Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If I was to use inverted wingers on both sides of a 4-4-2, one on attack and one on support, would it be necessary to have a box to box midfielder in the middle for extra support going through the middle? I’m attempting to play a counter attacking system, relatively direct. So far it’s working quite well but my BBM is the only member of my midfield not really impacting the game, and I wonder if it’s because he’s not really necessary. 
 

I’m playing a full back on support behind the inverted winger on attack duty on the side I’ve got the BBM. The left side of my team is fine (IW(s), BWM(d), WB(s)), works a treat. The right side is my only disappointing section.

 

I’ve got a Target Man and Pressing Forward up front, both on attack duty so I can counter more effectively (thank you Experienced Defender for that suggestion on another thread). 
 

I wonder if playing the BBM is pointless when the Inverted Winger and Pressing Forward are ahead of him on the right side. But I’m not entirely sure what role would make more sense. I’ve got the full back on support because he actually gets forward far more than I anticipated so I don’t want to go too adventurous in what is a counter attacking, conservative system. I feel like I don’t need a Carrilero because the FB is covering. But the BBM may well be missing space to work in. A regular CM? A DLP?

Edited by OrientTillIDie
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OrientTillIDie said:

If I was to use inverted wingers on both sides of a 4-4-2, one on attack and one on support, would it be necessary to have a box to box midfielder in the middle for extra support going through the middle?

Absolutely not. Moreover, I personally would avoid the BBM as a role in such a system. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Absolutely not. Moreover, I personally would avoid the BBM as a role in such a system. 

That’s what I thought. Would a more static CM make more sense? I worry about using a DLP purely because I don’t want him to become a ball magnet. A lot of my success comes from balls over the top into the channel. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Absolutely not. Moreover, I personally would avoid the BBM as a role in such a system. 

Interesting - i am currently using a bbm with inverted wingers in a 4-4-2.  He has been decent - not great but not bad either. 

what would you suggest fits better with the inverted wingers?  my other cm in the 442 plays as a DLP(D) and i have tried to change it up by having both cm as DLP, one on S and the other on D. 

thanks in advanced.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OrientTillIDie said:

Would a more static CM make more sense?

Depends on what exactly you mean by "more static CM". And what the system/setup would look like as a whole. 

 

1 hour ago, ta11zx said:

what would you suggest fits better with the inverted wingers?

I don't know what you want to achieve in terms of playing style, so it's impossible to suggest anything specifically. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

on't know what you want to achieve in terms of playing style, so it's impossible to suggest anything specifically. 

Counter attacking 

Defensive football 

Atheltico madrid style 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ta11zx said:

Counter attacking 

Defensive football 

Atheltico madrid style

I am not sure Simeone plays with 2 IWs, to begin with.

Anyway, if I were to use 2 IWs, I would play both CMs in holding roles in order to allow for attack-minded fullbacks, so that they can provide their IWs with proper support in more advanced areas. And when I say "attack-minded" fullbacks, I do not necessarily refer to attack duties. Because WB on support duty is also an attack-minded role.

An example of a setup:

CFsu    AF

IWat     CMde   DLPsu    IWsu

WBsu   CDde   CDde   WBsu

A more counter-attacking version:

CFat    AF

IWsu    CMde   DLPsu   IWsu

WBsu   CDde   CDde   WBsu

Link to post
Share on other sites

I play a 442 with two IWs and had the same dilemma. Actually ended up moving my central midfielders to the DM line, with one DM(s) and one SV(s). The SV is on the same side as the IW(s).

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...