Trying classic 4-4-2

[mikcheck]

Hello all. After few months of FM inactivity, i've decided to start a new save with Real Sociedad. For this one i'll chose 4-4-2 formation, something that i've never done before.

I have 2 versions, they're both similar, but i'd like to know your opinions about them.  Structured team shape (at least for the beginning of most matches) and mentality it depends.

 

PI's:

Both FB's - Stay wider

CM(A) - Close down more, more risky passes.

 

 

PI's:

Both FB's - Stay wider

WM(A) - Sit narrower

RPM(S) - Close down more

Thank you.

[Cleon]

Apart from me using a CF support instead of a F9, the top image is my exact 442 even the same player instructions  👌

[Atarin]

I like what I'm seeing but in the first version I'd, personally, switch the two CMs around. I'd have the CM(d) on the left to add some extra cover to the side that has the two Attack duties, where as the CM(a) could offer some much needed penetration on the right hand side, it would also stop the CM(a) bumping into the F9. I like the BPD & CD combo at the back, which offers a nice balance of distribution, one giving it simple and one launching riskier options. I really like CM(d)'s but they do sometimes allow a gap to appear ahead of the them which can be exploited. When this happens I usually switch the role to BWM(d) and then they push up into that space and sort things out.

The RPM in the second version is an interesting choice, a real tick-tock player. Might work better though switch around again. Rather than the BPD and the RPM being on top of each other it might be more effective if they were off-set?

[Cleon]

2 hours ago, Atarin said:

I like what I'm seeing but in the first version I'd, personally, switch the two CMs around. I'd have the CM(d) on the left to add some extra cover to the side that has the two Attack duties, where as the CM(a) could offer some much needed penetration on the right hand side, it would also stop the CM(a) bumping into the F9. I like the BPD & CD combo at the back, which offers a nice balance of distribution, one giving it simple and one launching riskier options. I really like CM(d)'s but they do sometimes allow a gap to appear ahead of the them which can be exploited. When this happens I usually switch the role to BWM(d) and then they push up into that space and sort things out.

The RPM in the second version is an interesting choice, a real tick-tock player. Might work better though switch around again. Rather than the BPD and the RPM being on top of each other it might be more effective if they were off-set?

I can understand why you'd give this advice and its perfectly fine. However there is also another side to why his current roles work fine on the side they are. As it stands currently he has options and variety on both sides of the pitch. If he switches the CM's around this brings two issues for me. The first one is it doesn't make sense to have a striker drop deep if no-one is going past him, it's a pointless exercise for most parts because no-one is using the space he creates. He could also switch the strikers around but then everything he creates becomes one dimensional again and he only really creates chances/attacks in one way. The second issue is he doesn't really need much penetration on the right hand side because his playmaker should be more than capable to offer this as well as being creative. The F9 and the CMA will come further inside and link with the WP fine as they are, it also means there is space for those players to use.

I also don't believe the F9 and CM would bump into each other because the roles are different and the space between them is quite large. What they will be doing is working in tandem for most parts and both being creative and passing outlets. The CM should also frequently go past the F9 which is a good thing as he will be using the space the F9 creates.

The same for the second image too, there is no way the RPM and BPD will ever be on top of each other.

Not saying you was wrong about the other stuff btw, was just explaining it from a different angle

[Rashidi]

My 442 which i have been playing with, depending on the players i have that BWM(D) role can change, and so can the FB(A) role, other than that this is my version of the 442, notice the similarities. I like the variety i get out of attack

 

[Armistice]

Gonna use a 442 too but more like a counter attacking tactic.

[bosque]

4 hours ago, Rashidi said:

My 442 which i have been playing with, depending on the players i have that BWM(D) role can change, and so can the FB(A) role, other than that this is my version of the 442, notice the similarities. I like the variety i get out of attack

 

Is the winger in support enough cover for the fb and cm in attack?

[Rashidi]

The central defender and the fullback have fantastic mentals.  I may change the FB to support if I face a side that's better like Manchester City or the top sides. In some matches I may release the fb on the other flank.

[mikcheck]

On 19/09/2017 at 10:22, Cleon said:

Apart from me using a CF support instead of a F9, the top image is my exact 442 even the same player instructions  👌

Thanks Cleon.

Well i couldn't ask for a better starting point   

Do you use to do many role changes during a game with your 442?

 

On 19/09/2017 at 10:24, Atarin said:

I like what I'm seeing but in the first version I'd, personally, switch the two CMs around. I'd have the CM(d) on the left to add some extra cover to the side that has the two Attack duties, where as the CM(a) could offer some much needed penetration on the right hand side, it would also stop the CM(a) bumping into the F9. I like the BPD & CD combo at the back, which offers a nice balance of distribution, one giving it simple and one launching riskier options. I really like CM(d)'s but they do sometimes allow a gap to appear ahead of the them which can be exploited. When this happens I usually switch the role to BWM(d) and then they push up into that space and sort things out.

The RPM in the second version is an interesting choice, a real tick-tock player. Might work better though switch around again. Rather than the BPD and the RPM being on top of each other it might be more effective if they were off-set?

Thanks for your input Atarin.

That makes perfect sense, but Cleon answered to that. My idea is to use CM(A) behind the deeper striker so he can use that space

On 19/09/2017 at 12:30, Cleon said:

I can understand why you'd give this advice and its perfectly fine. However there is also another side to why his current roles work fine on the side they are. As it stands currently he has options and variety on both sides of the pitch. If he switches the CM's around this brings two issues for me. The first one is it doesn't make sense to have a striker drop deep if no-one is going past him, it's a pointless exercise for most parts because no-one is using the space he creates. He could also switch the strikers around but then everything he creates becomes one dimensional again and he only really creates chances/attacks in one way. The second issue is he doesn't really need much penetration on the right hand side because his playmaker should be more than capable to offer this as well as being creative. The F9 and the CMA will come further inside and link with the WP fine as they are, it also means there is space for those players to use.

I also don't believe the F9 and CM would bump into each other because the roles are different and the space between them is quite large. What they will be doing is working in tandem for most parts and both being creative and passing outlets. The CM should also frequently go past the F9 which is a good thing as he will be using the space the F9 creates.

The same for the second image too, there is no way the RPM and BPD will ever be on top of each other.

Not saying you was wrong about the other stuff btw, was just explaining it from a different angle

That was my thinking of why i got CM(A) behind F9, so it can also create another avenue for attack.

17 hours ago, Rashidi said:

My 442 which i have been playing with, depending on the players i have that BWM(D) role can change, and so can the FB(A) role, other than that this is my version of the 442, notice the similarities. I like the variety i get out of attack

 

Thank you Rashidi. 

That's a very interesting setup. Yes it is not that different, however i'm intrigued with BWM role. I really like that role but isn't it dangerous to use it in a 2 central man midfield? Well i assume you have a really capable player playing there.

I've never played a classic 442 before and i want to make this a successful tactic for my Real Sociedade save  but seeing from  3 friendles i played so far, i will struggle a lot to get this right 

[MBarbaric]

Maybe I have wrong players, don't know, but that CMa never consistently moved ahead of DLF/F9. On occasion, he would go forward, but usually, he would stop just in line with F9 ruining opportunities for through balls. And he had runs into box and gets forward as soon as possible. Maybe some other role was preventing him but after two or three seasons of watching him (or any other player in the role) stopping those runs just about when they could be dangerous I got fed up with it.

[A.Pierfrancesco]

1 minute ago, MBarbaric said:

Maybe I have wrong players, don't know, but that CMa never consistently moved ahead of DLF/F9. On occasion, he would go forward, but usually, he would stop just in line with F9 ruining opportunities for through balls. And he had runs into box and gets forward as soon as possible. Maybe some other role was preventing him but after two or three seasons of watching him (or any other player in the role) stopping those runs just about when they could be dangerous I got fed up with it.

Are you sure there aren't other players in that position that prevent the CM(A) to "overlap" the F9? For example a IF sitting narrow. In that case probably the CM(A) would stop his run because of another player already in that position

[Atarin]

On 9/19/2017 at 12:30, Cleon said:

If he switches the CM's around...  it doesn't make sense to have a striker drop deep if no-one is going past him...

Its an element of tactical creation that I have struggled with, that one. I understand the basic concept and reasoning behind playing the space exploiter behind the space creator, I just get very twitchy about the defensive balance.

On 9/19/2017 at 12:30, Cleon said:

...The same for the second image too, there is no way the RPM and BPD will ever be on top of each other.

I probably should have been more clear, I wasn't speaking in terms of movement, more passing options. I look at the RPM coming deep and see it encouraging the BPD to play it short which, to my understanding, sort of negates the purpose of the BPD which is to either carry the ball forward into space or play a Direct pass deep into opposition territory. Short distribution can be achieved with a regular CD(d). I could still be way off  but that was my thinking.

[jc577]

25 minutes ago, A.Pierfrancesco said:

Are you sure there aren't other players in that position that prevent the CM(A) to "overlap" the F9? For example a IF sitting narrow. In that case probably the CM(A) would stop his run because of another player already in that position

If the IF was asked to stay wider would this allow the CM-A to run into that space, potentially being fed by the IF?

[A.Pierfrancesco]

It depends, IFs tend to drift inside in the final third. Asking them to play wider could help, but then it depends on the PPM of the players and the position of the players in the specific play. Also mentality and team shape has a major impact, playing in low mentality and fluid shape you will see less forward runs. It isn't a plug and play thing.

[MBarbaric]

1 hour ago, A.Pierfrancesco said:

Are you sure there aren't other players in that position that prevent the CM(A) to "overlap" the F9? For example a IF sitting narrow. In that case probably the CM(A) would stop his run because of another player already in that position

it was a 4-4-2 so no if's and the wide players were wingers/wm's without cut inside or stay narrow instructions

[BigLarusso]

I  completely useless at this game 

I have tried everything and I cannot win against lower placed teams 

I have used your formation I hope you don’t mind because I like to play 4-4-2 and in my first game using it I won 5-1 

I’m absolutely over the moon I don’t know how you did it because it makes no sense to me but at last it worked 

I’m going to the the others in other games and see if they work but thank you for giving me a tactic to use 

I don’t know why this game is so difficult for me to work out it makes me feel stupid 

thanks again for the formations guys 

[JWVG]

forget it. unless you have superior players 442 is just useless!

[Cleon]

8 minutes ago, JWVG said:

forget it. unless you have superior players 442 is just useless!

What a load of nonsense 😂

[BigLarusso]

Well that didn’t last long 

in my second game with this formation I lose 0-4 

i give up 

I’ll play another manager game it’s too hard 

[wereldbol]

please do

[Cleon]

6 hours ago, BigLarusso said:

Well that didn’t last long 

in my second game with this formation I lose 0-4 

i give up 

I’ll play another manager game it’s too hard 

Of course you keep losing because you're not taking the time to learn the basics of why something works. You're quitting and restarting and changing tactics in the hope you stumble across something that works. However until you learn how and why something works you'll always struggle. It doesn't have to be a massive learning curve or mean you have to read walls of text. All you have to do is pick a formation then focus on how it functions. Even focusing on the faults it has. Understand how the roles all link together than you've selected.  All the information you need is in the game already at your finger tips. Use the analysis tab and figure out why you lost 4-0. What were your players actually doing. Who was at faults for the goals etc. You can view all this kind of stuff in seconds by watching clips of the game back or moves. The analysis tab should be the first place you go rather than the forums. I understand it can be frustrating but in the end, only you can help you. It doesn't matter what someone on here says or advises on how to play or what changes to make if you don't understand why yourself. I had a quick glance at your posts over the last few weeks and people are giving advice which is great, but at the same time you're just twisting yourself in circles trying everything they suggest too. This just makes the game more complex on your part as you don't understand why people are suggesting what they did and how it actually impacts the formation you was currently using. It all comes back to my first point posted above, you need to know the strengths and weakness of what you are using. 

Ignore what everyone is suggesting or copying other peoples formations. Start up a brand new game and throw everything out of the window about how you think the game does/doesn't work. Have an open mind and then think about things logically and do trial and error. For example if you was using a 442 and was using a DLF/Advanced forward up front, look how they link up and see if they compliment each other. Also look at the supply the forwards are getting, who is providing it? Does it work? Is the supply constant? Are the midfield complimenting them and providing the support they need etc?

Focus on the simple stuff that most people seem to ignore these days. Strip things back and really go back to basics.

[BigLarusso]

2 hours ago, Cleon said:

Of course you keep losing because you're not taking the time to learn the basics of why something works. You're quitting and restarting and changing tactics in the hope you stumble across something that works. However until you learn how and why something works you'll always struggle. It doesn't have to be a massive learning curve or mean you have to read walls of text. All you have to do is pick a formation then focus on how it functions. Even focusing on the faults it has. Understand how the roles all link together than you've selected.  All the information you need is in the game already at your finger tips. Use the analysis tab and figure out why you lost 4-0. What were your players actually doing. Who was at faults for the goals etc. You can view all this kind of stuff in seconds by watching clips of the game back or moves. The analysis tab should be the first place you go rather than the forums. I understand it can be frustrating but in the end, only you can help you. It doesn't matter what someone on here says or advises on how to play or what changes to make if you don't understand why yourself. I had a quick glance at your posts over the last few weeks and people are giving advice which is great, but at the same time you're just twisting yourself in circles trying everything they suggest too. This just makes the game more complex on your part as you don't understand why people are suggesting what they did and how it actually impacts the formation you was currently using. It all comes back to my first point posted above, you need to know the strengths and weakness of what you are using. 

Ignore what everyone is suggesting or copying other peoples formations. Start up a brand new game and throw everything out of the window about how you think the game does/doesn't work. Have an open mind and then think about things logically and do trial and error. For example if you was using a 442 and was using a DLF/Advanced forward up front, look how they link up and see if they compliment each other. Also look at the supply the forwards are getting, who is providing it? Does it work? Is the supply constant? Are the midfield complimenting them and providing the support they need etc?

Focus on the simple stuff that most people seem to ignore these days. Strip things back and really go back to basics.

Thanks for a great reply 

but I have started from scratch many times, I only play fm touch on my iPad so I can watch comprehensive highlights but what’s strange is that I can have loads of possession and chances I miss the chances and the opposition have one chance and score 

I don’t think I understand how the game works enough 

in my head I don’t understand why I can’t have a box to box midfielder and a ball winning midfielder together to run the midfield and then 2 wingers to get balls into the box 

that’s how I want my team to play away and I try a short passing build up play at home and it never works no matter what combinations I try 

thanks for a great reply though 

[mikcheck]

 

Where the hell do i fit this guy in this system lol really weak mentals. Trying to sell must be the best choice.

[Cleon]

4 hours ago, BigLarusso said:

Thanks for a great reply 

but I have started from scratch many times, I only play fm touch on my iPad so I can watch comprehensive highlights but what’s strange is that I can have loads of possession and chances I miss the chances and the opposition have one chance and score 

I don’t think I understand how the game works enough 

in my head I don’t understand why I can’t have a box to box midfielder and a ball winning midfielder together to run the midfield and then 2 wingers to get balls into the box 

that’s how I want my team to play away and I try a short passing build up play at home and it never works no matter what combinations I try 

thanks for a great reply though 

You can play that way if you want but you have to look at it logically too. There is nothing wrong with a B2B and a BWM, however what happens if both wingers and both the B2B and BWM are all advanced at the same time. Who covers the middle then? You become vulnerable to counter attacks. However as long as you are away of this issue and realise that in some games this strategy just wont work plain and simple but it other games it will.

Also I don't understand how you'd want to use two wingers and focus on getting balls into the box yet on the other hand want to play a short passing game. You are conflicted, you want one or the other. If you're playing a short passing game and using wingers then there's a good chance your wingers are playing about rather than looking to attack the space and provide the ball into the early. This means the opposition can regain shape and stay solid because you'll be passing it about. Wingers work better when they get to the byline fast or cross early when the opposition is out of sync, so your forwards can make the most of it. 

Wingers are nullified the more crowded the box is or the longer they have the ball without realising it early enough. We see this in real life all the time, where the winger holds onto the ball for far too long or doesn't see the strikers making those early runs etc.

Also you don't need to understand how the game works (well you do on some level) but you do need to understand basics of how football works in general. Then you just apply this logic to FM. If you want to focus on a short passing game then you don't want too many attacking players more advanced than the speed of the play as they'd not be passing/support options. Everything you create with the roles/duties is relative to the speed of play you are creating. It all has to link together and compliment the style.

[Cleon]

3 hours ago, mikcheck said:

 

Where the hell do i fit this guy in this system lol really weak mentals. Trying to sell must be the best choice.

I know he is mentally weak but he can still be decent in the WP role on the right.

[Guest]

I'm using a BBM + BWM(de), this is my midfield:

 

WM(a)  BWM(de)  BBM  WP(a)

A SS(a) is in front of the BWM.
WP(a) does not have "get further forward", WM(a) is instructed to "sit narrower".
I'm using Counter + Highly structured.

I am sometimes opened to counters. I'd lower the D-line, bit that would make the gap between midfield and defence even bigger (and it's already  quite big due to h. struct.).

I'm trying to recreate Atletico Madrid here and I've opted to use h. struct. bcs of your Art of defensive football article, @Cleon, you've yourself have stated that this thread emerged while you were trying to recreate ATM so it'd be great to hear your opinion.

Thanks!

[TheJanitor]

1 hour ago, Cleon said:

I know he is mentally weak but he can still be decent in the WP role on the right.

Don't you feel like his poor desicion making would hamper him?

I'm always struggling to find a way to get the best out of those players with brilliant technical ability but poor mentals.

[Cleon]

2 minutes ago, TheJanitor said:

Don't you feel like his poor desicion making would hamper him?

I'm always struggling to find a way to get the best out of those players with brilliant technical ability but poor mentals.

In some instances it would yeah. But the player can still perform the role fine. 

1 hour ago, charisma_charisma said:

I'm using a BBM + BWM(de), this is my midfield:

 

WM(a)  BWM(de)  BBM  WP(a)

A SS(a) is in front of the BWM.
WP(a) does not have "get further forward", WM(a) is instructed to "sit narrower".
I'm using Counter + Highly structured.

I am sometimes opened to counters. I'd lower the D-line, bit that would make the gap between midfield and defence even bigger (and it's already  quite big due to h. struct.).

I'm trying to recreate Atletico Madrid here and I've opted to use h. struct. bcs of your Art of defensive football article, @Cleon, you've yourself have stated that this thread emerged while you were trying to recreate ATM so it'd be great to hear your opinion.

Thanks!

I'm not sure what your question is? If its how does your system work, you tell me

[BigLarusso]

2 hours ago, Cleon said:

You can play that way if you want but you have to look at it logically too. There is nothing wrong with a B2B and a BWM, however what happens if both wingers and both the B2B and BWM are all advanced at the same time. Who covers the middle then? You become vulnerable to counter attacks. However as long as you are away of this issue and realise that in some games this strategy just wont work plain and simple but it other games it will.

Also I don't understand how you'd want to use two wingers and focus on getting balls into the box yet on the other hand want to play a short passing game. You are conflicted, you want one or the other. If you're playing a short passing game and using wingers then there's a good chance your wingers are playing about rather than looking to attack the space and provide the ball into the early. This means the opposition can regain shape and stay solid because you'll be passing it about. Wingers work better when they get to the byline fast or cross early when the opposition is out of sync, so your forwards can make the most of it. 

Wingers are nullified the more crowded the box is or the longer they have the ball without realising it early enough. We see this in real life all the time, where the winger holds onto the ball for far too long or doesn't see the strikers making those early runs etc.

Also you don't need to understand how the game works (well you do on some level) but you do need to understand basics of how football works in general. Then you just apply this logic to FM. If you want to focus on a short passing game then you don't want too many attacking players more advanced than the speed of the play as they'd not be passing/support options. Everything you create with the roles/duties is relative to the speed of play you are creating. It all has to link together and compliment the style.

Thanks cleon 

ill try and bear that in mind 

[Guest]

16 hours ago, Cleon said:

In some instances it would yeah. But the player can still perform the role fine. 

I'm not sure what your question is? If its how does your system work, you tell me

I am telling you: I'm sometimes opened to counter attacks...

The first idea was to lower the D-line, bit that made the gap between midfield and defence even bigger, I assume due to h. structured.
In your article, you used deeper D-line from the beginning, but you had 1 more stratum than I do - you had a DM player + you played on a lower mentality than I do.

The question was do you see sth that I'm missing (after all, you've been playing the game for decades) or doing wrong and do you have any suggestions?

Thanks again!

[Cleon]

In a couple of days I'll have a new post up explaining the ins and outs of the 442 as a lot of people seem to be struggling with it and have the wrong ideas about what it is. It'll be along the style of the 3-5-2 one I did recently;

https://teaandbusquets.com/3-5-2-chronicles

I just need to finish it off today/tomorrow. 

[mikcheck]

19 hours ago, Cleon said:

I know he is mentally weak but he can still be decent in the WP role on the right.

Thanks Cleon.

That might work, Canales plays there, Januzaj will be the 2nd option. Both are left footed which is also good on that side.

I'm looking forward for the 442 article. That 352 is amazing.

[JWVG]

On 20.9.2017 at 21:40, Cleon said:

What a load of nonsense 😂

Have you even played FM17?