[FMT] Anything wrong with this 4-4-2?

[Orikoru]

To anyone who saw my previous topic - I still have no idea how to play. The 4-2-3-1 I built worked for a while, and then it didn't, and we lost plenty of stupid games to the likes of Villa and Norwich. When we lost it was usually lots of attempts and possession but no goals. Or occasionally against a big team we'd get absolutely stuffed, like 30 shots to our 3. We ended up finishing 7th. Lucky to keep my job, probably because I managed to drag us into a league cup final, and CL and FA cup semis.

Long story short, I started developing this 4-4-2 tactic (or 4-2-4) at the end of the season because Kane was not as good as I hoped up front, so I thought it might be better to use him in a supporting role. Image attached below. Thoughts are as follows:

• Kane in his favoured DLP support role so the goal burden isn't all on him. Haaland is arriving to play up top - might use him in poacher role rather than AF?
• Left winger is traditional kind because if he cuts in he'll be bumping into Kane's territory I guess. I set him attack to get to byline, then cut it back to Kane or deep cross to Haaland.
• Cengiz Under was our best player last season in that IW(S) role on the right, so he should plenty of room to work in still.
• I started off with a DLP(S)-CM(D) pair in the middle, but it was very flat. I think the energy of the box-to-box role is needed to cover the space in front and behind him. Lo Celso isn't the best defensively, so I will probably use Ndombele as the DLP(D) against anyone good, and bring in a different BBM. 
• I can't use a high defensive line, it just never ever works for me, frequently just see opponents through on goal with the freedom of London to score in. So I've kept it standard and gone lower line of engagement to compact the team a bit.
• Higher tempo because most teams are hard to break down. Against better teams I'll probably lower the tempo to standard but use shorter passing.

 

So yeah that's everything I think, I'm sure it will work really well for two months and then become a total disaster overnight just like every other tactic I've ever tried.

Assuming it's totally wrong, but where is it most obviously wrong? Thanks in advance for your help.

[santy001]

It's a similar set-up to what I play with, but keep in mind I'm fairly poor at nailing specific issues. With this line up I imagine your team is kind of attacking and playing in the shape of a Z (albeit flipped) - Might be worth checking the heat maps from some of your games.

However, it looks to me like you might have a situation where Sanchez/Lo Celso and Vangoman are all overlapping the same area. With Davies quite isolated.

Then on the other side you'd have Ndombele, Sessegnon and Kane vying for the same space with Lamela on his own, even as an inverted winger.

Your passing combinations could also perhaps show if play is gravitating somewhere you wouldn't necessarily want it to be.

[Orikoru]

5 minutes ago, santy001 said:

It's a similar set-up to what I play with, but keep in mind I'm fairly poor at nailing specific issues. With this line up I imagine your team is kind of attacking and playing in the shape of a Z (albeit flipped) - Might be worth checking the heat maps from some of your games.

However, it looks to me like you might have a situation where Sanchez/Lo Celso and Vangoman are all overlapping the same area. With Davies quite isolated.

Then on the other side you'd have Ndombele, Sessegnon and Kane vying for the same space with Lamela on his own, even as an inverted winger.

Your passing combinations could also perhaps show if play is gravitating somewhere you wouldn't necessarily want it to be.

Not sure I understand the issue with Sanchez/Lo Celso/Vangoman - I've put the DLP(D) on the same side as the attacking full back as extra cover if he gets caught out of position, basically. That seems to make more sense than having him the other side. Davies should be ok I'd have thought, I'm thinking of buying a better left back though anyway.

 

The Ndombele/Sess/Kane thing is exactly why I'm using a W rather than an IW - but perhaps it would be better to use a W(S) there? I've toyed with that but wondered if it was too many Support roles and not enough Attack ones. On Lamela (actually will be Under, forgot to change it) - I have the full back on Attack that side to get up alongside him.

[Thunderthump]

Keep us updated with how this goes, this maybe against popular opinion.... I think a low loe with so many players upfield maybe counter to what you want to achieve. With those two in defense I'd play a high line and a standard line of engagement. 

If you want to encourage the opposition to attack you for more counter attacks I'd drop defensive line back to low and keep loe at standard. But those two defenders defo suit higher line. 

All the above is combined with a high or higher pressing intensity 

This is not written in stone and I maybe incorrect however this is just my own experience. I'd be interested in what works and what doesn't 

[Orikoru]

Just now, Thunderthump said:

Keep us updated with how this goes, this maybe against popular opinion.... I think a low loe with so many players upfield maybe counter to what you want to achieve. With those two in defense I'd play a high line and a standard line of engagement. 

If you want to encourage the opposition to attack you for more counter attacks I'd drop defensive line back to low and keep loe at standard. But those two defenders defo suit higher line. 

All the above is combined with a high or higher pressing intensity 

This is not written in stone and I maybe incorrect however this is just my own experience. I'd be interested in what works and what doesn't 

As I mentioned, high line defence has been suicidal every time I've used it. Just doesn't work for me and I'm scared of it, haha. Even with these centre backs. (Also I still have Alderweireld, so I'm not sure what my best pairing is yet.)

[Experienced Defender]

28 minutes ago, Orikoru said:

 

28 minutes ago, Orikoru said:

where is it most obviously wrong?

For me, the most confusing thing in your tactic is the fact that you manage a top team (Spurs) but at the same time playing with a lower Line of engagement, as though the Spurs are underdogs. That probably would not be advisable to do even in matches against other top/strong teams (except as an occasional in-match tweak), let alone as part of your regular tactic. In other words, your tactical style needs to match the strength and reputation of your team. 

On the other hand, the setup of roles and duties does not look bad in and of itself. In fact, it's relatively nicely balanced. But again, that's just one segment of a tactic, not the only one.

When it comes to player selection relative to roles, I don't see much (if any) sense in playing Lo Celso as a holding midfielder, given his attributes (especially when compared with his midfield partner Ndombele, who is a lot more defensively reliable as a player). 

[santy001]

15 minutes ago, Orikoru said:

Not sure I understand the issue with Sanchez/Lo Celso/Vangoman - I've put the DLP(D) on the same side as the attacking full back as extra cover if he gets caught out of position, basically. That seems to make more sense than having him the other side. Davies should be ok I'd have thought, I'm thinking of buying a better left back though anyway.

 

The Ndombele/Sess/Kane thing is exactly why I'm using a W rather than an IW - but perhaps it would be better to use a W(S) there? I've toyed with that but wondered if it was too many Support roles and not enough Attack ones. On Lamela (actually will be Under, forgot to change it) - I have the full back on Attack that side to get up alongside him.

As I edited into my post, it isn't my area of speciality. Its just something that stood out to me as I actually play quite similarly to you:

I found that having the cover position usually would provide Tripper with a safer ball backwards, and as Support Koke would be a bit higher up relieving pressure. It looks to me like you'd have the same passing base in the bottom right corner of your team like I tend to have:

Trippier is the player at the top by the half way line in the combinations.

It just made me think as a Full Back attack you run the risk of Vangoman not being there, or having pulled back to defend and Sanchez/Lo Celso basically being on top of him. 

[Orikoru]

1 minute ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

For me, the most confusing thing in your tactic is the fact that you manage a top team (Spurs) but at the same time playing with a lower Line of engagement, as though the Spurs are underdogs. That probably would not be advisable to do even in matches against other top/strong teams (except as an occasional in-match tweak), let alone as part of your regular tactic. In other words, your tactical style needs to match the strength and reputation of your team. 

On the other hand, the setup of roles and duties does not look bad in and of itself. In fact, it's relatively nicely balanced. But again, that's just one segment of a tactic, not the only one.

When it comes to player selection relative to roles, I don't see much (if any) sense in playing Lo Celso as a holding midfielder, given his attributes (especially when compared with his midfield partner Ndombele, who is a lot more defensively reliable as a player). 

Surprisingly positive there! Ha. I'll put the line of engagement back to standard, that's not a deal-breaker at all. As I mentioned it was an effort to condense the team a little but I hate using high defensive line. But both lines on standard should still be ok right?

I just really like Lo Celso, he's a good player but he doesn't really fit any other role in the team. Suppose I was crowbarring him in slightly. Might have to keep him as an impact sub if I fancy throwing on an advanced playmaker or something. It definitely is more logical to use Ndombele as the DLP(D) and Gedson perhaps as the BBM. I also have Florentino Luis in the squad, but it's hard to say that he really fits either role properly.

[Orikoru]

2 minutes ago, santy001 said:

 

It just made me think as a Full Back attack you run the risk of Vangoman not being there, or having pulled back to defend and Sanchez/Lo Celso basically being on top of him. 

I'm not sure what the answer is there. Sometimes I put Vangoman on Support, if I don't want him overcommitting forward, but that could leave only one attack duty in the whole team if I took it off the left winger as well. Might be a try it, play around and see thing.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Orikoru said:

I'll put the line of engagement back to standard, that's not a deal-breaker at all. As I mentioned it was an effort to condense the team a little but I hate using high defensive line. But both lines on standard should still be ok right?

Yes, both lines on standard should be okay in general. Here the formation also plays a part though. You are actually making your own tactical job more difficult by using an inherently vulnerable top-heavy system such as 424 (or 4231), which besides the top-heaviness does not employ a DM. Therefore, it's a bit too tricky as a formation for a tactical novice to get right. 

 

1 hour ago, Orikoru said:

I just really like Lo Celso, he's a good player but he doesn't really fit any other role in the team

I like Lo Celso as a player. But I would avoid playing him in a CM position in a 424, especially in a holding role. I would play him as an AMC in a 4231 or as a CM in a 4123 wide. So if you want to use Lo Celso, that's just one more reason for you to consider a different formation. Because you cannot assign roles to players on a random basis. Different systems (types of formations) require different types of players in certain positions. 

 

1 hour ago, Orikoru said:

Suppose I was crowbarring him in slightly

Yeah, I would say so. 

 

1 hour ago, Orikoru said:

It definitely is more logical to use Ndombele as the DLP(D) and Gedson perhaps as the BBM. I also have Florentino Luis in the squad, but it's hard to say that he really fits either role properly

What about Winks and Dier? Where are they?

[Orikoru]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Yes, both lines on standard should be okay in general. Here the formation also plays a part though. You are actually making your own tactical job more difficult by using an inherently vulnerable top-heavy system such as 424 (or 4231), which besides the top-heaviness does not employ a DM. Therefore, it's a bit too tricky as a formation for a tactical novice to get right. 

 

I like Lo Celso as a player. But I would avoid playing him in a CM position in a 424, especially in a holding role. I would play him as an AMC in a 4231 or as a CM in a 4123 wide. So if you want to use Lo Celso, that's just one more reason for you to consider a different formation. Because you cannot assign roles to players on a random basis. Different systems (types of formations) require different types of players in certain positions. 

 

Yeah, I would say so. 

 

What about Winks and Dier? Where are they?

Thanks for the feedback. Winks and Dier are still in my squad, they played bit-part back-up roles in the first season. I can't see Dier having much usefulness this season and was thinking of selling him though if an offer came in.

[Orikoru]

On 07/05/2020 at 13:36, Thunderthump said:

Keep us updated with how this goes

I hate to tempt fate as all my tactics tend to crash and burn by Christmas, but so far, this one is working! We're top of the league after 10 games with 8 wins and 2 draws. Smashing our Europa group but they're all poor teams so that doesn't say much. Some particular highlights of the system:

• The left W(A) seems to pop up with a lot of goals. Often unmarked from a right wing cross that gives them a header or tap-in. Sessegnon was doing really well there, but I had to play Dele Alli there for a few games, and he wouldn't normally be my pick for that role, but he did brilliantly! He has 10 goals in 13(5) this season (not all of them played left wing but most of them).
• Harry Kane in the DLF(S) role has 16 apps, 8 goals and 6 assists, so I'd say he's playing the role perfectly.
• Haaland is a machine obviously, so I have to admit having him up top does help. Last season we created a lot of chances that were missed, but he doesn't miss too many. He's scored 14 in 12(3).
• Our attacking right full back, the young Vagnoman, has an obscene 10 assists from 15(1) games.
• Cengiz Under is still class at right IW(S) - 12(3) apps, 7 goals, 8 assists.

Some of those stats are a little bloated by Europa appearances against rubbish teams, so I'll give the league only figures too:

• Dele 9(1) apps 5 goals.
• Kane 9 apps, 3 goals, 3 assists.
• Haaland 9(1) apps, 10 goals.
• Vagnoman 10 apps, 8 assists - that's actually even better!
• Under 7(2) apps, 4 goals, 5 assists.

We've had a few fantastic comebacks as well which is always nice to see. Europa was nearly down the pan as we lost the first leg of a qualifying round to Sassuolo, 2-0 away. Home leg we went for it and were 3-0 up by half time. That's how it stayed for 3-2 agg.

Mad game against Burnley as we were 2-0 down at half time, got one back before the hour, then goals in the 92nd, 94th and 97th minute to win 4-2. Talk about Fergie time.

Away at Chelsea we were 2-0 down in ten minutes, 3-1 down at half time. Another late goal as we won 4-3 in the 94th minute.

And the game I just had against Liverpool was exciting. We were 2-1 down, scored in the 84th and 88th, but unfortunately conceded a 92nd minute equaliser.

 

So yeah, going well so far. I think going from 7th last season to 1st after ten games is quite a leap. Hopefully we can keep it up and not p*** it all away at Christmas like normal. I've attached a little update of the system, not very much has changed though.

Edited May 10, 2020 by Orikoru

[Thunderthump]

Thanks for the update Orikou. Really good to see it working. From your results you mentioned sounds like this is a really attacking tactic which is some thing I was interested In with this formation.

I'm going to use it in my save as i use many of the team instructions already. 

Good luck with the rest of the season.