Lower League direct approach (4-4-2)

[bwidell]

First time posting in here, hopefully I didn't muck anything up.

Anyway, decided that this year I'd like to build my own tactic and start in the lower leagues, so I'm looking for some feedback to see if I'm on the right track.

I'm looking to play a pretty direct 4-4-2, nothing too complicated as my side is pretty average. Basically, get it wide and put a cross in or play a through pass to my (relatively) pacey forwards to run onto.

Here's what I've come up with, I'll go into some more detail later.

Starting from the back on, Goalkeeper just needs to do his job, nothing fancy.

Limited Defenders because I'd rather they not mess about and just get the ball to someone more skilled. Want to keep it solid back there.

Fullbacks because I know for a fact that I won't have players who are suited to wingback for a while. Unsure about what duty to give them, though, so left it on Automatic.

Went BWM defend and DLP support in center midfield as those roles match my two best CMs. I think I chose the right duties, but I could be way off.

Wingers because I want these guys to help in the attack a lot. Chose attack on the left and support on the right, to get a bit of a different look, and because one of them is mostly just pace.

Poacher to exploit his pace, but for the other forward I went with DF support because it looked like he'd fit that role, and he'd offer some link up with my midfield. But I was really just guessing on this one.

As far as the team settings, just tried to guess on what matched how I wanted to play best. You can basically ignore control strategy, as I plan to alter that depending on who I'm playing. Unless that's wrong, too (it very well could be )

To give you guys an idea of my team's strengths and weaknesses...

Also looking for any suggestions on what shouts would help me with the style I'm looking for.

I'm open to any any all suggestions, questions, criticism, etc. Have at me.

[Aleynasdad]

Im playing level 9 (Sussex county one) with a 4-2-1-2-1 formation. Something very similair to what Mr Hough suggests on his threads and working with his shouts and developed them. Havent lost a game all season and Im at the end of October.

[bwidell]

Pre-season went well (http://i.imgur.com/n1GDe.png), but I'm wondering now if it might be better going with something a bit simpler. Simply because my players lack quality.

Something along these lines:

Rigid + Counter. More Direct + Disciplined. Zonal Marking + Stick to Position.

Thoughts? Still unsure about shouts. I know they can be very useful but I'm not sure which to use at the moment.

[furiousuk]

Why did you change your roles around?

Look like you got some good results in pre-season, why don't you think your first setup would work during the season?

[bwidell]

Haven't changed anything yet actually, took a break to get some work done.

I suppose I was over thinking it, to be honest. Going to start the season off with what I had originally planned and see how it's looking after a few matches. I'll probably hold off on any shouts right away, since it would probably make sense to get the shape down first, then the player roles and strategy, before I throw shouts into the mix, no?

[furiousuk]

Sounds like a good plan.

A quick observation I've got is with your midfield - a BWM closes down very hard so if you've got him as your holding player, then, well, he won't. The DLP may cover for him, even with a support duty, but if you have problems have a look at reversing the duties so the BWM is on Support and the DLP is on Defend. Just something to consider.

[bwidell]

Got a chance to play my first league match, came out with a comfortable 3-1 win, with their goal coming in the 90th minute. Used the settings from my first post, with the exception of swapping the DF support for a TM support, due to injury. I think I liked how that played, as he held the ball up quite well for us which allowed the rest of the team to get involved.

I did make one switch, after 15 minutes. We were already up 1-0, but I wasn't enjoying the fact that the team was essentially bypassing the wingers all together, so I scrapped the idea of playing 'More Direct,' which seemed to solve the problem.

I'm still not sure what I should do with my fullbacks. They were solid in defense, but they only got off one cross each (which may have more to do with their quality than my tactic). I'd like them to be a bit more involved in the offense, but wouldn't want to lose too much cover. I have them on automatic now, and I'm not sure if I should stick with that or if support would be better suited.

Anyway, here's some match stats:

Any advice on what to look for in the Analysis tab?

A quick observation I've got is with your midfield - a BWM closes down very hard so if you've got him as your holding player, then, well, he won't. The DLP may cover for him, even with a support duty, but if you have problems have a look at reversing the duties so the BWM is on Support and the DLP is on Defend. Just something to consider.

I did notice this to be a bit wonky, the BWM was pulling himself out of position a bit and at times the DLP wasn't able to cover for him. I'll swap them around next match and see how they get on.

What would an alternative to the BWM be, if I wanted to keep the DLP on support? Just a CM defend?

[Elliath]

I used almost the same setup as you in FM12 and it was working quite well. I was always the underdog, so I was using mostly counter/standard strategies, but those roles worked pretty well for my team.

CM(d) should be more conservative than BWM(d) so you can try and see for yourself. I was using BWM when I wanted to hassle opposing playmaker. Anyway you should watch the matches and see for yourself how it works for you.

Those match stats look good in my opinion. For my team I had a rule that the game went well if I won and I had like 12 shots, 6 of them were on target (50% of total shots) and I scored 3 goals (50% of SoT). You had 9 shots and 6 on target with 3 goals so you are creating good amount of scoring changes. But thats only my personal evaluation.

You can check the Analysis tab for some abnormalities - like if one player has really low pass competion % or anything else that stands out from the rest. But don't try to fix anything that is not broken.

[bwidell]

So this happened:

My centerbacks closed down way too high (I'm on Zonal marking), not playing offside trap either, so my fullbacks didn't move up. My center mids also didn't do much more than traffic cones could do.

Would switching to man marking help this? I'd really love to stay on Zonal, any role suggestions that would help? I'd prefer my centerbacks here to hold their position and for the CMs to pick up the men instead.

[bwidell]

So we got hammered, 4-1. Our goal came late after we were down 4 goals... Can't tell if this was just "one of those games" or if my tactics are off.

Still don't know what's happening with my centerbacks. It's really noticeable when my keeper has the ball, they move way up the field, just behind the opposition strikers. The problem is my fullbacks sit really deep on the wings, leaving lots of room for any striker with decent pace to just skate on past my centerbacks. Has anyone encountered this?

Is there a guide out there on how to set up a simple 4-4-2, something that will help me get a tactic to work without many adjustments, that I can tweak once results are steady?

[Elliath]

I think this should be solved by using OIs. Tight marking should make your midfielders stick to opposition or you can use Closing down on both of them. BWM(s) and DLP(d) both have default closing down set to "Own half" so they will try to close them when you are defeinding in your half. However it could depend on your defensive line. If it's too deep, they could start to close down later.

Both of your defenders are tight marking the strikers. Did you use tight marking OI on them? If so, you can try to leave it on "none" and see how they behave.

[Elliath]

Is there a guide out there on how to set up a simple 4-4-2, something that will help me get a tactic to work without many adjustments, that I can tweak once results are steady?

I think you should stick with your current tactic. Your team could behave strangely if they are not gelled together/don't know the tactic well. I don't think you could make your tactic much simplier as it is now.

[bwidell]

Starting to feel like I'm in over my head here. I can see that the team isn't playing how I'd like, I just have no idea what I need to do to change that. I've poured through lots of threads here and it's all basically discussing 4-5-1s (or some variation). I know 4-4-2 isn't popular anymore, but it seems like nobody's talking about it because everyone else knows how to properly set one up (except me! haha).

I know the team needs to jell, but that leads me to another thing I have absolutely no clue on... general/match training. Have no idea what a good, basic way to set that would be. Same problem I'm having with tactics.

I'm really leaning towards restarting the save, and not using any specialist roles. Just a TM, Poacher, two wingers, two CMs (defend/support), fullbacks, centerbacks. Leave everything on default.... I'm lost!

[NotPotter]

I have been trying to do exactly the same as you Bwidell. I have also noticed that using zonal marking causes 'interesting' things to central defenders (whether this is just a lower-league thing I'm not sure), as even with 'stand off more' selected my centre backs feel they both should close down the same opposing striker, which subsequently leaves massive holes for the opposition to run through and despite the pressure of my two centre backs, always manage to thread a through ball to the runner.

Now some of this I put down to the quality of player I have available to me (I am Droylsden in the BSN, so they are the footballing equivalent of a two year old child dribbling with a colander on it's head) but I have always thought quality of player was relevant to the rest of the league (hence the importance of using the comparison charts). I have never been able to have the same effect of the opposition though.

What I am struggling with most is trying to work out what's the best way to play to my team's strengths because the values on the comparison pages are so inconsistent and don't really form a conducive pattern and applying that to a 4-4-2 that works within the framework of FM.

[bwidell]

So I've settled on my shape and player roles for now:

Everything aside from that is on default settings.

What I'm having a hard time doing is figuring out what Philosophy, Playing Style settings, and shouts I should use to get the team playing the way I'd like:

Basically, primarily want things to come from my wingers working the touchline and putting crosses in. I want them to be able to take on and beat their man, or latch onto a diagonal ball from one of my center mids. Too often I've noticed my wingers get the ball around the halfway line and instead of trying to take on their man or play a one two, they just launch the ball over the top to no one, and we lose possession.

Defensively, simple is how I want to keep it. I may not need to make any changes, but any suggestions are welcome. The only thing bothering me is this fullbacks issue, brought up here.

[NakS]

Hi bwidel

I have made a "how to made a simple 442" thread but it's in french actually. I'll still try to helpp you though using pictures I have made for that occasion.

Basic 442 shape, numbered in french standard so CB are 4 and 5 rather than 4 and 6 as in british football if I recall correctly

2 danger zones. The bottom one is defensively. Weakness of 442 is how it defends depth since it is a 3-line formation, you need to defend correctly this space. I'd recommand keeping your CM-Defend which is a better for role for holding than a BWM-D. Since you have a rather quick defence, you may check opponent attacking players pace and try to push up defensive line to reduce space in the middle of the pitch and between your defence and midfield. You may consider as well playing narrower to even further reduce space against 433 or 4231 for example. You second CM you should not be gung-ho (avoid attack duty here) but he still has to make the link between defence and attack. A DLPM sit deep and spray passes but he may be a bit far away from your strikers, a CM-Support would do the trick as he is more an all rouder and will not be on the same line as your CM-Defend (RFD - rare and RFD - sometimes). Be careful that the DLPM has less closing down and mentality than a CM-S...

Strength of the 442 is width, you can have still 3 players down one flank (FB,WM,ST), keep the midfield patrolled (CM x2) having a central striker (other ST) and a man at far post (opposite WM). To best use this width, have a striker dropping deep into the other black zone between midfield and attack. A DLF-Support is perfect when it is associate with a depth striker like AF-Attack.

Here is a very basic 442 animation

4-5-6 are defend duties, they are guarding the dangerous space between line. 8 is a simple yet effective passing midfielder. He should be ok when defending the square (4-5-6-8). So look for a complete midfielder. Each player of the square should have good positioning and concentration attributes. They really have to ne in shape. The left striker drops deep to link play, number 9 is higher and just in from of your more creative/passing midfielder (number8). 2 wingers providing width who can be on different depth (read different duty/RFD).

Your 442 is based on partnership

Using a gif, I highlight how balance should be checked

First is defensive box (0)

Usually 3 defense duties and one support. 4 defense duties (or a DLPM) may lack offensive centran support and with a DLPM lacking bite in midfiel.

Midfield partnership (1)

Defense and support duties. One holding and one passing, simple stuff. How you are picking your players here will change how your team will play. So have a good look at attributes

Striker partnership (2)

Support and attack duties. 2 different depth, one dropping and linking up play (creative forward) the other one looking for space in behind

Offensive box (3)

1 defence duty, 2 support duties, 1 attack duty. The support striker is in front of the holding CM and your passing CM is behind your quick forward

Wide offensive partnership (4)

Keep balance as well. Left side is support ST + CM defence so an Attack WM will add varieties. On the rigth, a more conservative choice is required not to invade AF-A space. Something like CM-Support + WM-Support + AF-Attack

Wide support partnership

Same logic, look at duties balance. On left side you have a CM-Defense holding and a WM-Attack. Due to the presence of a holding CM and a very high winger, your fullback can stay in touch with attack. So WBack-Support (RFD often default) + CM-Defense + WM-Attack look a pretty agressive wingplay but bear in mind you have a ST-Support and CM-Defense on that flank. If you feel in danger, switch to a FB-Support. On the rigth wing, you have a CM support which means you can not be gung-ho with your FB. I'd recommand a simple FB-Support. Actually, you should be aware that a wingback-support is a bit like an attack duty because of RFD often by default.

Choosinh philosophy depends on several things. Usually how you want risks to be spread amongst your shape. A very fluid shape means everyone shares the same set of mind when it comes to defense and attack since they all have the same mentality. If you want more threat down the wing, balance allow you FB to have a higher mentality than CB for example.

For a 442, I don't recommand fluid philosophy at all.

Don't be afraid, it is just how mentality is spread on a 442 with a fluid philosophy. X is GK mentality

I have written down mentality difference between your players in a 442. What I am looking out is how much mentality difference I have between defence and midfield. With fluid I have 2 groups of players with a 4 mentality difference. Remember I try to reduce that dangerous space. Only based on formation and mentality structure, I don't like how fluid philosophy is altering my shape. Huge gap in risk taking between defense and CM-8 and between FB and WM

Here is the very fluid philosophy. Everyone is tight mentality wise which is think is way better when your shape leave space between defence and midfield. I quite like a very fluid 442. But, creative freedom should not be neglect and in very fluid you have high levels of it.

Another philosophy I like is very-rigid

Smaller gaps on the flanks between FB and WM, it should help me keeping some sort of shape in transition. Very rigid is ok for a 442 but you may like some threat down flank. Rigid may suit more your attacking project down the flank.

Regarding shouts, I'd make a group "reduce space between lines" with "push higher up + play narrower". You should consider attack down the flanks "exploits the flank"

Hope it helps

[PeeKay]

NakS, great post on the 4-4-2 as it's very comprehesive.

Bwidel, are you using the same tactic for every match? This could be why your results are not quite working every match. I find that creating additional 2 tactics based on your basic; one more attacking and one more defensive to use when you are overwelming favourities or underdogs. You can use the same formation and just modify the roles, e.g change DLP to AP for attacking or DLF to DF for defensive. Of course, you can be more extreme (changes in philosophies, style and shape) but that raises other issues with familarity.

I would not get a hang up on how lower league teams should play and if they can not use more complex roles. It's best to get the team to play how you want it to play as it is relative to the teams that you are against. The only thing I would be cautious on would be anyting that increase creativity in a player; it stops them from doing what you ask for!

[bwidell]

Cheers NakS, the tweaks you suggested for what I had have really helped! The squad's doing strong in the early months of the season.