Help needed with leaky 442

[ArthurFM]

Been using a 442 counter-attack tactic since league 2 and now in the premier league. We were very lucky to get promoted through the play-offs after coming sixth and now we are in the difficult position of trying to compete in the PL with a squad that would be poor even for the championship. 

Despite me trying to create a Counter-attacking tactic we have always conceded quite a few goals but we've been able to outscore the opponents on most occasions. However, now we are in the premier league we are just conceding far too many goals to be competitive. We are currently bottom with 4 points from 11 games and a shocking 37 goals conceded (we scored 16). I understand the squad is very poor but I at least think the centre-backs were okay.

So the question is, how can I improve this tactic to concede less goals.

In terms of PIs, the advanced forwards have close down more, the fullbacks have more direct passing, the BBM has tackle harder and close down more.

 

Edited March 7, 2021 by ArthurFM

[Experienced Defender]

If you want to play a counter-attacking or any other defensive/low-block style of football, the first thing you need to make sure is that both your midfielders and defenders have proper defense-related attributes. Because otherwise, your players will hardly be able to withstand the amount of pressure from the opposition that such style of play implies. 

Once that has been sorted out, the next step is to make your tactic as solid defensively as possible. This is achieved primarily through:

- the optimal level of defensive compactness (which your tactic currently has thanks to the ideal distance between D-line and LOE  )

- as much balance in your setup of roles and duties as possible (which your tactic does not currently have to a sufficient degree in relation to your desired style of play)

So where IMO are key issues with your setup of roles and duties relative to your tactical intention (to play defensive/counter-attacking football):

- no defend duty in the midfield (even your sole holding midfielder is on support duty)

- a winger on attack duty, especially when played alongside a midfield runner (BBM), because that can leave the fullback on that flank insufficiently protected at times

Let's now see what is potentially wrong with your team instructions:

- most notably the Overlap left, which not just makes your left flank more vulnerable by increasing the fullback's (already high) individual mentality but is also completely unnecessary in a style of play supposed to be based on fast attacking transitions

- wide attacking width, because your goal should logically be to get the ball to your 2 strikers as early as possible, rather than wingers

- the combination of tight marking and more urgent pressing, because the increased pressing urgency will logically thwart the effect that the tight marking is supposed to have

[Johnny Ace]

I wouldn't have an attacking fullback with no D duty midfielder, either have the DLP on a D duty or the fullback on S

Two Advanced Forwards too seems a bit weird, I don't know any team that plays with two number 9s, counter or not so I'd want that right hand striker to be supporting the AF, the whole plan shouldn't be just counter, having a 9 &10 should help you out when you're on the front foot

As a side note, if you only just knicked promotion, don't worry about getting beaten weekly, take the Prem money & run, build up over the summer & try & win the Championship    

Edited March 7, 2021 by Johnny Ace

[ArthurFM]

57 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

If you want to play a counter-attacking or any other defensive/low-block style of football, the first thing you need to make sure is that both your midfielders and defenders have proper defense-related attributes. Because otherwise, your players will hardly be able to withstand the amount of pressure from the opposition that such style of play implies. 

Once that has been sorted out, the next step is to make your tactic as solid defensively as possible. This is achieved primarily through:

- the optimal level of defensive compactness (which your tactic currently has thanks to the ideal distance between D-line and LOE  )

- as much balance in your setup of roles and duties as possible (which your tactic does not currently have to a sufficient degree in relation to your desired style of play)

So where IMO are key issues with your setup of roles and duties relative to your tactical intention (to play defensive/counter-attacking football):

- no defend duty in the midfield (even your sole holding midfielder is on support duty)

- a winger on attack duty, especially when played alongside a midfield runner (BBM), because that can leave the fullback on that flank insufficiently protected at times

Let's now see what is potentially wrong with your team instructions:

- most notably the Overlap left, which not just makes your left flank more vulnerable by increasing the fullback's (already high) individual mentality but is also completely unnecessary in a style of play supposed to be based on fast attacking transitions

- wide attacking width, because your goal should logically be to get the ball to your 2 strikers as early as possible, rather than wingers

- the combination of tight marking and more urgent pressing, because the increased pressing urgency will logically thwart the effect that the tight marking is supposed to have

Thanks so much for the advice, i guess something like this seems for reasonable?

 

[ArthurFM]

39 minutes ago, Johnny Ace said:

I wouldn't have an attacking fullback with no D duty midfielder, either have the DLP on a D duty or the fullback on S

Two Advanced Forwards too seems a bit weird, I don't know any team that plays with two number 9s, counter or not so I'd want that right hand striker to be supporting the AF, the whole plan shouldn't be just counter, having a 9 &10 should help you out when you're on the front foot

As a side note, if you only just knicked promotion, don't worry about getting beaten weekly, take the Prem money & run, build up over the summer & try & win the Championship    

I agree that the two AFs are unconventional but I score enough goals so I don't worry about it too much, all I'm really looking for is for them to run onto balls over the top or pick it up around the halfway line and run past a slower defender to be through on goal. I do have Ashley Barnes who i use as a TM(s) on occasion if we're expecting a tough game. They still seem to work together a reasonable amount. And for sure, if I go down I'll be in a much better financial position to come back up again

Edited March 7, 2021 by ArthurFM

[Experienced Defender]

48 minutes ago, ArthurFM said:

Thanks so much for the advice, i guess something like this seems for reasonable?

This definitely looks more solid defense-wise, but could on the other hand prove a bit too conservative attacking-wise. But anyway, test this new tactic and see how it works and if there is any notable improvement 

[zabyl]

This direct attacking 4-4-2 can work in a lower league where defenders are not speedy to catch 2 AFs. But in a top league this needs balancing.

Direct passing is not a necessity with counter-attacking systems. Mixed passing seems excellent for this style. No need to rush or slow down.

Two AF on attack? AFa is a perfect role for counter-attacking if it is used in a combination with support forward / attacking midfielder. AFa-TMs can be quite good combo if one of the strikers has aerial ability.

In 4-4-2 there is no DM. One or two central players must help the defence when it is needed. Your both "CM"s are on support and BBM goes forward too much. So there will be spaces to exploit between defence and midfield blocks. DLPd can help to cover this.

-If those are 2 best wingers on your team; use quicker one on Wa and the other on Ws.

-Use BBM or another support CM role next to Ws and DLPd next to Wa.

-WBs can be used behind Wa to overload that side if there is a good WB. 

Distribute over opposition defence is not a must for counter. 

Those are my suggestions for your 4-4-2.

 

I used this 4-4-2 with 2 DM against stronger sides in FM20. Maybe it can work well with your team. I never used it on FM21. Because I loved central plays and those cheeky through balls in this version. I don't like wing plays too much.

Edited March 7, 2021 by zabyl

[pheelf]

14 hours ago, ArthurFM said:

Thanks so much for the advice, 

i guess something like this seems for reasonable?

One of the main weaknesses of a 4-4-2 when it comes to defending is the spaces in between the lines. Thus in my view, to be good defensively you need to have a team that is hardworking in order to consistently cover those gaps and it requires the tactic be set up in a way which compresses the space your players have to cover.

Unfortunately, in your tactic. the TIs you've used in the out of possession instructions actually exacerbate the weaknesses. Playing a lower line of engagement means that your midfield and attackers aren't going to really contribute much to defending and instead all the onus will be on your back line to press hard and win the ball back which is dangerous for a newly promoted team. Especially since having them press harder disrupts your defensive line and gives the opponents attackers more space to operate in when your defenders move out of their defensive positions.

I would push up the line of engagement so that more of the team contributes to your pressing game and if your defenders are relatively quick I might consider pushing up the defensive line in order to compress the gap between the midfield and defensive lines. Giving higher quality opposition time and space in your final third is likely why you are leaking so many goals.

I think you could set up the roles and duties up better however when it comes to the offensive side of the game. For me, your attacks are very one dimensional and predictable. Being over-reliant on balls over the top to score most of your goals is going to be a problem and I think you need more variety in the way your team attacks. To have an effective strike partnership, they both need to perform roles which compliment each other. As a result, having 2 AF's isn't the most optimal partnership given they both want the same type of service and want to occupy the same spaces.

There is no push-pull on the oppositions defensive line, both want to run in behind pushing the line back. All a smart manager would need to do to blunt your attack is run an effective offside trap or drop their defensive line deeper and eliminate the space in behind for your strikers to attack. If you had a push-pull on the other hand then it gives the opposition defenders a problem. If they push up to deny space to the striker who is deeper, that gives space to the other striker that wants to run in behind and vice versa. You want to attach a risk to every decision and to set up the team in a way which exploits all the ways an opponent can set up to defend.

I'm also a bit unsure why you want to play narrower when one of the main weaknesses of the 4-4-2 is through the middle where you are likely to be outnumbered and one of the main strengths of the 4-4-2 is the ability to dominate the flanks. You've also selected to hit early crosses but again who is going to provide these early crosses as you don't have a player in the tactic that seeks to get high and wide early meaning the crosses are likely to come from deep. You need to think about whether your two strikers really would thrive off that sort of service. In my view, an Advanced Forward type striker typically isn't the type of striker that thrives off lofted crosses from deep and they are better suited to receiving crosses from the byline.

I think you need more of your players when attacking seeking to break the lines, especially in a flat 4-4-2. As a rule of thumb, having 1 attack duty in each strata is a good way of achieving this. Staggering your attacks and having players arrive from different angles and at different times is hugely disruptive to the oppositions defence which could help you be more effective from situations when you aren't counter attacking. Personally, I wouldn't build my entire strategy around counter attacking the opposition, it's too dependent on how the opposition plays. It relies on the opposition over-committing men forward and you being able to win the ball back and take advantage of that. The problem with that strategy is that it assumes your team has the ability to soak up the pressure from the opponent and quite frankly as a newly promoted team I don't think your defenders are good enough to do that consistently.

I also think you might need to get rid of the Higher Tempo TI, I don't see how rushing the play when you do regain possession helps your team. From my perspective, all it does is it makes it more likely that your players will lose possession quicker which just invites more pressure. If the opposition doesn't have the ball, they can't score and keeping the ball and having some meaningless possession can be an effective defense and allow your defenders to take a breather.

Hopefully, what I have written is of help to you.

All the best

Edited March 8, 2021 by pheelf

[zabyl]

5 hours ago, pheelf said:

Unfortunately, in your tactic. the TIs you've used in the out of possession instructions actually exacerbate the weaknesses. Playing a lower line of engagement means that your midfield and attackers aren't going to really contribute much to defending and instead all the onus will be on your back line to press hard and win the ball back which is dangerous for a newly promoted team. Especially since having them press harder disrupts your defensive line and gives the opponents attackers more space to operate in when your defenders move out of their defensive positions.

This is a different perspective for lowering LOE. I respect your line of sight but I don't agree. Lowering LOE can be used to reduce spaces between midfield & defence blocks when there is no DM. In addition to this; he is trying to compete in a top league with a squad that would be poor for one lower tier he said. Lowering LOE against top sides sounds reasonable for me than increasing LOE + giving spaces to them.

Mid-press can turn a counter tactic into a powerful weapon when combined with higher tempo & play for set pieces TIs.

[AlexJames]

I have had some recent success with a 4-4-2 as an underdog newly promoted team in the EPL by adjusting pressing to be "Less Urgent". My current setup involves a cautious/ balanced mentality, high defensive line, standard LOE, "Less Urgent" pressing and "Regroup" when ball is lost. I adjust width/ passing length/ tempo and other TIs during the game, depending on performance.

I am no tactical expert, but my assumption here is that the higher defensive line helps limit the invitation of pressure on the backline (compared to a lower block), whilst less urgent pressing and regrouping once ball is lost maintains shape and restricts passing options for the opposition. Of course, this is also player dependent, as I have fairly quick defenders with good anticipation, which helps with the high defensive line. As a result I am finding opposition teams struggle to break my team down, and at the same time am presented with plenty of counter attacking opportunities (although I do not have "Counter" TI set).

I still expect to struggle - and do - against the elite teams, but generally perform well against other bottom half teams. I am currently comfortably in mid-table after half a season, having won 6 of the last 7 (all against bottom half teams).

I have tried experimenting with a lower defensive line, LOE and "More Urgent" pressing, but have found this invites too much pressure, pulls my players out of position and simply gets overwhelmed by superior opposition, with any attempted counter attacks easily snuffed out as my lower quality players have too much work to do to get from one end of the pitch to the other successfully.

Edited March 9, 2021 by AlexJames

[pheelf]

On 08/03/2021 at 18:07, zabyl said:

This is a different perspective for lowering LOE. I respect your line of sight but I don't agree. Lowering LOE can be used to reduce spaces between midfield & defence blocks when there is no DM. In addition to this; he is trying to compete in a top league with a squad that would be poor for one lower tier he said. Lowering LOE against top sides sounds reasonable for me than increasing LOE + giving spaces to them.

Mid-press can turn a counter tactic into a powerful weapon when combined with higher tempo & play for set pieces TIs.

The line of engagement as I understand it instructs the team when they should start looking to retrieve the ball from the opponent. I have no doubt that it can be made to work provided you have the right profile of player AND you have the right setup of roles and duties.

I feel that in order to make a lower LOE work you either need to put more players in your defensive third like you have done by withdrawing your 2 CMs in the tactic you posted OR be far less aggressive with the pressing especially in a flat 4-4-2 which has a lot of space in between the lines to defend.

Given that it's one of the worst teams in the league I think that necessitates more of the team contributing to defending otherwise it's possible to get overrun when trying to defend mainly with only your defensive line. Playing a lower line of engagement isn't proving to be beneficial, the OP hasn't kept a single clean sheet in the league therefore it's reasonable to question its inclusion when trying to offer help to improve the tactic defensively.

As I understood it, the in-possession tempo instructions have nothing to do with counter attacks. When a team is counter attacking that is a special category of it's own (the way it works might have changed). Therefore playing a higher tempo just gives the player on the ball less time to consider their next action when your team has possession. I don't see this as being a good idea as it is likely to lead to less possession overall given the lower quality of player which likely will not be able to operate as effectively at an elevated tempo, As a consequence, this will give more possession to the opposition and make for more defending for your players to have to do.

Cheers

[waddlemagic]

To echo some of the above comments suggesting adding defensive duty to your DLP, if you also move your left-sided striker into the AM strata this will give you a 4-5-1 out of possession (when looking at average positions) and some more solidity.

This was the only way I could make this shape work as an underdog team - personally, I don't like the defense duty DLP in a flat 4-4-2 due to the gaps it creates.

[Rashidi]

On 09/03/2021 at 02:07, zabyl said:

This is a different perspective for lowering LOE. I respect your line of sight but I don't agree. Lowering LOE can be used to reduce spaces between midfield & defence blocks when there is no DM. In addition to this; he is trying to compete in a top league with a squad that would be poor for one lower tier he said. Lowering LOE against top sides sounds reasonable for me than increasing LOE + giving spaces to them.

Mid-press can turn a counter tactic into a powerful weapon when combined with higher tempo & play for set pieces TIs.

 

19 minutes ago, pheelf said:

As I understood it, the in-possession tempo instructions have nothing to do with counter attacks. When a team is counter attacking that is a special category of it's own (the way it works might have changed). Therefore playing a higher tempo just gives the player on the ball less time to consider their next action when your team has possession. I don't see this as being a good idea as it is likely to lead to less possession overall given the lower quality of player which likely will not be able to operate as effectively at an elevated tempo, As a consequence, this will give more possession to the opposition and make for more defending for your players to have to do.

Both of you are arriving at the same destination in different buses.

The LOE definitely sets where your team begins its defensive actions, however, your mentality and choice of roles and duties will still impact this. So while LOE simplistically does influence midfield to drop deeper. More needs to be done. For example the roles chosen like wingers  could be a bit more aggressive as roles, but this depends entirely how you want to set up counter attacks. One could set up a WM/FB(A) combo on one side and an IW(A)/WB(S) combo on the other side. Then with a defend duty in central midfield you might create a fairly aggressive zone that wants to win back the ball.

Now the LOE/DL relationship also influences how your backline helps your counters. The lower your DL the bigger your gap.  So if someone were to play a much lower defensive line and a low LOE then that system may not be very ambitious with the roles in the defensive tier. So it could only be depending on a few roles for counters.

Here tempo, passing directness can play a big part in how the system performs. If you set a tactic to high tempo, you may be trying to move the ball up quickly and only towards those few roles that are on attack duty, so you really aren't too fussed about building play up nicely. On lower tempo settings your team could develop its play a bit more effectively and here a playmaker kinda role in central midfield could take advantage of that.

So both of you well you got some of it right.