Holding onto a lead

I have an issue with my new team where I cannot simply hold onto a lead. Im 3/4 through my first season with them and I have bought in better players - mainly defenders to help deal with this along with changing the roles of midfield players to be more defensive and also my tactics during a game - but yet if I am 2-0 up the opposition will come back in the second half and equalise or win the game in the last few minutes.

The timing of my goals is detailed below - as you will see from the stats I concede late in games despite adjusting my tactics to slow games down when winning, using subs and been more defensive

Can anyone add any insight in how to improve these stats and how to hold onto a lead when winning as defending, changing to be more discipined and more defensive player roles does not seem to cut it for me.

It's impossible to offer more advice without knowing more about the instructions you're using.

Have you tried just simply dropping your d-line?

I will drop the d-line if I notice quick players getting in behind my defence a lot or if the other team are dominating me in my half at any time of the match.

If you feel you are strong defensively, then you could try to push-up more and keep them in their own half if feeling confident

Also don't make too many changes to your defence from match to match too much (player rotation) and look out for complacent players during the match, the players you bring on as subs may also go complacent straight away too.

It's impossible to offer more advice without knowing more about the instructions you're using.

These are my general settings - I sometimes use a 4231 wide tactic.

I change the flank depending upon where the opposition conceded the most, change the players to play deep, narrow or wide depending upon pitch width. If I am winning during the last 20 minutes will go more defensive strategy, more disciplined, slow the pace down and lower tempo. If I am losing I will push up go higher temp close down more and tackle harder. However in most situations I am already leading by 2 or more goals only for the oppositon to come back

try playing narrower,thats what i tend to do seems ok,especially with lower tempo etc and the others that you said,then again depends on who are playing i suppose..

You are leaving HUGE gaps between your midfield and defense. Your BWMs will run headlessly around to try and win the ball, and your AP will often be out of position to try and find space on and off the ball. If you insist on using a ball winner, I'd suggest setting him to defend instead of support.

I think 442 is a pretty poor formation overall - I like playing teams who use it, there are so many ways to beat it

These are my general settings - I sometimes use a 4231 wide tactic.

I change the flank depending upon where the opposition conceded the most, change the players to play deep, narrow or wide depending upon pitch width. If I am winning during the last 20 minutes will go more defensive strategy, more disciplined, slow the pace down and lower tempo. If I am losing I will push up go higher temp close down more and tackle harder. However in most situations I am already leading by 2 or more goals only for the oppositon to come back

Firstly, as others have said, this is a pretty poor implementation of a 4-4-2. It's critical to have a bit of stability in that formation and you lack it. Just pause a match when you have the ball in the final third and look at how open you are.

You say you change "the flank depending upon where the opposition conceded the most", but that is all about how you attack. Aren't you considering where they themselves are strong out wide?

"change the players to play deep, narrow or wide depending upon pitch width" - how, and why?

"If I am winning during the last 20 minutes will go more defensive strategy, more disciplined, slow the pace down and lower tempo." Why? It just invites pressure in a system which is inherently poor at repelling it.

There's nothing wrong with a 4-4-2, but I'd suggest you read (or re-read) the Pairs and Combinations thread about midfield partnerships.

Firstly, as others have said, this is a pretty poor implementation of a 4-4-2. It's critical to have a bit of stability in that formation and you lack it. Just pause a match when you have the ball in the final third and look at how open you are.

You say you change "the flank depending upon where the opposition conceded the most", but that is all about how you attack. Aren't you considering where they themselves are strong out wide?

"change the players to play deep, narrow or wide depending upon pitch width" - how, and why?

"If I am winning during the last 20 minutes will go more defensive strategy, more disciplined, slow the pace down and lower tempo." Why? It just invites pressure in a system which is inherently poor at repelling it.

There's nothing wrong with a 4-4-2, but I'd suggest you read (or re-read) the Pairs and Combinations thread about midfield partnerships.

I think the issue is I have become complacent due to playing FM since its incarnation back in the day and with every team I have managed I have never had the problem I am facing now. In fact my last team on this save I won the leagues and lots of cups with a more open formation and did not concede like I have been with my new team. Maybe my players should be shouting at me from the pitch to 'demand more' lol.

I have tweaked the midfield roles following reading the pairs and combinations as shown below and havn't played any games yet but will see how we go.

I intend to be more defensive with my full backs from now on changing them to a support/defence duty on the wings where an opponent scores the goals to help combat this.

I play deep on a short pitch and a bit higher up on a longer pitch same again with the width. On wider pitches I play narrower so the players are closer together and wider on a narrower pitch. I read that you should do this on a forum somewhere a few years ago when discussing tactics on different pitch sizes.

The reason I change to be more defensive when I am winning for the last 20 minutes is to hold onto the lead. I understand my team is not good at this and this is why I have asked advice. Hopefully with the roles I have now implemented this may help the situation.

When I have time I am going to re-read the other sections of the pairs combinations guide and see if I can improve in other areas.

Thanks for your help.

Any other advice on my set up above would be appreciated

I'd ditch the BWM(D) for a good ol' CM(D) (or any other less aggressive role with D duty) just to keep some shape and to help the DCs.

E: Just a thought but do you need the ball when you're leading? If not then why the BWM? I'd use BWM when behind.

-SnUrF

I would agree with the above suggestion of using a CM instead of BWM. If you really insist, you need to have a DM or BBM to cover the space he leaves open. I would recommend changing your F9 to a DF.