Old School 442

[Romers]

I'm trying to build a very traditional 442 that I grew up watching in the early 90's and just wanted some opinions on my initial plans

My thoughts are:

GK (D) - Bog standard, keep the ball out of the net, none of this modern day "must be good with his feet" nonsense

FB (S) - Both sides, to stay in line the majority of the time with the two CB's and offer a passing option to the wingers if they can't beat their man to get a cross in

CB (D) - Both, I don't see limited defenders here hoofing it clear but just two simple defenders staying in line and giving it to a better player once they've got it

Wiger (A) - Both sides, these guys are the heartbeat of the team, looking for pacey players to run at defences and chase chaos and supply the two strikers 

CM (D) - This guy needs to keep it simple, hold his position in the middle, win it back, give it short to his midfield partner or one of the wingers and be available as a passing option if attacks are going nowhere

B2B (S) - Looking for this guy to arrive late and support attacks but then when it breaks down to get back in position and help win the ball back

TM (S) & Adv For (A) - A classic big man-little man partnership, big guy wins flick on's if the smaller guy is in behind or he holds it up and links up with him if he's deeper or pushes it back to the B2B arriving late 

Team instructions I'm thinking:

Rigid - Each player has his own role 

More Direct - No need to build from the back here

Exploit The Flanks - To encourage play via the pacey wide men 

Higher Tempo - A really intense approach to make things happen quickly to catch out defences

 

Then I have a few tweaks in mind depending on how the game is going:

Wide Men Quiet = Clear Ball To Flanks

Wide Men Struggling To Get Balls In = Hit Early Crosses

Against Deep Defences = Run At Defence to draw them out 

Against High Defences = Pass Into Space to get in behind 

 

Let me know if you have any immediate thoughts on things I've missed, for example do I need to add width or will that just expose holes in my back 4? Should the Adv For be a Poacher or does that limit his involvement?

[Craigus89]

You've clearly thought through the attacking aspects, but probably the main reason that this formation, and more specifically, this way of playing the 4-4-2 died is because of the weaknesses in the midfield, particularly against 'more modern' formations with 5 man midfields.

How do you intend to defend? Press high up? Drop back and stay compact?

Also a lot of your success will depend on the team you are managing and player selection. Whilst the wingers may be the heartbeat in terms of supplying assists and driving the team forward, the real heartbeat is the central midfielders. These guys need to be complete footballers with big engines, capable of defending well and in a robust manner whilst also being capable of play making and supporting attacks.

[Romers]

18 minutes ago, Craigus89 said:

You've clearly thought through the attacking aspects, but probably the main reason that this formation, and more specifically, this way of playing the 4-4-2 died is because of the weaknesses in the midfield, particularly against 'more modern' formations with 5 man midfields.

How do you intend to defend? Press high up? Drop back and stay compact?

Also a lot of your success will depend on the team you are managing and player selection. Whilst the wingers may be the heartbeat in terms of supplying assists and driving the team forward, the real heartbeat is the central midfielders. These guys need to be complete footballers with big engines, capable of defending well and in a robust manner whilst also being capable of play making and supporting attacks.

Very good point! I don't visualise a high line with lots of pressing but equally I don't see a deep line allowing lots of time on the ball for the other team. Can I find a balance? Leave my line where it is as standard but encourage more pressing and tighter marking to reduce the time my opponents have on the ball? I see your point with midfield, my plan is to find very complete midfielders or allow youngsters the time to become this more to the point. I'm re-starting with Southampton so I can see Redmond doing well right wing and Hojbjerg has impressed when I've played him as a B2B in a 3412 but I don't know who the "sitter" will be as JWP doesn't have the discipline 

[roggiotis]

Why u want wingers instead of WMs?

Wingers always have activated dribble more ,run wide with ball , stay wider and cross more often ,

are u sure u want to play like this ?

[Romers]

51 minutes ago, roggiotis said:

Why u want wingers instead of WMs?

Wingers always have activated dribble more ,run wide with ball , stay wider and cross more often ,

are u sure u want to play like this ?

All those things are what I want from my wide men 

[roggiotis]

Ok ,then

did you play some games ?

what mentality u use ?

isn't  risky higher tempo + more direct ?

[Wilesy]

From my experience wingers perform more to my liking in a 4-4-2 on a support role rather than attack. My strikers aren't the fastest so I found the wingers were beating them to the last third and attacks were breaking down.

Poacher works fine as a compliment to the target man, can see the advanced forward doing this too, you want him to always be ahead of your target man ideally. I also found a target man with an attacking focus to try and flick the ball on (to no one generally) rather than build the play that the support role offers.

I play a deep line, defence is there to defend. Having the 4 midfielders make 2 banks of 4 is the main line of defence. I tend to not use much closing down, they have to play through me to score.

You may not need to up the tempo, what you are looking to do is frustrate the other team then clear it to your flanks and let the wingers do the damage. 

[Romers]

41 minutes ago, roggiotis said:

Ok ,then

did you play some games ?

what mentality u use ?

isn't  risky higher tempo + more direct ?

 

20 minutes ago, Wilesy said:

From my experience wingers perform more to my liking in a 4-4-2 on a support role rather than attack. My strikers aren't the fastest so I found the wingers were beating them to the last third and attacks were breaking down.

Poacher works fine as a compliment to the target man, can see the advanced forward doing this too, you want him to always be ahead of your target man ideally. I also found a target man with an attacking focus to try and flick the ball on (to no one generally) rather than build the play that the support role offers.

I play a deep line, defence is there to defend. Having the 4 midfielders make 2 banks of 4 is the main line of defence. I tend to not use much closing down, they have to play through me to score.

You may not need to up the tempo, what you are looking to do is frustrate the other team then clear it to your flanks and let the wingers do the damage. 

I haven't played any games with this yet I'll be testing it tonight. I think the higher tempo and more direct passing I'll leave off until I've seen how they perform without these additions

Thanks Wilesy I had thought of winger supports as I think I want them to just beat their man and get it in so I'll observe the difference, what do you do with your full backs?

Ill start with TM S & AF but I'll bare in mind your comment on the TM

will try without the closing down and see if I can build 2 banks of solid 4's

[Coulthard's Jaw]

If you're going two flat banks of 4 you're probably better using a flexible or fluid team shape.

[hollij93]

I'm playing a 4-4-2 atm with my Bournemouth side, and I've found that it works best (for me anyway) to:

Have plenty of pace in your team on the flanks and up front

Set your defensive line to 'deeper', and enable higher tempo, more direct passing, defensive/counter mentality (Essentially think of Leicester last season)

As my forwards (Wilson and Afobe/Assombalonga) are both quick but not big I've also enabled 'low crosses' which has proved successful in this FM

Also have made one of the wide men a winger (A) and one a Wide Midfielder (S), as with the right player the WM then becomes a goal threat from those crosses

My full team (give or take some rotation) is:

 

GK (D) Rajkovic

RB (Defensive full back) - Callum Chambers 

CB (D) - Michael Keane

BPD (D) Steve Cook

WB (S) - Charlie Taylor

W(A) - Jordan Ibe

DLP (D) Lewis Cook

BBM (S) Harry Arter

WM (S) - Jesse Lingard

DLF (S) - Britt Assombalonga

CF (S) - Callum Wilson

 

 

[Romers]

2 hours ago, Coulthard's Jaw said:

If you're going two flat banks of 4 you're probably better using a flexible or fluid team shape.

How come? I thought Rigid encouraged a standard team shape and fluid encourage deviation from this?

[Romers]

34 minutes ago, hollij93 said:

I'm playing a 4-4-2 atm with my Bournemouth side, and I've found that it works best (for me anyway) to:

Have plenty of pace in your team on the flanks and up front

Set your defensive line to 'deeper', and enable higher tempo, more direct passing, defensive/counter mentality (Essentially think of Leicester last season)

As my forwards (Wilson and Afobe/Assombalonga) are both quick but not big I've also enabled 'low crosses' which has proved successful in this FM

Also have made one of the wide men a winger (A) and one a Wide Midfielder (S), as with the right player the WM then becomes a goal threat from those crosses

My full team (give or take some rotation) is:

 

GK (D) Rajkovic

RB (Defensive full back) - Callum Chambers 

CB (D) - Michael Keane

BPD (D) Steve Cook

WB (S) - Charlie Taylor

W(A) - Jordan Ibe

DLP (D) Lewis Cook

BBM (S) Harry Arter

WM (S) - Jesse Lingard

DLF (S) - Britt Assombalonga

CF (S) - Callum Wilson

 

 

Do you find the DLP is disciplined enough to be the holding man in midfield? I want to use James Ward Prowse there but I'm worried he needs to be a CM - D instead to really be what I want from that role? 

I will consider the WM and Winger combo once I've looked at it in play. Do you still get assists from the WM or does play always develop down the right with the WM finishing moves instead?

[shaunwwfc]

Be interested to see how this thread pans out.

[AFCBeer]

1 hour ago, Romers said:

How come? I thought Rigid encouraged a standard team shape and fluid encourage deviation from this?

The weakness of the 4-4-2 is it leaves space between the lines. In an attacking sense you can mitigate this by playing more direct up to a big man upfront. This is how a lot of teams play the 4-4-2 IRL too. 

Defensively the problem is the space in front of the back 4 but behind the midfield. A more fluid shape reduces the difference in mentalities between midfielders and defenders so in theory reducing that space between lines. However, higher fluidity will also mean your back 4 pushes upfield more quickly when attacking leaving you vulnerable too counter attacks and balls over the top. This is why fast intelligent defenders are a must. 

Structured shapes would avoid this but if you want to avoid giving up the space between the lines, then you'd be better off playing your 4-4-2 with 2 DMC's. With support duties they should still offer something going forward (i.e. DLPs and DMCs). 

A good thread to read would be Ozil to the Arsenal's thread on Wales' Highly Structured Euro 16 team. Although not about a 4-4-2 specifically, it explains how to create compact structured systems. 

[roggiotis]

For me an MC(D) is a must in the 4-4-2

[MichaelBrown]

53 minutes ago, roggiotis said:

For me an MC(D) is a must in the 4-4-2

Why? I have a 4-4-2 that has a BWM/BBM combination.

[roggiotis]

more stable a MC(D) 

[shaunwwfc]

On Flexible/Standard, I think two Box to Box midfielders is not actually a bad combo.

[Wilesy]

16 hours ago, Romers said:

 

I haven't played any games with this yet I'll be testing it tonight. I think the higher tempo and more direct passing I'll leave off until I've seen how they perform without these additions

Thanks Wilesy I had thought of winger supports as I think I want them to just beat their man and get it in so I'll observe the difference, what do you do with your full backs?

Ill start with TM S & AF but I'll bare in mind your comment on the TM

will try without the closing down and see if I can build 2 banks of solid 4's

Wingers on support will still try and beat their man to get a cross in, just do it from a deeper starting position really. I play LLM so the skill is lesser, it's all about positioning.

Full backs I keep on FB-S, I don't want them overlapping. Providing a deeper passing option for the winger but I want them to be able to get back as soon as and reclaim the defensive position.

Centre mids - I've stuck to CM-D and CM-S, my players aren't the most skillful so I don't want to overload them. Just keep it simple tackle, pass and move. If I had the choice I would go for a RPM/BBM duo. 

The TM-S will drop between the lines, especially if you have a guy who plays with his back to goal, the other alternative is to go for the opposite big-man small-man combo. Think Les Ferdianand and Peter Beardsley. The big man occupied the centre backs and the little man (false 9? DLF?) fed off the knock downs and found his own space to create. I think Zola was probably the best at this, though you could argue that he was more an attacking midfielder. Either way, you could play a big man up top and a player in the AM role as a SS and achieve the same result. You could argue that it is then a 4-4-1-1 but still is 4 defenders, 4 midfielders and 2 attackers.

[Romers]

I've played my first few games. Bare in mind I'm 16 games in to a so far unsuccessful season with Southampton so confidence is low

I started with:

FB S x 2

CB D x 2

Winger A x 2

DLP D & B2B

TM S & Adv For

I went with a rigid shape and just exploit the flanks as team instructions

 

First 45 minutes my team were so direct it was horrible to watch. It wasn't even always aimed towards the TM it was just lumps from the back but I got to HT 0-0 away at Palace

I changed the TM to a F9 to try and cut down on the long balls and encourage the F9 to drop and link up with the midfield. Things instantly looked better and a few chances went begging and I drew 0-0. I was very impressed by the DLP's discipline and the B2B work rate, it looked similar to the Drinkwater/Kante axis Leicester had last season 

I then travelled to Stamford Bridge to play Chelsea and at HT I was 1-0 down their only real attack of quality and Willian scored a very neat goal. At HT I changed to a counter mentality to try and sit back and break but it was appalling. Willian scored his second which was in all fairness was an unstoppable counter attack and then he got a third which was a deflected free kick. At 3-0 after an hour I had nothing to lose so I took off the counter mentality and backed my original idea of a standard mentality with a rigid shape, I added more direct passing and a higher tempo and kept on exploit the flanks and out of nowhere scored 2 well worked goals and got it back to 3-2! Couldn't quite steal an equaliser but it gave me plenty of positives 

My final game last night was at home to recently promoted Boro a game I had to win. I stuck with my original gut feel and it worked a treat! I was 2-0 up at HT and cruising and playing very well. I won a pen in the first minute of the second half which was saved but I was controlling the game. Then out of nothing Negredo hit a 35 yard effort which dribbled in and I looked nervous but held on for a huge 3 points to send me to bed very happy with optimism of what tonight will bring 

[Craigus89]

No mention of Mentality which is by far and away the main thing that will influence the directness, amount of pressing, tempo etc. The team instructions just modify small parts of the overall mentality.

 

[Romers]

7 minutes ago, Craigus89 said:

No mention of Mentality which is by far and away the main thing that will influence the directness, amount of pressing, tempo etc. The team instructions just modify small parts of the overall mentality.

 

I've tried to keep it simple and went with standard. I think attacking will be too exposed. Control is more of a patient approach than I'm looking for. Counter just doesn't sit well with me as I feel you hand the initiative to the opposition too much and defensive I feel the same way 

[shaunwwfc]

I do not think you should play with any Playmakers/Target Men unless they are genuinely your only good players. They attract too much attention. Your side will always look for your playmaker to create, and the Target Man will always be your one main outlet. No wonder you are so direct, it is too one dimensional.

I would go Flexible/Standard with for now just exploit each flank and see how that goes. Simplify it as much as possible. In that structure/strategy, I think two Box to Box midfielders with Wingers either side are ideal. They are not too conservative, nor too offensive, I actually think it is a good balance. Obviously if you put it up to Attacking then it would be overkill. If personnel or the oppositions approach is leaving you too exposed, go with a CM duo of defend/support.

Upfront, I would go with DLF (S) with an Advanced Forward. I would experiment with other combinations but for now try that. But honestly, you are looking to play arguably one of the most simplistic ways, yet putting in player roles that are just harming it and turning it into something else.

Let me know how you get on.

[Romers]

18 minutes ago, shaunwwfc said:

I do not think you should play with any Playmakers/Target Men unless they are genuinely your only good players. They attract too much attention. Your side will always look for your playmaker to create, and the Target Man will always be your one main outlet. No wonder you are so direct, it is too one dimensional.

I would go Flexible/Standard with for now just exploit each flank and see how that goes. Simplify it as much as possible. In that structure/strategy, I think two Box to Box midfielders with Wingers either side are ideal. They are not too conservative, nor too offensive, I actually think it is a good balance. Obviously if you put it up to Attacking then it would be overkill. If personnel or the oppositions approach is leaving you too exposed, go with a CM duo of defend/support.

Upfront, I would go with DLF (S) with an Advanced Forward. I would experiment with other combinations but for now try that. But honestly, you are looking to play arguably one of the most simplistic ways, yet putting in player roles that are just harming it and turning it into something else.

Let me know how you get on.

Yeah I've already removed the TM as it was too direct and aimless. My DLP really is a key player though and he's not up to the job of CM - D so I want to give him a chance to play there hoping he will hold his position so he's available for a pass and helps keep the team shape

I will rotate between F9 & DLF as both these roles are basically what I want the second striker to do to open up space for the main focul point of my attacks to receive passes

[hollij93]

16 hours ago, Romers said:

Do you find the DLP is disciplined enough to be the holding man in midfield? I want to use James Ward Prowse there but I'm worried he needs to be a CM - D instead to really be what I want from that role? 

I will consider the WM and Winger combo once I've looked at it in play. Do you still get assists from the WM or does play always develop down the right with the WM finishing moves instead?

I have found the DLP to be effective especially at home, but away from home you may be more suited to a CM(D) for added discipline and a player with stronger defensive attributes

(someone may correct me but PIs for both roles are quite similar, you may be able to tweak to your liking)

- In terms of the WM it generally seems my play is quite lopsided down the right (although Ibe is my strongest mf so I'm happy with this), and the WM isn't as involved in build up as much as I'd like. When the rest of the players are firing it's fine, and the WM playing slightly narrower helps with defensive shape if we get countered.

[shaunwwfc]

1 hour ago, Romers said:

Yeah I've already removed the TM as it was too direct and aimless. My DLP really is a key player though and he's not up to the job of CM - D so I want to give him a chance to play there hoping he will hold his position so he's available for a pass and helps keep the team shape

I will rotate between F9 & DLF as both these roles are basically what I want the second striker to do to open up space for the main focul point of my attacks to receive passes

Put a CM on hold position and you basically have a deep lying playmaker. You could even add more risky passes. He will essentially behave like one, with the added benefit of the rest of the side not always looking to get him to be the main creator.

The main creators you want are your wide players.

[Romers]

2 hours ago, shaunwwfc said:

Put a CM on hold position and you basically have a deep lying playmaker. You could even add more risky passes. He will essentially behave like one, with the added benefit of the rest of the side not always looking to get him to be the main creator.

The main creators you want are your wide players.

Would you say CM - Auto and then add hold and risky passes then? Or CM - D with passes?

[Dr. Hook]

8 hours ago, Romers said:

Would you say CM - Auto and then add hold and risky passes then? Or CM - D with passes?

Don't use auto- it will adjust his duty to your mentality. If you are using standard, then it will be a CM-S, if attacking, then CM-A, if counter then CM-D etc.  A CM-D with the more risky passes and more direct passing PI's will replicate the deep lying role to an extent without the ball magnet attached to him.

[Romers]

Tonight has gone horribly. 3 defeats and a draw. I'm starting to think the obvious floors in a real life 442 are too hard to overcome in FM and I might have to accept that 442 is in the past!?

[Romers]

On 23/03/2017 at 11:58, Craigus89 said:

You've clearly thought through the attacking aspects, but probably the main reason that this formation, and more specifically, this way of playing the 4-4-2 died is because of the weaknesses in the midfield, particularly against 'more modern' formations with 5 man midfields.

How do you intend to defend? Press high up? Drop back and stay compact?

Also a lot of your success will depend on the team you are managing and player selection. Whilst the wingers may be the heartbeat in terms of supplying assists and driving the team forward, the real heartbeat is the central midfielders. These guys need to be complete footballers with big engines, capable of defending well and in a robust manner whilst also being capable of play making and supporting attacks.

What do you think would work best with a 442? Intense pressing with tight marking to really reduce the space or drop deep and keep the shape and make it hard for teams to play through?

[d d]

I have use 4-4-2 on 16. Took Stockport from Vanarama North to the Championship, i mean obviously having good players help but i have not change the shape or the Instructions 

[roggiotis]

10 hours ago, Romers said:

Tonight has gone horribly. 3 defeats and a draw. I'm starting to think the obvious floors in a real life 442 are too hard to overcome in FM and I might have to accept that 442 is in the past!?

Thats very pessimistic,

accept this = Atletico and Monaco play 4-4-2 ,also Leverkusen

[kingjericho]

OP:

 

[summatsupeer]

16 hours ago, Dr. Hook said:

Don't use auto- it will adjust his duty to your mentality. If you are using standard, then it will be a CM-S, if attacking, then CM-A, if counter then CM-D etc.  A CM-D with the more risky passes and more direct passing PI's will replicate the deep lying role to an extent without the ball magnet attached to him.

I thought on Counter, Standard or Control an auto duty was Support?  With Contain & Defensive being defend and Attacking & Overload being attack.

Things would be easier if Auto was just removed.

[Dr. Hook]

2 minutes ago, summatsupeer said:

I thought on Counter, Standard or Control an auto duty was Support?  With Contain & Defensive being defend and Attacking & Overload being attack.

Things would be easier if Auto was just removed.

I believe you're right - I never use it and don't even understand why it is in there.

[Stukey]

Just finished a first half season in the Romanian Second Division (I took over after the winter break) playing a direct 442, mostly on Counter mentality, flexible shape. Lining up like this

                GK (D)

FB(S)  CD(D)  CD(D) FB(A)

W(A)  CM(S)  CM(D)  WM(S)

          DLF(S)  AF(A)

 

Team shouts more direct passing and higher tempo. Only PIs are the winger to cross from the byeline, and the WM to play narrower.

Fortunately, a lot of the other teams in this division line up with a 442 as well. Against other teams playing 442 it has been raining goals. I have scored 6 (six) in three different games with a couple of four goal games as well. Some of these games have turned in to straight up who can score the most competitions. I won away at the team top of the league 6-5 in one match! It is a lot of fun.

Against 5 man midfields I have struggled though. Still tinkering with getting those games right. I am having some success with adding play narrower, lowering the tempo, short goalkeeper distribution, and fluid shape. My theory is that this will help close the gaps between the lines, and bringing the wide men in to help with shortage in the centre of midfield. Also marking the DM (with DLF) or AM (with CMD) seems to help. I feel you have to find a way of negating the extra man in midfield if you play 442.

[johnstonpickle]

I'm playing a 442 in the Conference North as Worcester. Albeit a team that is tipped to go down and the level is completely different, I've found something that works for me.

I play;

Counter

Standard

GK

DR - DFB D

DCR - CD D

DCL - DCB D

DL - WB D

MR - W S

MCR - DLP D

MCL - CM A

ML - DW S

STL - AF A

STR - DF D

TIs: slightly deeper, more disciplined, stick to positions, clear ball to flanks, hit early crosses, much narrower, more direct passing, pass into spaces

I've found a nice solidity at the back, midfield duo are nice and balanced and are often helped by the DW and DF and we get a lot of 1 v 1 opportunities. Playing with a fast striker, at that level is essential. He might have about 4-5 CCCs and only bury 1-2 but it's still a decent ratio. I'm currently just inside the playoffs so it's working well!

 

[noikeee]

On 24/03/2017 at 22:23, Romers said:

Tonight has gone horribly. 3 defeats and a draw. I'm starting to think the obvious floors in a real life 442 are too hard to overcome in FM and I might have to accept that 442 is in the past!?

In this ME you can get absolutely annihilated by a men advantage in the middle, even when fielding 3 central midfielders. I find this a little exaggerated in the ME actually. So whilst it is a fundamental problem of the system even in real life, it becomes particularly hard to play a true old-school 4-4-2.

That being said, I've seen some 4-4-2s work great in this ME and I personally have some trouble against a AI side that always lines up 4-4-2 against me so it's not impossible. It's just that it's going to be hard to work purely under the old-school concepts, I think. You'd probably have more success either attempting to compress the space between the lines by playing Fluid or Very Fluid, and perhaps even a very high line and rely on pacey defenders; or by playing a more patient style with shorter passing and wide midfielders/playmakers instead of wingers. Defensive forwards could also help as they become extra midfielders on occasion.

[max787]

On ‎25‎/‎03‎/‎2017 at 13:23, kingjericho said:

OP:

 

Yep, this still works really well so long as you have a good target man. I've had good success with it this year.

[aderow]

 

On 3/24/2017 at 04:42, Romers said:

I've tried to keep it simple and went with standard. I think attacking will be too exposed. Control is more of a patient approach than I'm looking for. Counter just doesn't sit well with me as I feel you hand the initiative to the opposition too much and defensive I feel the same way 

It may seem counter intuitive (no pun intended) but counter is actually the way to go if you want a patient approach. If you feel that you are sitting too deep you can always raise your defensive line. That's something I always do to minimise the space between the midfield and defense. 

And don't give up mate. The formation that has given me the most headaches in the last year or so is the 442. So it is certainly still viable. Keep plugging away and I'm sure you'll figure it out

[oneronaldo]

Control is in fact an extremely attacking mentality, yes while your players will take more care to retain possession of the ball to prevent opposition breaks the key issue is your team is still focused pushing players forward. A 4-4-2 with Wingers instead of WM exposes your midfield as it is outnumbered, last thing you want is to be shredded by a fast break.

Counter isn't the magical solve-everything-solution but it will make your players more urgently return to their defensive shape if they lose the ball, and keep them there until the ball is won. And besides, Counter can produce some pretty sick fast breaks when combined with Pass Into Space and an opponent over-committing.

[Mr U Rosler]

One way to partially alleviate the problem of only 2 midfielders is by using Inverted Wingbacks.

They operate centrally essentially turning your midfield 2 into a 4 at least whilst you have possession.

They can be very effective in the right system (i'm using them in a 4411) essentially forming a 'box' midfield which enables easy ball retention in central areas.

As with most things in FM, anything with an 'upside' has a potential 'downside' but in a 442 set up you already have width built into your attack so I personally don't miss having full backs in wide areas.