4-1-4-1 counter

[shirajzl]

4141 is supposedly easy to get it right, but I can't do it for the life of me.

Counter, Fluid/Very Fluid

PI:

WMs - Cut Inside

WMa - Run Wide

The good

We're keeping our shape nicely in defence, all the corridors are shut, wide midfielders especially are doing their job of preventing overloads on the flanks. The central trio holds the middle with ease.

The bad

We can't seem to do practically anything going forward, not when countering, not from full build-up play. Sure, we get one or two decent plays a game and if we score, we have a good chance of keeping the lead. However, generally, we're incredibly toothless. The attacker helps in build-up, we can relatively easily keep the ball (depending on the opposition), but far away from danger. When we're up in the attacking third, we lack real penetration and danger, despite the obvious patterns emerge; like overlaps on the left side and crossing from the right side.

Failed remedies

First off, I tried Standard, with the idea that playing a bit higher, wider and faster, we could be more dangerous. Failed. It's pretty much the same; tight at the back, useless going forward.

I then, following the same logic, changed to control. The result was that we lost our defensive coherence, unsurprisingly, and matches started to become adventurous end-to-end affairs, which I don' want.

Next, on counter and standard I noticed a lot of stray, long passes, i.e. we lost possession needlessly too quickly. I applied Short Passing and/or Retain Possession. Those passes were toned down, we kept the ball much better, passing it around nicely...until we enter the final third and again hit the wall. That's both against teams which were attacking us and against teams which were sitting deep.

I tried changing roles a bit. Midfield became CMa-CMs, wide midfielders became wingers, the attacker was both DLFs and DLFa. Nothing substantially changed. The same problems occur. Also tried fullbacks as wingbacks, but not much improvement.

(I was trying those things once at a time and, eventually, all together, still nothing.)

I'm losing my mind here, what am I missing?

[Rykjvk]

Took our jerbs! Please guys, help a brotha out!

[SpartyOn]

What team are you? If you're a strong team, it may be that opponents are playing cautious against you and not attacking to give you opportunities to counter.

[kingjericho]

Have you tried your striker in a supporting role? By being on an attacking mindset he might be too far from the midfield. This way his only involvment in the attacking process is trying to get through balls over the defense, and not really helping the midfield when in possession.

[shirajzl]

I'm the worst team in French 3rd tier, so it's not that.

As I said in OP, I've tried strikers on support as well, didn't change much. He contributed to build-up, but it was even worse because he's far away from goal.

[kingjericho]

I'd definitely go with the full backs as Wing Backs. Wide midfielders aren't the 'explosive winger' style and for them to be dangerous from wide areas they need support. So wing backs seems to be a better fit than the traditional full back.

The DM could be a DLP(d). If you're playing on the counter you need someone to put those through balls, and apart from the Advanced Playmaker you have nobody with that mission. Having the DM as a DLP will ensure that he looks for the best passing options rather than just passing the ball to the Advanced Playmaker.

What about Team Instructions, what do you have?

[Ultimoroger]

I've tried to get this formation working myself, but I also struggle. Here's what I'm currently working with;

LB: FB(A)

CD: LD(D) X 2

RB: FB(S)

DM: DM/A(D)

LM: WM(S)

CM: CM(A)

CM: DLP(S)/BBM(S)

RM: W(A)

CF: DLF(S)

I usually play on Standard/Fluid. I try not to define my teams as either counter-attacking/possession/attacking/defending. I like to think standard is a good balance of all these things, maybe this is naive of me. I just want them to be solid.

I find a CM(A) really helps with my attack. If I want to use a play-maker I'll include a DLP(S). I also sometimes make the WM attack as well. Someone suggested trying wingbacks, I may give that a try as well.

In regards to your problems with your striker, I have them as well. If my striker struggles, we lose-usually. Most of my wage budget is spent on my striker.

[Glaps]

Is your team familar with the tactic yet? I had great success with this tactic also on counter and fluid.

My DM was a roaming playmaker and i had a CMd in the middle, You need to have a support duty for your striker. Hes to isolated if you don't.

Might be a struggle to find the players in third tier france tho

[llama3]

You don't have many players trying to get up in support of an attack, nor many direct players. Often you need something resembling a direct outlet, and someone busting a gut off the ball to get in support of the attackers. You don't have anyone doing this in a consistent manner. This formation also tends to struggle to get support to the striker consistently. Suggestions:

• Get a Wing Back role in place of a Full Back role, at least on the left flank, possibly right flank too.
  
• Get a CM(A) role into midfield. Consider the behaviour of each role to decide the best place for it. I would suggest in place of your BBM(S) as the WM(S) will cut into the space behind the CM(A) when he gets forward. I would also look to make the AP(A) an AP(S) to balance your duties and provide enough cover in midfield.
  
• At the same time you get your CM(A) forward, your DLF needs to be dropping back as a Support duty to help this.

What team are you using? What team instructions are you using, as these are essential to know to give appropriate advice?

[shirajzl]

I'm Colomiers, the worst team in the league.

I have no team instructions (explained what I've tried in the OP).

Maybe the key are wingbacks for more aggression down the flanks + a DLP or a roaming playmaker, i.e. a much more active role in DM position. Maybe a DLP first because I fear having someone who roams around from that position.

As I already said, I've tried CMa and DLFs; they certainly help a bit, but a lot is still missing.

I got it to work somewhat when I pushed ML and MR up to AML and AMR, but I don't want that. I'm more dangerous because those two are waiting for the ball in wide areas, but my defensive coherence suffers as a result.

[llama3]

You might need some Team Instructions to help you maintain some style of play to suit the system and players.

[shirajzl]

You might need some Team Instructions to help you maintain some style of play to suit the system and players.

One of the things I tried to implement was a traditional counter-attacking style (or so I thought), added More Direct Passes and Higher Tempo to move the ball quickly and exploit the space. The only thing I got out of it was losing possession within seconds every time and no good counters whatsoever.

[llama3]

What does your team comparison say about your team? That's kind of essential to know how to adapt it.

[daleuk8]

What does your team comparison say about your team? That's kind of essential to know how to adapt it.

I struggle to understand the comparison pages.

[brussels]

hi,

the way I interpret the 4141 is that the DM is preferably an anchor man type, someone that will always stay back, and I want 2 marauding CMs in front of him. Also a central AP may be slowing down your attacks.

Think that the 4141 is a very defensive version of the 433, so the second line of 4 has to be willing to join the attack whenever you win the ball, and willing to track back when you loose it. You may also want to try using one of your wide midfielders in the AML/R position (the formation is not gonna be symmetric anyway due to the different roles and duties).

Whenever I tried playing 4141 in previous FM versions (usually to defend a lead or a second leg in cup games) it was relatively solid in defense but useless in attack. And sometimes it would explode in my face as it would invite too much pressure (as whenever you go on park the bus mode).

[shirajzl]

What does your team comparison say about your team? That's kind of essential to know how to adapt it.

The team is the weakest, and I meant THE weakest. Bottom 3 in almost every attribute.

That's an interesting thing you mentioned, I always wondered how would tactical experts here adapt their team if it was so painfully bad (relative to the rest of the league).

[brussels]

I always wondered how would tactical experts here adapt their team if it was so painfully bad

resigning is a good strategy

with bad players there's only so much you can do, especially if morale is low and the players don't react to motivation

[Switters]

I'm using 4141 too with Wolves and doing pretty well. Your deep lying forward (attack) is likely to be isolated in any build up. It might be good to drop him to support role. Your forward might also not have enough support to score or lay off in the box, so push one of your wide player further forward, maybe give him roaming and cut inside too. So he's the direct outlet to score and support. Advanced playmaker might not be a great idea if he pushes too far up and too close to team mates in the final third. I got mine as roaming playmaker, so he drops deeper and controls the midfield with his passing. Finally, whichever wide midfielder pushes further up and inside, it might be a good idea to have the full back on 'wingback (a) duty on that same side, to provide width and crosses.

[llama3]

Well I would look at what my team can do - either game by game comparison, or in general. Have a system which specifically enhances my only good quality, or a couple of adaptable systems depending on what I am trying to nullify.

[fmjeros]

Hi shirajzl , I played a lot last year with 4141 formation and know some things how things should work out. First of all if you go for a counter attacking tactic,which is the reasonable thinking since it is a very weak team, you should be a bit more aggressive in attack roles you choose, eg the standard way of setting up a tactic is to use 3defend 4 support and 3 attack roles. When I manage a very weak team and play this style of fottball I always try to go for 325 or at least 334. Obviously as other people said you should go for a support role upfront and due to the poor players you have I suggest a defensive forward. Surely one of the midfielders should be in attack and one wide player and probably the 2 fullbacks as well. So let's say a rigid setup you should go for 3-4 specialist roles could be the following example

GK

CWB(a)

DC

DC

WB(a)

Anchorman

Raumdeuter(a)

AP(s)

MC(a)

Winger(s)

DF(s)