Jump to content

What's wrong with this tactic?


Recommended Posts

What would you say needs to be changed with this tactic to make it better suited to playing as a weaker team in the lower league, this has been working quite well I can usually finish in the top half of the table despite being predicted to be in the bottom half but I'd like to see what I can change.

Banks 4-4-2.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, De Nile said:

What kind of style are you looking for do you want to control possession or counter attack

It's meant to be more of a mid block tactic so I would say more counter attacking as I am usually the weaker team in most games played.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some possibilities (but I don't know your players):

  • you don't have attacking width on either flank in the final third;
  • on the right side, the IW(s), CM(s) and DLF(s) all might be working too closely in the same area;
  • the DL and midfield are too symmetrical and too predictable;
  • you don't have enough players on attack duty to counter attack (2-3 is good for underdog teams); therefore

 

  • maybe turn the RW into a W(a) or
  • turn the RW into a WM or DW, plus make the RB a WB(a)

Also, the 4-4-2 has an inherent issue with the gaps between the DL and midfield and the midfield and strikers.  Plus you are playing on standard both DL and LOE, which leaves more space in defensive transition.  Therefore, to create a more compact block, consider either raising the DL one notch - but not if your CDs have lower acc/ant/pos than attacking opponents' acc/ant/otb --or lowering the LOE one notch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ahewrestlingfan said:

It's meant to be more of a mid block tactic so I would say more counter attacking as I am usually the weaker team in most games played.

You'll never have a consistent counter attack with Balanced mentality & only one attack role in your line up. Never going to work. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ahewrestlingfan said:

It's meant to be more of a mid block tactic so I would say more counter attacking as I am usually the weaker team in most games played.

Having a structured shape works best with counter attacking having a very fluid shape means the team would attacking as one and in counter attacking you only need a few player on support.

Play out of defense is not great for counter attacking.

Whether you want to use counter press it is up to you but if that is so either lower the LOE or use regroup so you can win the ball back and break into counter attack more easily. Then again if you don't like regroup you can pick neither and leave it to you team.

Try use a winger on attack and either one of the FB on defend or attack. Also use a CM(a) next to the IW(s).

And if all fails use a 442 DM instead

Edited by De Nile
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • I prefer a DLP/BBM mix in a 4-4-2. I want someone to get into the box from the middle, and CM(s) just doesn't do it for me.
  • I like pairing WB with IW and FB with W. IW and FB feels like a suboptimal mix on the flank.
  • If you want some quick attacking play then use the Attacking mentality.
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, De Nile said:

Play out of defense is not great for counter attacking

I don't necessarily agree with this. It can be useful if your intent is to draw out the opposition so they can attack you and then you have a role or a player playing it direct from the back 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DarJ said:

I don't necessarily agree with this. It can be useful if your intent is to draw out the opposition so they can attack you and then you have a role or a player playing it direct from the back 

I know it's useful but it not the best thing to do as a weak team especially since in the lower leagues it is more ideal to counter straight after the opposition attack from the goalkeeper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, De Nile said:

I know it's useful but it not the best thing to do as a weak team especially since in the lower leagues it is more ideal to counter straight after the opposition attack from the goalkeeper.

Depends, see I don't know if it's just me, but I'm not one to go out & think right, our play style is counter attacking. I think of it like, you'll have the ball at the very least for 40% of a match, you need to be setting your team up for what they're going to do for that 40% I've seen over the years on here, saying you can't do this, you can't do that you must use direct passing, you must pass into space. With how counter attacks work now, you need to have bodies back & hope the other team over commit, have the Counter TI set & you're good to go :thup: 

 

@AhewrestlingfanIf you're a weaker team, I wouldn't counter press & maybe offer some width on a flank, on the right hand side would make sense. Have a good look at Miller-Rooney too, in a 4-4-2 your CMs need to be solid  

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, YAMS said:

You'll never have a consistent counter attack with Balanced mentality & only one attack role in your line up. Never going to work. 

Disagree, if you're looking to sit back, concede possession and hit on the break, counters get triggered based on how much the opposition over commit. As long as you're not on a defensive mentality or lower, you should get plenty of counter attacks if you set up right defensively.

Setting up to hit on the break is very different to fast, direct, attacking fotball.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09.09.2021 at 17:01, Ahewrestlingfan said:

What would you say needs to be changed with this tactic to make it better suited to playing as a weaker team in the lower league, this has been working quite well I can usually finish in the top half of the table despite being predicted to be in the bottom half but I'd like to see what I can change.

Banks 4-4-2.png

Nothing. It is a well balanced midblock counter style 4-4-2.

Very fluid team shape with lots of support duties can strengthen counter & counter-press. This team can attack & defend collectively. So I'm not surprised with your successful league position.

The only change I may suggest Ws instead of IWs for RM if there is a suited player. The reason is; CMs-DLFs-IWs can use potentially similar areas. Also this change can provide width to your attacks and increase scoring chances of AFa indirectly.

Edited by zabyl
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jack722 said:

Disagree, if you're looking to sit back, concede possession and hit on the break, counters get triggered based on how much the opposition over commit. As long as you're not on a defensive mentality or lower, you should get plenty of counter attacks if you set up right defensively.

Setting up to hit on the break is very different to fast, direct, attacking fotball.

With only one support role on balanced mentality playing counter attack will be an interesting venture. I would want 3 attacking roles in there at least. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09.09.2021 at 18:36, Fatkidscantjump said:

Only one attack duty with a balanced mentality means possible lack of penetration. I'd change the right Iw(s) to an attack duty so he can use the space created by the Dlf. Just this one change for now and monitor how it goes.

It is not necessary to use an attack duty on the right. This tactic balances the risks with support duties. That change can increase the risks and can weaken this team's midblock press & counter-press.

 

21 saat önce, glengarry224 said:

you don't have attacking width on either flank in the final third;

This tactic creates enough width to play counter attacking. He doesn't use a possession based tactic. Also he manages a bottom half side so a weaker side.

 

21 saat önce, glengarry224 said:

you don't have enough players on attack duty to counter attack (2-3 is good for underdog teams)

He has enough players to play counter. This team plays collective counter not a direct one.

 

21 saat önce, glengarry224 said:

Also, the 4-4-2 has an inherent issue with the gaps between the DL and midfield and the midfield and strikers.

True. But it has higher advantages on counter style than any other formation. So why not using a 4-4-2.

 

21 saat önce, glengarry224 said:

Plus you are playing on standard both DL and LOE, which leaves more space in defensive transition.  Therefore, to create a more compact block, consider either raising the DL one notch

Not necessary on balanced mentality if you use a counter based midblock style . If you want to cut opposition's AMC, then you can do it with one of your CM's personal marking PI. There are a lot of ways to shut the opposition than changing your playing style.

 

21 saat önce, YAMS said:

You'll never have a consistent counter attack with Balanced mentality & only one attack role in your line up. Never going to work. 

I think this is a prejudice my friend :)

 

 

20 saat önce, De Nile said:

Having a structured shape works best with counter attacking having a very fluid shape means the team would attacking as one and in counter attacking you only need a few player on support.

You explained the direct counter style but this tactic is a collective counter. This team attacks and defends as a unit.

 

20 saat önce, De Nile said:

Play out of defense is not great for counter attacking.

Play out of defence is not great for direct counter attacks. But it is useful for fluid counters as this example.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hace 1 hora, zabyl dijo:
hace 21 horas, De Nile dijo:

Having a structured shape works best with counter attacking having a very fluid shape means the team would attacking as one and in counter attacking you only need a few player on support.

You explained the direct counter style but this tactic is a collective counter. This team attacks and defends as a unit.2

This "collective counter" and the team attacking and defending with the player being close to eachother reminds me an old tactic framework from FM2008 called "Zagallo's 2-6-2". Where those "6" are both fullbacks and the flat midfield who goes up and down as a unit and the other "2" are the center backs and strikers. 

 

hace 1 hora, zabyl dijo:
hace 21 horas, De Nile dijo:

Play out of defense is not great for counter attacking.

Play out of defence is not great for direct counter attacks. But it is useful for fluid counters as this example.

What is the difference between a direct counter attack and a fluid one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 dakika önce, bosque said:

What is the difference between a direct counter attack and a fluid one?

With a direct counter; the most advanced players attack the space with direct long balls. Has high risks of losing the ball and suited more to lower league teams because of the importance of physical attributes like acceleration-pace.

With a fluid / collective counter, team attack the space together as a more organised manner with balancing the risks without losing the ball easily. Has balanced risks and suited more to higher level football leagues where both physical and technical attributes are higher already.

I suppose Football Manager AI uses this style more because I saw these movements and organised counters more on match engine when playing against defensive teams. I think this style of counter is more suited to top leagues' average or below average teams. Because they have fine technical and physical attributes to play this modern defensive style compared to older direct one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/09/2021 at 09:17, zabyl said:

This tactic creates enough width to play counter attacking. He doesn't use a possession based tactic. Also he manages a bottom half side so a weaker side.

 

That might be correct but he asked about potential improvements.  I intentionally wrote that these were possibilities - or things that he could look out for.  If he stops scoring because teams learn what he is doing and just pack the center, he'll need to address the width issue at some point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 saat önce, glengarry224 said:

That might be correct but he asked about potential improvements.  I intentionally wrote that these were possibilities - or things that he could look out for.  If he stops scoring because teams learn what he is doing and just pack the center, he'll need to address the width issue at some point.

I understand your approach, but you are exaggerating too much about width. 4-4-2 has natural width from its shape unless you drop attacking width or use both flank pairs as inside cutting roles like IWB-IW or IWB-WP partnerships. “FB” can provide enough width on a FBs-IWs flank. It is an excellent partnership for natural overlaps. When IWs gets the ball and starts to cut inside with a strange “L” shape, at the same time FBs pushes forward to provide width. This is a fine movement combination. 

 

Additionally; narrow deep defending weaker teams defend like that because of human manager’s high DL-LOE combo. That narrow deep style is weaker teams’ AI’s reaction to aggressive DL-LOE. So it is a trap… If you use higher levels for both against weaker teams, prepare yourself for some Arsenal football against nasty park the bus.

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...