicating came up with this:

TIs

More Direct Passing

Pass Into Space

High Tempo

PIs

GK - Pass It Shorter

WBR/L - Close Down More & Stay Wider

DLP - Close Down More

CM - Close Down More

The Wing Backs would roam up the pitch to provide crosses from the side lines for the strikers. The Wide Playmakers would act as Inside Forwards, but further down the pitch, cutting inside to get on the end of crosses or pass the ball about. The central midfielders would sit back and provide a little more defensive cover once the Wing Backs had shot further up the pitch. Basically, re-watch the .gif above. That's what I was trying to do.

This turned out to be successful, and I was very pleased with myself. Like I said, we were predicted to finish in 11th place, and we ended up finishing 1st. We had 88 points (2nd place had 74), and our goal difference was 35 (next highest was 21). We did lose 8 times, but the lack of draws we suffered resulted in 27 wins out of 42 games, which was enough to secure the title.

I continued using this same tactic into the second season, in the Conference Premier. We were predicted to come 23rd (out of 24), and we finished in 11th place. Again, we overachieved, and the tactic showed it was capable of holding strong against teams of a much better calibre. However, it wasn't perfect, and it was under the strain of these bigger challenges that I saw certain things needed to be changed. We were essentially sitting back and letting the other team come at us, hoping they would make a mistake that we would capitalise on. This would be a perfectly fine method of playing if we had the defenders to deal with that kind of pressure and we were perhaps a bigger team, but we struggled constantly under such constant barrage. With this version of the tactic, the mentality dictated how I wanted them to sit without the ball, and the Instructions dictated how I wanted us to move with the ball. So, I decided to reverse this, so that we could be more attacking, without abandoning the concept of counter attack.

The second version of this tactic now gave me something that looked like this:

http://s3.postimg.org/yzaph097n/2014_12_29_00001.jpg

TIs

Direct Passing

Pass Into Space

Play Out of Defence

Drop Deeper

Higher Tempo

Be More Disciplined

PIs

2x CD - Close Down Less (to counter the natural closing down an attacking mentality would give them)

WBR/L - Stay Wider

I had balanced out the duties on either side of the pitch for one of the WPs and one of the WBs, I had changed the role of the keeper, shifted the midfield around a little and changed the mentality to Attacking. I then added a few more conservative TIs to ensure that we kept our shape and kept defensively solid when not on the ball. This resulted in a lot more attacking chances, and a team that didn't just sit back and wait to get hammered every game. Much better.

This is the version of the tactic I'm working with now and, because of its success, I've decided to share it with you all so that you can pick at it and dissect it as much as you want. I've said it before but I'll say it again, I am in no way a tactical genius, and no doubt a few of you have looked at this tactic and thought 'What the hell am I looking at, this is garbage?' However, I'll accept all and any constructive criticism, as it will only help the tactic get better and continue to grow. I'm finally having fun playing FM15 with this tactic, and that's all that matters in the end, really.

Thanks for reading!

A very well thought out tactic, well researched and implemented. A nice tactic to copy as well, that AZ team were one of only 2 to break the big 3 dominance in the Dutch league in about the last 20 years i think? (Along with McLaren's Twente).

On the new tactic, going to attacking mentality seems very extreme. It seems unlikely you could get sustained success with such an extreme mentality, but if you are managing it, thats what counts. What was your reason for this? It counteracts a number of the TI you have set (Attacking will set your Dline much higher, which sort of goes against the Van Gaal "sit in" philosophy?). Like wise you have higher tempo, and the attacking mentality will increase that even more. Do you not find you are very rushed?

Would be very interested to see how the WPM are working out for you. I have tended to use WM(a) to try and create deeper "inside forward" type behaviour, but would be great to see some examples of how that role is working for you. I am tempted to try and fit one into one of my systems at some point.

Overall, great work on taking a lower league side up and keeping on building and tweaking

On the new tactic, going to attacking mentality seems very extreme. It seems unlikely you could get sustained success with such an extreme mentality, but if you are managing it, thats what counts. What was your reason for this? It counteracts a number of the TI you have set (Attacking will set your Dline much higher, which sort of goes against the Van Gaal "sit in" philosophy?). Like wise you have higher tempo, and the attacking mentality will increase that even more. Do you not find you are very rushed?

Hmm, this will be something I will have to look into. It was done mainly to add more urgency to the attacking phase of play, as this particular version of the tactic was designed to improve that area. But I guess having it paired with higher tempo would make things rather ridiculous in that aspect, so perhaps a change of thought is required. Perhaps Standard would be a good place to start, as a base for more testing.

Would be very interested to see how the WPM are working out for you. I have tended to use WM(a) to try and create deeper "inside forward" type behaviour, but would be great to see some examples of how that role is working for you. I am tempted to try and fit one into one of my systems at some point.

They're honestly fantastic, for me. Most of my goals revolve around them in some aspect, most usually when the WBs cross the ball to them, where they either find a way into the box themselves, or pass to a striker. I can't think of any other way of describing them than an Inside Forward that sits a little deeper.

Agree with Jambo98: With an attacking mentality you don't need direct passing, play out of defence and higher tempo, as the mentality already does that. Also, you do not need Be more diciplined, as your philosophy is already based on that. I don't think you need pass into space either, since it means your players will try more through balls, but you already have three designated playmaker who play through balls when they have the chance. Your mentality means that you are already playing wide, so adding stay wider for your wingbacks doesn't make much sense to me. Drop deeper, and your CD's PI I agree with. Other than that I think you have a sound logic behind your choices, as long as you keep thinking the way you have done, constantly reviewing and adjusting you will be fine.

Agree with Jambo98: With an attacking mentality you don't need direct passing, play out of defence and higher tempo, as the mentality already does that. Also, you do not need Be more diciplined, as your philosophy is already based on that. I don't think you need pass into space either, since it means your players will try more through balls, but you already have three designated playmaker who play through balls when they have the chance. Your mentality means that you are already playing wide, so adding stay wider for your wingbacks doesn't make much sense to me. Drop deeper, and your CD's PI I agree with. Other than that I think you have a sound logic behind your choices, as long as you keep thinking the way you have done, constantly reviewing and adjusting you will be fine.

It sounds to me as though changing the mentality would be less hassle and more productive than changing the conflicting instructions. With that in mind, I'll start with a Standard base and see if anything needs changing from there.

It doesn't seem far off the 4-4-2 van Gaal used in his double-winning season at Bayern with the exception of the wingers being more direct in their movement (to the extent of often looking like a 4-2-4).

It doesn't seem far off the 4-4-2 van Gaal used in his double-winning season at Bayern with the exception of the wingers being more direct in their movement (to the extent of often looking like a 4-2-4).

Funnily enough, I have a .gif for that as well!

http://gfycat.com/SharpEcstaticAxolotl

Just like you said, it is very similar, but much more attacking. Another interesting note is how the wingers stay on the wings, unlike the Inside Forward type wingers he employed at AZ.

For future reference and anybody interested, here is the source for all these really handy .gifs:

http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/projects/the-van-gaal-dossier/

There's one for Van Gaal at Ajax, Barcelona, AZ and Bayern Munich.

Van Gals Bayern team played more like Brazil at the time. 4-2-2-2 is more appropriate

I took everybody's advice on board, saw the error of my ways, and reverted back to Version 1 (with a few minor tweaks). I mean, it worked, so why not? The tactic as it stands now looks like this:

Counter mentality. Fluid team shape.

TIs

More Direct Passing

Pass Into Space

Higher Tempo

PIs

GK - Pass It Shorter

WBL/R - Close Down More, Stay Wider

Sadly, this tactic just doesn't seem to be working for me (strange it worked so well in the first season, but solely the first season). I'd like to blame it on the players or the club, but it seems clear to me that it's some sort of tactical weakness. Maybe not a single, glaring obvious, but more of a general weakness. Formation, instructions, overarching idea, I don't know. With work, I imagine it could work, but I am no Van Gaal, and I think it would take a far greater tactical mind than mine to implement this into FM. I think it's time to retire the idea and call it a day on this particular journey.

The reason it isn't working appears to be because you don't have enough attack. Your wide playmakers are not going to the net, your two CMs are sitting fairly deepish, the DLP in particular, and your TM on a support duty is also coming back into space. All you have scoring is a poacher who I reckon is getting isolated up front quite often. You aren't far off from a really nice looking tactic, though. You just want some more movement toward the net I think.

The reason it isn't working appears to be because you don't have enough attack. Your wide playmakers are not going to the net, your two CMs are sitting fairly deepish, the DLP in particular, and your TM on a support duty is also coming back into space. All you have scoring is a poacher who I reckon is getting isolated up front quite often. You aren't far off from a really nice looking tactic, though. You just want some more movement toward the net I think.

The tactic in its absolute purest form was as follows:

But I figured that this was far too attacking, with the amount of space being created by the wide players being far too large, and so I 'balanced' the Wing Backs and Wide Playmakers. I suppose alternative options would be changing the DLP to something like a BBM, which I feel would leave the midfield and the centre backs too exposed, or changing the TM to something more attacking, which might leave me with two isolated strikers instead of one.

Did you try that "pure form" version in any matches? Yeah you are going to leave a lot of space on the flanks but if that is what Van Gaal's attacking shape looked like, you should try it . Probably would work best with Complete Wingback roles using men with high stamina and good pace who can haul it back on defense. The WP(A) in FM should stay back enough that the WBs overlap. What if you were just to put the CM on a support role, and move the DLP to defend, where he would stay back deeper and provide support for the defense. Would that be too non- Van Gaal-ish?

Did you try that "pure form" version in any matches? Yeah you are going to leave a lot of space on the flanks but if that is what Van Gaal's attacking shape looked like, you should try it . Probably would work best with Complete Wingback roles using men with high stamina and good pace who can haul it back on defense. The WP(A) in FM should stay back enough that the WBs overlap. What if you were just to put the CM on a support role, and move the DLP to defend, where he would stay back deeper and provide support for the defense. Would that be too non- Van Gaal-ish?

Well, according to what research I could find on his time at AZ, both centre midfielders were required to stay back in some way or another, adopting positions directly in front of the centre backs. The wing backs would bomb forwards, and the wide midfielders would cut in front of the centre midfielders and behind the strikers. It looks a little like this:

http://zippy.gfycat.com/FaroffNextHorsefly.gif

So in FM terms, you could translate this as 2 DM's, one as a DM(S) and a DLP (S) so that they move up a bit but are still pretty deep. Do you find the WP position actually has them drifting inside like that? I haven't used that role as yet. But using two DMs, you would be a lot more solid at the back, if the play comes down the wings, you'd still have four men in the middle to deal with anything until your WBs get back in position.

So in FM terms, you could translate this as 2 DM's, one as a DM(S) and a DLP (S) so that they move up a bit but are still pretty deep. Do you find the WP position actually has them drifting inside like that? I haven't used that role as yet. But using two DMs, you would be a lot more solid at the back, if the play comes down the wings, you'd still have four men in the middle to deal with anything until your WBs get back in position.

I find the WPs do cut inside quite often, without charging too far up the field to have a go on goal themselves. Like an Inside Forward, but further down the pitch, and much more emphasis on playmaking rather than goal scoring. I could, if necessary, add something like 'Sit Narrower' on to the WPs if I need more cutting in. Perhaps all of this trouble really is just a case of changing the formation slightly, incorporating two DMs instead of two CMs to create more solidarity and cover for the fact the WBs and WPs need to be more attacking, but it is rather bittersweet having to give up on a flat 4-4-2.

it is rather bittersweet having to give up on a flat 4-4-2.

I hear you, but sometimes FM just doesn't quite manage to replicate some of the things we want to do. I read "Brilliant Orange" a couple of years ago and was inspired to try a total football tactic and I never could get it to behave quite right. One thing I would like to see the game do at some point is be able to define position changes during play, sort of like the old wibble/wobble screen, but better. Well, good luck with it if you stick with it- I'd be interested to see if you every get it working the way it should

Looking at that gif from above, the defensive shape is still 4-4-2. So I wouldn't bin it just yet. Two defensive holders in CM, two WPs, a support AM, two complete Wingbacks on Attack ( this is where the two defensive CMs earn their corn) and a Attack duty forward. These would get you close to the attacking shape above. When transitioned back to defensive shape it will look again like 4-4-2.

So, at the moment, I'm going to be testing these two tactics to see which one performs the most like how I want it to (and still gets results):

You said in the opening post "Pressing and pressurising when not in possession, yes, but only in the team's own half", but you haven't used 'get stuck in' or 'close down more' or anything similar. Right now is the team not just sitting back waiting for the opposition to make a mistake? Put more pressure on them?

The flatline 4-4-2 I think just doesn't work in FM. Unless you have a DM the CBs are far too erratic. I'd try with the 2 DMs.

I think another issue you have is the TM-S. Players are just going to try and play long balls to him. Perhaps switching for a DLF-S would benefit you.

Some good things in that Van Gaal article;

"At Ajax, van Gaal described his full-backs as “killers”, whose primary function was to mark the opposition wingers and move the ball on."

"Look at the way Barcelona have played over the last few seasons: a close counterpart of van Gaal’s 4-3-3, albeit with Lionel Messi as a slightly withdrawn centre forward. Moreover they retain the same values – high energy, high line, high pressing – that characterise all van Gaal teams."

So set your full-backs to mark the wingers tightly and make sure you press more with your team.

You said in the opening post "Pressing and pressurising when not in possession, yes, but only in the team's own half", but you haven't used 'get stuck in' or 'close down more' or anything similar. Right now is the team not just sitting back waiting for the opposition to make a mistake? Put more pressure on them?

The flatline 4-4-2 I think just doesn't work in FM. Unless you have a DM the CBs are far too erratic. I'd try with the 2 DMs.

I think another issue you have is the TM-S. Players are just going to try and play long balls to him. Perhaps switching for a DLF-S would benefit you.

I have 'Close Down More' as a PI for my WBs, and the CM(D) already has that particular PI ticked automatically for him. I don't really like the CDs coming out of position and closing down, as it leads to far too much space opening up, so that pretty much covers our own half. As for 'Get Stuck In', it's something that I toy with during games, but I feel it leads to far too many fouls if used on a consistent basis. Maybe that's more of a problem with the players I have available, but it's still something that I feel is best left off. I think I will have to go with the 4-2DM-2-2 in the end, just because, as you said, the 4-4-2 is so inconsistent defensively. It's a shame, as I really wanted to go with the 4-4-2, but success is what measures a tactic at the end of the day.

Some good things in that Van Gaal article;

"At Ajax, van Gaal described his full-backs as “killers”, whose primary function was to mark the opposition wingers and move the ball on."

"Look at the way Barcelona have played over the last few seasons: a close counterpart of van Gaal’s 4-3-3, albeit with Lionel Messi as a slightly withdrawn centre forward. Moreover they retain the same values – high energy, high line, high pressing – that characterise all van Gaal teams."

So set your full-backs to mark the wingers tightly and make sure you press more with your team.

It's a fantastic article, and taught me a lot about what Van Gaal calls his 'philosophy', but it's not exhaustive when it comes to material written on him. Setting my full backs to man mark the wingers tightly and pressing hard is something that would work with an Ajax, Barcelona or Bayern reproduction tactic, but I don't think that's what he was going for with AZ. The season before he won the league, he attempted a total football-esque style of football with them, and finished 11th in the end; he just didn't have the players to play that kind of football against teams like Ajax, who could do it so much better. In the end, he created the system I'm trying to replicate now, which is more relaxed and more countering (although, he'd be the last person to admit it was a counter-attacking tactic). Aspects of total football still remained, however, which is why the AZ team that won the league that season still pressed and pressurised, albeit only in their own half.

I agree on the advise of changing the TM to a DLF. How about this? Try your "pure-form" set up, and change your mentallity to defensive. Now I myself am no wizard, but maybe that would tell all your players to defend when not in possesion, and then with your players´ duties (5 on attacking) would see them go from one end of the pitch to the other in no time...

OK, update. I seem to have improved the tactic, and things are looking up results-wise at the moment. Not only are we getting the frequency of wins I'm after, but we're playing in a way that looks similar to how Van Gaal had his AZ side playing (or at least as close as I can get them to look).

I had a go at making a 4-2DM-2-2, like I discussed below, but I just couldn't get it to work. The results weren't the best, and the team weren't playing anything like I wanted to them. Sure, this formation could work, and I'm sure many people have got it to work, but I think with the roles and movement I was after it left us too exposed in certain areas, which found us being punished repeatedly. So I went back to good old 4-4-2, even though I knew it had its quite glaring flaws. Like I said, though, it seems to be working now.

TIs

More Direct Passing

Pass Into Space

Get Stuck In

Higher Tempo

PIs

GK - Distribute to Full Backs

CWB - Close Down More

CD - Close Down Less

DLP - Close Down More

CM - Close Down More

This is what I've gone for in the end. As you can see, I've rectified the problems in Version 3 (lack of attacking movement) by making my Wing Backs much more attacking, and changing them to CBWs. Sometimes, this can cause problems if the opposition are running pacey wingers, but this is something easily solved during a match by changing their duties to Support, or to WBs on Support.

Following the advice of the good people here, I changed the TM to a DLF as well, so that he can get more involved in the build up play. Interestingly, I have found that this has benefited me in a couple of ways: The player whose role I have changed no longer scores as much as he used to, but the player he plays with, the Poacher, has started scoring a hell of a lot more, with the DLF now getting bucket loads of assists. Basically, he's doing his job, filling the hole and providing chances.

I switched the DLP from Support to Defend, and the CM from Defend to Support, which allowed more movement in the midfield. Before, the DLP stayed very static in midfield, with the CM dropping back and staying static in front of the back four. Now, the DLP stays static in front of the back four, spraying passes to the CM, who now has the freedom to move back and forth a bit more.

Get Stuck In has been added as a TI to increase the pressure we apply on the opposition in our half, again recommended on these forums. On top of that, the PIs have mostly stayed the same, but with the addition of Close Down More to the centre midfielders, again, for the same reasons as Get Stuck In.

Finally, a working tactic!

I really want to play Cazorla properly and also get Özil playing on the right cutting in, to see what they can do. This kind of 4-4-2 system suits them both so I might give it a go.

I really want to play Cazorla properly and also get Özil playing on the right cutting in, to see what they can do. This kind of 4-4-2 system suits them both so I might give it a go.

That sounds like a good idea. Bear in mind though, the WP won't shoot too often, even on Attack duty. You could try the 'Shoots more often' PI if that's what you're after, but otherwise they should be great for Ozil and Cazorla. The idea with the tactic really is feeding the two strikers as much as you can, so making sure you have a couple of lethal guys up front is very necessary.