Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Sign in to follow this  
hicuty

Help My 4-4-2 pls

Recommended Posts

Hello i just started a new save with Espanyol. I am playing 4-4-2 with defensive mentality and flexible team shape. I use only shorter passing as TI. My system is this:

                    DLF(S)        CF(A)

WM(A)        MC(d)          BTB(s)      W(S)

WB(s)         DC               DC           FB(A)

I use PIs for wm to replicate inside forwards. Also w(s) has get further forward pi. Some notable ppms are dlf - come deep to get ball, cf - play one twos and btb - arrives late into opposition are.

So my problem is in defence. I have some decent centre backs but conceded 7 goals in last 3 games. there is a gap between my defence and midfield also my midfield cant handle 3 or more opponents' midfield players. They are just outnumbered. 

My plan is to make wm(A) to wm(S) and give him sit narrow pi. Also i plan to increase defensive line. I dont know if i should touch team shape as it affects the space between lines. Do you have any suggestions to this setup? Is it balanced or have an obvious weakness? I need some help about this. 

Edited by hicuty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your idea to change the WM(A) to WM(S) is sound as he should be more likely to get back and help the defence, and will keep a more even line across the midfield. Similarly, you might want to do the same with the FB(A). The thought of moving the D-line forward is good, but you'll find that changing to a STRUCTURED team shape will have your players maintain their defensive shape better. You might also look at reducing the width a notch too, making them more compact. The other role you might look at is the BTB midfielder. He will be less enthusiastic about bombing forward as a CM(S) but it's worth a try to see if it shores up the defence a tad. Good luck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the WB (s) and FB (a) are the trendy thing to do ... but in a 442 I always think I want my wingers to be the primary attacking width. Attacking full backs and wing backs are great in a tactic that doesn't have wingers. But in your tactic - On the right side I'd definitely want my full back to stay back in support of an attacking winger. (surely the winger has better dribbling and crossing stats, and the FB has better defensive stats?) ... you may then want the left back to be attacking if your WM is cutting in as auxiliary CM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your two CMs need to be more  disciplined, particularly against 3 man midfields.

The CM(d) has "close down more" by default now so he'll be chasing the opposition around off the ball. The B2B will be roaming everywhere when on the ball. Both situations will leave you vulnerable during transitions. 

I've found a DLP(d) besides a CM(s) to be working okay for the couple of 4-4-2 games I've played recently (Villa). I haven't found their to be a significant gap between my defence and midfield, but granted, I am using very fluid. 

Edited by Rui

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...