djpdavey Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 (edited) Hi, I would like some ideas on how to make my 4-4-2 better. Started 1 league below the Vanarama North. Was one of the best teams in the league and got promoted first season with our PF on Attack getting 50 goals across all competitions. Got to the FA Trophy Semis and won the Northern Premier League cup. Towards the second half of the season was a bit of a struggle in the league and I'm not completely convinced by the tactic yet. the FBs dont get very good ratings. I know it's going to get harder in this coming season so was wanting to see if there is anything I can do. Edited January 5, 2021 by djpdavey Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frukox Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 3 minutes ago, djpdavey said: Hi, I would like some ideas on how to make my 4-4-2 better. Started 1 league below the Vanarama North. Was one of the best teams in the league and got promoted first season with our PF on Attack getting 50 goals across all competitions. Got to the FA Trophy Semis and won the Northern Premier League cup. Towards the second half of the season was a bit of a struggle in the league and I'm not completely convinced by the tactic yet. the FBs dont get very good ratings. I know it's going to get harder in this coming season so was wanting to see if there is anything I can do. What kind of style would you like to implement? It looks like a mixed bag at the moment. Your flanks mirror each other. Imo,having a tactical asymmetry is better to create different angles of attack to break down different kinds of opposition without getting stuck easily. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpdavey Posted January 5, 2021 Author Share Posted January 5, 2021 17 minutes ago, frukox said: What kind of style would you like to implement? It looks like a mixed bag at the moment. Your flanks mirror each other. Imo,having a tactical asymmetry is better to create different angles of attack to break down different kinds of opposition without getting stuck easily. I get what you're saying. If I was going to swap one of the sides to FB(A) and the wide player on support that might make this a bit more diverse but I dont have a player that can player wide midfielders or inverted wingers so I might be still limited to a winger... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coach vahid Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 Im not a good tactician maker....but playing with Wat support by a FBsu , with the overlap instruction is not the best idea. The winger's instruction Stay Wide + cross from byline ...The full back will never overlap. And you play with Counter Active. I dont think the full back will overlap. But be careful, im not a good tactician. Maybe you can try a simple approach. Left side Wmsu+FBat +overlap left. Right side Wat+FBs Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coach vahid Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 il y a 6 minutes, djpdavey a dit : I get what you're saying. If I was going to swap one of the sides to FB(A) and the wide player on support that might make this a bit more diverse but I dont have a player that can player wide midfielders or inverted wingers so I might be still limited to a Dont use overlap in this case but maybe play on the left and right side. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frukox Posted January 5, 2021 Share Posted January 5, 2021 7 minutes ago, djpdavey said: I get what you're saying. If I was going to swap one of the sides to FB(A) and the wide player on support that might make this a bit more diverse but I dont have a player that can player wide midfielders or inverted wingers so I might be still limited to a winger... why not? please don't look at role suitability thing in the interface. Instead, look at the attributes that make a good supporting winger(workrate, acceleration, agility, balance, first touch, off the ball, passing, etc.) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc577 Posted January 6, 2021 Share Posted January 6, 2021 12 hours ago, djpdavey said: FBs dont get very good ratings. I think FB ratings are universally low in FM21 for some reason. In regard to your tactic, why not use one winger on support? That way you still have some variation, as he will look to cross early. I'd also change one of the striker roles personally, as two pressing forwards might be a bit static. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djpdavey Posted January 6, 2021 Author Share Posted January 6, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, jc577 said: I think FB ratings are universally low in FM21 for some reason. good to know. 1 hour ago, jc577 said: I'd also change one of the striker roles personally, as two pressing forwards might be a bit static. will have a look at that. so aside from the striker role i've done this now: Edited January 6, 2021 by djpdavey Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enzo_Francescoli Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 (edited) Overlapping an attacking winger makes no sense to me at all. He will dribble to the byline or arrive at the box to the end of crosses from the other side. How is a support full-back supposed to overlap? Also, a CM(d) will not find much to do in a system like this. That's a great role for protection against counter-attacks in a 4231 for example, but you play a mid-block 442. Most likely, that player will just be a passenger. I would change that to DLP(d) if you want to stick to POD or BWM(d) if you don't. Edited January 7, 2021 by Enzo_Francescoli 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc577 Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 1 hour ago, Enzo_Francescoli said: Also, a CM(d) will not find much to do in a system like this. That's a great role for protection against counter-attacks in a 4231 for example, but you play a mid-block 442. Most likely, that player will just be a passenger. I would change that to DLP(d) if you want to stick to POD or BWM(d) if you don't. Could you explain this further? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enzo_Francescoli Posted January 7, 2021 Share Posted January 7, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, jc577 said: Could you explain this further? The way I see it, with the 442 I only have two players at central midfield, so I gotta make it count. The CM(d) is probably the most passive of all the roles, both on the ball and off it. The OP's latest system has a W(s) in the midfield strata next to him, which will come back to defend early in the transition. On the other side, there's a BBM which will engage the opponent as well. Whereas the CM(d) is just... there, holding his position in front of the defence, doing nothing basically. He won't close down much, nor will he hustle to make a tackle. That's a luxury. In high pressing, top-heavy systems which send almost everyone else up the pitch, it could prove invaluable to have an insurance policy like that, but the OP's tactic is neither high pressing, nor top-heavy. In possession, he'll make the safest passes imaginable, which, in this case, means he'll mostly lay it off to the BBM or the nearest teammate who's open and then get out of the way. The OP wants to play out of defence in a relatively low tempo system. Which is why I suggested a playmaker at that spot, someone who can and will collect and distribute the ball, often with riskier passes. The CM(d) doesn't quite do that and doesn't support the attack by getting up the pitch either. Again, a luxury. Edited January 7, 2021 by Enzo_Francescoli Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now