Direct/Counter 442

[scwiffy]

 

Hi guys,

This is the first time I’ve had decent success from my own tactic. I’m obsessed with football tactics but often struggle with FM, however, understanding the roles in more detail every year is helping me develop.

This year I’ve had decent success with a high press tactic (as has everyone else by the look of it). But now I’m finding teams setting up against me differently, usually soacking pressure with 2 DMs, then countering direct long balls beating my high line offside trap. I also find some teams playing with high D line with plenty of space behind, similar to me. So I wanted a different tactic wich could expose these setups and also be decent against the top 4 in EPL (I’m in 4th season with Brighton, now a decent Europa league standard team).

This lead me to this.....

 

Its been playing out out well, but I still think it can improve, especially as its inconstant. The main idea is to only challenge/press for the ball in our own half, maybe soak up a bit of pressure, then counter hard and fast preferably with long defence splitting ‘quarter back style’ passes to the AF and little to no dribbling (I have decent dribblers on the wings but they aren't the fastest)

RPM has been a revelation finding space and then raking long ball to forwards. BWM works on both D and S, on Support he often clashes with RPM but weirdly I haven't found this to be a issue in the way the tactic plays, against weaker teams its nice to have him pressing the ball a little higher. NCB often plays the instant long ball I’m after.

Only things I’m unsure about are the PF, I love everything about him on D and S but I don’t want him to hold up the ball which is hard coded. PF-A works better in that one regard but is too high up, isolating both attackers and not giving another option when the long ball isn’t on. I tried DLF but that also holds up ball. Maybe SS? Seems a shame as my forward doesn’t suit SS role.

Also unsure about wings and which role suits the AF site (which sometimes sits wide) better. I’ve tried different wing roles and they are all fine and nothing terrible but haven’t found anything thats consistently successful. Plenty of scope for improvement there.

Any help would be amazingly appreciated, anything to help,y tactical understanding in this game

Sidenote : This is my gem of an AF, breaking D-lines and offside traps like a boss at 19! Loads of potential and a joy to watch. I'd like to build my entire tactic around him.

[Experienced Defender]

If I understood you correctly, you want to create a sort of direct counter-attack tactic for certain types of matches/opposition, right? Well, given that it's my favorite style of football, I'll be glad to share some thoughts with you 

I'll now tell you what I would change in the tactic you posted a screenshot of, and explain why:

- would remove the "Be more expressive" TI, and for two reasons. First, it is what I call a "secondary" instruction, i.e. one that is used in special situations, rather than as part of a primary (starting) tactic. Second, because it simply does not go hand in hand with a direct counter style

- would remove the "Pass into space" from the starting tactical setup and instead use it selectively, i.e. only when the situation in a given match is such that it obviously makes sense. Otherwise, you risk losing a lot of possession for nothing. You already have the "Counter" instruction ticked in transition, so your players will look to play direct balls into space anyway, whenever a promising opportunity for a counter-attack occurs

In the "Out of possession" section, I have to warn you that the extremely urgent press can expose your defense, especially as you play with lower DL and LOE, because it's a team instruction, meaning it affects all players including defenders as well, which can see them stepping out of position too much. So my suggestion would be to tone it down a bit (to "more urgent" for now). 

You can also tell your midfield four to mark tighter via their player instructions. I always use this for my midfielders (and never for defenders), and it works pretty nicely for me. 

Not sure about your choice of mentality. Maybe Balanced would be a better (safer) idea for starters, until you get completely comfortable with this new tactic. But be careful, because mentality affects all other settings.

Btw, I would consider swapping your strikers around, so the AF would be on the right and PF on the left. The latter can also be told to "Stay wider", so as to make more space for the IW cutting inside. Your NCB should be  moved into DCR spot in that case.

Finally, if you want your RB as an IWB, maybe defend duty would be a more suitable choice in this particular tactical setup. That way he would protect your defense better (covering for the RPM), while still being involved in the build-up phase of the game. 

NOTE: Please do not follow these suggestions blindly (because they are just suggestions after all). Only you know your team and what they are capable (or incapable) of, so any final decision must be yours 

 

[scwiffy]

Amazing! Thanks for your advice.

Thanks for pointing out “be more expressive”, that was a punt in one match that made it into the tactic and I don’t fully understand what it does on the pitch with the ME.

I want to keep “pass into space” as I’m certain that is EXACTLY what I’m trying to achieve.

I've definitely misread some of the advice on low LOE and pressing, being a notch down makes complete sense, as does tighter marking on the midfield (but maybe not on BWM due to role?)

I've taken your advice on PF being wider, swapping with AF and using IWB on defend and swapping NCB. What is your thinking behind swapping NCB?

First game at home against Man City wth these changes went very well

Biggest improvement is defensively with combination of IWB in defend and “more urgent” pressing. We completely limited their chances. It’s sometimes scary seeing a defender not engage someone on the ball when they start running but I’d heed Lombardis advice on the American Football thread about “bend don’t break”.

Offensively I want convinced. PF being wider looked nice with IW but the AF often goes wide too so sometimes there’s a gaping hole in the middle and no crossing option. Maybe I could switch AF to Poacher? I’m reluctant to do so as AF had been working so well and the tactic is based around that role/outlet but I don’t see huge dissimilarities with Poacher other than it doesn’t look for space out wide.

 

[Experienced Defender]

5 hours ago, scwiffy said:

What is your thinking behind swapping NCB?

Just to put him on the same side with the AF, so when he clears the ball long, the AF would look to chase it (of course, this will not succeed too often because it's a rather speculative pass, but when it does - can be fantastic).

 

5 hours ago, scwiffy said:

but the AF often goes wide too so sometimes there’s a gaping hole in the middle and no crossing option. Maybe I could switch AF to Poacher?

Yes, you can do that, and it can work pretty nicely. But unless you try, we cannot know how your current AF would do in the new role 

[scwiffy]

I'm too scared to change AF to Poacher so took of "Stay Wider" on PF and swapped back strikers and DCs. Again, this is going quite well so far, especially since the changes. Although a handful of wins have been due to random penalties and set-piece melees.

I'm now thinking a CM on defensive duty might be better than a BWM, he's covering the IW and WB well but due to his role he can stray a little too far out and leave a gap in the middle. I'm thinking CM-D will cover well and be better positionally, but its a role that doesn't offer much other than positional discipline IMO so any other suggestions would be welcome. Maybe its just going to be one of those roles where the player never excels but benefits the entire team and system. Maybe a DLP? Too many playmakers?

Also, I still want to get more out of my wingers, IW-S in particular isn't really offering me anything other than a bit of balance. I'm thinking of switching to IW-A, but don't want him clashing with AF. Also unsure about mazy runs/dribbles, seems to slow everything down. Maybe I need different personnel, a speed demon might be better suited (which I don't really have).

[Experienced Defender]

5 hours ago, scwiffy said:

I'm now thinking a CM on defensive duty might be better than a BWM, he's covering the IW and WB well but due to his role he can stray a little too far out and leave a gap in the middle. I'm thinking CM-D will cover well and be better positionally, but its a role that doesn't offer much other than positional discipline IMO so any other suggestions would be welcome. Maybe its just going to be one of those roles where the player never excels but benefits the entire team and system

If you ask me, I would always prefer a CM on defend to a BWM (especially in a system without a DM, such as 442), precisely because of the reasons you yourself cited above.

 

5 hours ago, scwiffy said:

I'm thinking of switching to IW-A, but don't want him clashing with AF

They won't clash (assuming you play them on different sides, though they would not clash even if played on the same one, but that would be more risky due to an upset of balance). In fact, he (IWBat) would be more likely to "clash" with the RPM than with AF (albeit not necessarily, because it ultimately depends on player intelligence and how used they are to the tactic).

[11v11]

just out of curiosity, lots of quality on the am l/r position while not as much nowdays with m l/r or wide midfielders...is it possible to get players natural from am l/r to play as wide midfielders as inverted wingers and train them until they can naturally play in those position?

[Experienced Defender]

3 hours ago, 11v11 said:

is it possible to get players natural from am l/r to play as wide midfielders as inverted wingers and train them until they can naturally play in those position?

Of course it's possible. Especially as IW and IF share a number of similarities.

[Faramir]

Thanks ED for a couple of points you offered to scwiffy. I have been playing this approach since the release (playing East Stirling up to Scottish Premier), but hadn't really considered that my NCB would be a lot more effective as CD on the side with the AF/Poacher. I really don't have the personnel for the level I am at, but am scuffing by thanks to a a couple good wingers (vs WM approach scwiffy is using). Your point on the 'stay wider' to PF is a good one too. Thanks to both of you for this discussion, it is helping.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Faramir said:

hadn't really considered that my NCB would be a lot more effective as CD on the side with the AF/Poacher

Here you should also take into account which is his stronger/weaker foot. Playing him on the side of his stronger foot is basically the "safest" option (unless both are equally strong 

[scwiffy]

So I feel this tactic is as good as I can make it. It’s defensively solid, and is great as an underdog tactic and away tactic against equal opposition.

This is the slightly more balanced version (less deep)

I ended up using a WP on the left due to a comment from ED on another thread and it’s been exactly what I needed. Not used a WP before but my god I wish I had. Drifts into space perfectly and opens up a bigger space for WB to move into. Crucially it doesn’t hold onto the ball longer than necessary like a IW or even worse run into a dead end and loose the ball. 

 

Im now moving onto my counter pressing tactic again as my success has meant I’m challenging for CL place and most sides are parking the bus.

This is what I have so far, any help would be welcome.

I initially had AF as a PF-a but found when I switched to an AF that he found space in the box much better when we were in possession deep into the oppositions half, the PF-a was much better in the transition or on the counter but the PF-d was already helping in that regard. I definitely feel the AP-s has scope for improvement. W-a is working very well, CWB-s can be a WB-s, I'm struggling to see the differences in game.

[Experienced Defender]

I recently started an experimental save with Brighton and I also use 442 (along with 4411 and occasionally 4141), but I am playing with BHA's current real-life squad, so my tactic is more conservative than yours. Brighton is just the kind of team I love to manage, because they are perfect for playing a simple and direct style. It's the "ugly" football I like the most  

[scwiffy]

30 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

I recently started an experimental save with Brighton and I also use 442 (along with 4411 and occasionally 4141), but I am playing with BHA's current real-life squad, so my tactic is more conservative than yours. Brighton is just the kind of team I love to manage, because they are perfect for playing a simple and direct style. It's the "ugly" football I like the most  

I play with them every other season of FM because I'm a Brighton fan. This year is good because they have made some great signings (Andone, Bernardo, Bissouma and Jakhanbaksh are still in my squad in my 5th season). But they are desperate for some reshaping in FM as they have a difficult squad to work with. At first it looks very defensive with human towers in Dunk and Duffy and conservative CMs, but there is no pace up top to efficiently play a low DL and counter attacking game. Another annoyance is ALL the wingers have "cut inside" PPMs, this is a frustrating PPM for a side of their caliber as they lack any speed or quality dribbling skill (for the premier league). You can make most of this all work (as have I) but you'll desperately need a striker with some decent pace (this is true to their RL squad too). 

Another plus is that they have a decent setup behind the scenes. Financially stable, good youth prospects, training facilities, backroom staff etc

[Faramir]

I am playing East Stirling in Scottish Premier (played up from bottom level), so while mine is similar to yours - it varies based on the personnel I have been able to get. My payroll is lowest is SP (Celtic, the perennial champion has 12 players with higher weekly wages than my entire side ), so some of that is make do. The main differences are that I am using true wingers vs. wide midfielders for you, otherwise our setups are pretty close (esp. my forward setup is same - except flipped to right with AF). The framework has been solid this season (2nd in SP) after we leaked goals in the first season due to weak center midfield. It looks like a really good approach for you.

 

[scwiffy]

2 minutes ago, Faramir said:

I am playing East Stirling in Scottish Premier (played up from bottom level), so while mine is similar to yours - it varies based on the personnel I have been able to get. My payroll is lowest is SP (Celtic, the perennial champion has 12 players with higher weekly wages than my entire side ), so some of that is make do. The main differences are that I am using true wingers vs. wide midfielders for you, otherwise our setups are pretty close (esp. my forward setup is same - except flipped to right with AF). The framework has been solid this season (2nd in SP) after we leaked goals in the first season due to weak center midfield. It looks like a really good approach for you.

 

I often switch WM to W depending on the player. Only one I don't change as is crucial for tactic is the WP. RPM is weak defensively but crucial for the quater back style pass to the forwards, thats one of the reasons why boring CM-d is needed.

[Faramir]

My holding mid is usually a DLP, but sometimes CM-d depending on match circumstances. Usually the other is AP-Attack or CM-Attack depending on the player filling the role.

[Rashidi]

Just some observations based on what you are trying to achieve.

1. Your roles in the backline will help pump the ball forward without thinking too much, the IWB sitting behind the RPM gives him more license to roam and the IW(S) allows you get some support in midfield
2. Your team instructions encourage you to sit back, and soak. This is at the risk of long shots, but its the price you pay for this choice
3. Upfront you have a PF(S) and a AF which i find is fine, except the emphasis here isn't as much as pumping forward to a focal point but to a general area which is achieved with the NCD. Otherwise the pressure is on the RPM to find players

 

My suggestions revolve around chaining very little because there are several things that could happen, the biggest of which is going to be telling which particular change helped the most. Personally the changes i would make revolve around making it more likely that your ball is driven forward and those players coming behind can become a bigger challenge for teams to defend against.

First let's talk about the LOE/DL. This sets your defensive shape and serves to govern how you defend your horizontal channels. At the moment its very shallow so you may be doing a good job, but it could also be unnecessary. In some games you can afford to push this up slightly. Remember that LOE is how you trigger your closing down and defensive line sets how far your defenders are going to be from their own goal. You can easily play on a standard defensive line and a standard line of engagement against some sides. This sets your closing down closer to your own half and not in front of your goal. This is a really good area to do this in because the opposing team has most likely just entered their midfield consolidation phase where they are trying to get players into support for attack. Disrupting them there can also be good cos your own players aren't too deep. 

Secondly to make the attacks more punchy consider using other roles instead of the PF(S), while the PF(S) is a good role he could be too far away from the AF. Here i am a big fan of either the TM or the DLF(S). The TM will become an easy target and your players will  look to him first especially if its for a quick counter. If you have the player for it this could be a good way of achieving the direct counter you are after. It was frequently my first choice of play when i play with sides that are inferior. The other option allows him to get others into play. The DLF(S) drops deep and he could look at other players behind him or he could make the decision to drive the ball towards the AF. Since the DLF operates in the channels he could also pull a defender with him.

The WM is a safe role, could be ok against good sides, but against sides who are camping you need a strategy to brute force your way through, and this could mean using a W and a DLF in attack.

[scwiffy]

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

Just some observations based on what you are trying to achieve.

1. Your roles in the backline will help pump the ball forward without thinking too much, the IWB sitting behind the RPM gives him more license to roam and the IW(S) allows you get some support in midfield
2. Your team instructions encourage you to sit back, and soak. This is at the risk of long shots, but its the price you pay for this choice
3. Upfront you have a PF(S) and a AF which i find is fine, except the emphasis here isn't as much as pumping forward to a focal point but to a general area which is achieved with the NCD. Otherwise the pressure is on the RPM to find players

I think your looking at the first post (tactic has evolved slightly since then) but what you are describing is still what I'm trying to achieve. Is the standard practice on this forum to change/update the OP?

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

First let's talk about the LOE/DL. This sets your defensive shape and serves to govern how you defend your horizontal channels. At the moment its very shallow so you may be doing a good job, but it could also be unnecessary. In some games you can afford to push this up slightly. Remember that LOE is how you trigger your closing down and defensive line sets how far your defenders are going to be from their own goal. You can easily play on a standard defensive line and a standard line of engagement against some sides. This sets your closing down closer to your own half and not in front of your goal. This is a really good area to do this in because the opposing team has most likely just entered their midfield consolidation phase where they are trying to get players into support for attack. Disrupting them there can also be good cos your own players aren't too deep. 

This is a good point. I have created a more balanced version (see my updated post), which CAN work more effectively depending on how I see the game playing out. I've found that when playing a dominant side, the DL setting seems more relevant to the CMs, this is because the opposition often camp their entire squad in my half. The difference between Lower and Standard DL in these situations is so minimal due to how far back they have forced my defence/defensive line. But on a Standard DL setting I find the CMs preventing long shots more due to their slightly higher position. You would think this could be achieved on a higher/standard LOE (as you have described) but in practice I've found that it simply leaves a narrow gap for AM strata to exploit.

Because I'm sitting back and playing direct counter attacking football, the transition when we loose possession is not a problem we face that often. A problem I've found with closing down in the midfield area is that because we are playing 442 (and have a RPM) we are quite vulnerable in the middle, and don't have the numbers to press there as effectively. But I'll definitely take you sound advice and experiment further.

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

Secondly to make the attacks more punchy consider using other roles instead of the PF(S), while the PF(S) is a good role he could be too far away from the AF. Here i am a big fan of either the TM or the DLF(S). The TM will become an easy target and your players will  look to him first especially if its for a quick counter. If you have the player for it this could be a good way of achieving the direct counter you are after. It was frequently my first choice of play when i play with sides that are inferior. The other option allows him to get others into play. The DLF(S) drops deep and he could look at other players behind him or he could make the decision to drive the ball towards the AF. Since the DLF operates in the channels he could also pull a defender with him.

I'm on a PF-d now but still come across this problem of isolation. However it is a sacrifice I think I'm willing to make. The main thing I'm trying to do is force passes OVER the opposition DL so the AF is through on goal, I feel a TM would mean most of the long passes would be to him and change the tactic. The DLF-s sounds much more attractive to me, but I really LOVE the way the PF-d puts pressure on the DM position, especially as I only have 2 players in the middle defending which can often be overrun. This is the reason I switched from PF-s to PF-d, the PF-s was often caught between the idea of pressing the DM and the CD but doing neither (of neither very well at least). I did try a PF-a and this CAN work due to the added DL-line threat, but I found I ended up with 2 isolated players instead of 1. I'll try a DLF-s though as I like the thought of him attacking the channels, I definitely want that position to offer more in attack but maybe I'm asking too much?

1 hour ago, Rashidi said:

The WM is a safe role, could be ok against good sides, but against sides who are camping you need a strategy to brute force your way through, and this could mean using a W and a DLF in attack.

Yes, I now have a W-a role against most sides and it works much better. WM is better for dominant opposition, but it depends on the player at my disposal

[Experienced Defender]

56 minutes ago, scwiffy said:

At first it looks very defensive with human towers in Dunk and Duffy and conservative CMs, but there is no pace up top to efficiently play a low DL and counter attacking game. Another annoyance is ALL the wingers have "cut inside" PPMs, this is a frustrating PPM for a side of their caliber as they lack any speed or quality dribbling skill (for the premier league). You can make most of this all work (as have I) but you'll desperately need a striker with some decent pace (this is true to their RL squad too)

Well, that's why I like it even more. Because the bigger the challenge is, the more tactically flexible you need to be 

Yes, wingers have the "cut inside" PPM, so I solved that "problem" in this way: March is left-footed and likes to cut inside from the right, so I usually play him as a left winger; Knockaert is also left-footed and cuts inside from the right, so I use him as an IW on the right, whereas Montoya is there to provide some width (I play him either as a WB on support or a FB on support with the "Get forward" and "Stay wider" PIs). Murray is relatively slow, but has very good anticipation and off the ball (along with being an aerial threat), so I pair him with Locadia (because Andone is currently injured), who is quicker but a bit less intelligent. And this pertains solely to my 442 (in 4411 it's slightly different). So my primary setup with the first-choice starting 11 is basically this:

PO/PFat     PFsu/TMsu

Wsu      APsu      CMde       IWsu/at

NFB      CDde      CDde/co      FBsu/WBsu

SKde

As you can see, roles in certain positions can vary depending on who is playing there at the moment, what I want to achieve in a given situation, and of course the type of opposition.

Starting team instructions:

In possession - more direct passing, higher tempo, play wider, hit early crosses, play for set-pieces (occasional TIs/tweaks - pass into space, overlap right, shot on sight, waste time sometimes)

In transition - counter (the rest depends on the situation and is therefore adjustable)

Out of possession - standard DL, standard or lower LOE (as above, other defensive settings vary)

Player instructions:

- mark tighter for all the midfield four

- CML/APsu is allowed to roam from position

- RB/FBsu - stay wider, get further forward, cross more often (except when I am pleased with the result and want to preserve it)

- RM/IWsu - get further forward, sit narrower (sometimes shoot more often)

- LW/Wsu - get further forward (albeit not always)

PIs for strikers depend on which striker combo and players I use in a given match. Basically, the support-duty striker on the right is allowed to roam, and the attacking one can move into channels (but again not necessarily) when played as a poacher (since PF on attack has the hard-coded MIC PI anyway).

Mentality is balanced or cautious.

So it's pretty much simple 

[scwiffy]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Well, that's why I like it even more. Because the bigger the challenge is, the more tactically flexible you need to be 

Yes, wingers have the "cut inside" PPM, so I solved that "problem" in this way: March is left-footed and likes to cut inside from the right, so I usually play him as a left winger; Knockaert is also left-footed and cuts inside from the right, so I use him as an IW on the right, whereas Montoya is there to provide some width (I play him either as a WB on support or a FB on support with the "Get forward" and "Stay wider" PIs). Murray is relatively slow, but has very good anticipation and off the ball (along with being an aerial threat), so I pair him with Locadia (because Andone is currently injured), who is quicker but a bit less intelligent. And this pertains solely to my 442 (in 4411 it's slightly different). So my primary setup with the first-choice starting 11 is basically this:

PO/PFat     PFsu/TMsu

Wsu      APsu      CMde       IWsu/at

NFB      CDde      CDde/co      FBsu/WBsu

SKde

As you can see, roles in certain positions can vary depending on who is playing there at the moment, what I want to achieve in a given situation, and of course the type of opposition.

Starting team instructions:

In possession - more direct passing, higher tempo, play wider, hit early crosses, play for set-pieces (occasional TIs/tweaks - pass into space, overlap right, shot on sight, waste time sometimes)

In transition - counter (the rest depends on the situation and is therefore adjustable)

Out of possession - standard DL, standard or lower LOE (as above, other defensive settings vary)

Player instructions:

- mark tighter for all the midfield four

- CML/APsu is allowed to roam from position

- RB/FBsu - stay wider, get further forward, cross more often (except when I am pleased with the result and want to preserve it)

- RM/IWsu - get further forward, sit narrower (sometimes shoot more often)

- LW/Wsu - get further forward (albeit not always)

PIs for strikers depend on which striker combo and players I use in a given match. Basically, the support-duty striker on the right is allowed to roam, and the attacking one can move into channels (but again not necessarily) when played as a poacher (since PF on attack has the hard-coded MIC PI anyway).

Mentality is balanced or cautious.

So it's pretty much simple 

Looks great. I played 4411 my first season due to lack of striker options (3 isn’t enough for a whole season with 2 striker tactics). Using March that way is genius, hadn’t thought about that. Knockheart is still in my squad, quality player. I’ve found he works best in a WM/Winger role as the IW role tends to make him dribble too much and loose possession. Because of his PPMs he still plays much like a IW, cutting inside nicely but making better choices/decisions in the final third.

im curious why you’ve opted for a NFB, I’d always got for FB instead. Ontop of that it looks like your screaming out for a IWB there

[Faramir]

Rashidi's point on PF-S is one that I have seen, and my usual in-match adjustment was to go with DLF-S (also after earning a yellow card on PF-S I convert it to this). Forgot to mention I have play wider on him to leave room for Inverted Winger that usually plays left wing in my formation.

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, scwiffy said:

Using March that way is genius, hadn’t thought about that

So far he's one of my best players. Actually, he is the best in terms of assists and goals combined. However, it's my playmakers Proper and Gros who are making him look so good by playing timely passes to him on the flank 

 

2 hours ago, scwiffy said:

Knockheart is still in my squad, quality player. I’ve found he works best in a WM/Winger role as the IW role tends to make him dribble too much and loose possession

Yes, you are right  I've also noted this. But overall, he really plays well for the time being. Nevertheless, I will consider your suggestion of playing him as a standard winger, it could improve his game even more.

 

2 hours ago, scwiffy said:

im curious why you’ve opted for a NFB, I’d always got for FB instead. Ontop of that it looks like your screaming out for a IWB there

Because I primarily use Bonk, who is technically pretty poor, but also in order to get occasional long balls forward on the left side where my faster striker is usually located. I don't play him as an NFB all the time, sometimes he's a FB on defend (or even WB on defend). It really depends. As for inverted winger, I like the role and sometimes use it in the Brighton save, though rarely from the start of a match.

 

2 hours ago, scwiffy said:

I played 4411 my first season due to lack of striker options (3 isn’t enough for a whole season with 2 striker tactics)

Actually, we have 4 strikers: Murray, Andone, Izquierdo and Locadia. Andone and Izquierdo are currently injured though. And I do frequently use 4411 as well. But here the setup looks slightly differently:

PFat/DLFat

APat/AMat

Wsu     BBM/CMsu    CMde      IWsu/at

The back line is essentially set up in the same way as in the 442. 

The attack-duty APM/AM in the AMC spot is told to roam from position. The BBM/CM su to get further forward. Others have more or less the same PIs as in 442.

Finally, my most defensive tactic is 4141 (against top sides), but I haven't used it so far because there has been no such games (as I just started the save):

PFat

 

Wsu    APat     BWMsu     IWsu

ACM

NFB   CDco   CD/NCBde    FBsu/WBde

[Rashidi]

8 hours ago, scwiffy said:

Is the standard practice on this forum to change/update the OP?

 

I think you may have wondered if you needed to change your OP, which you don't really need to do, incidentally if you are attacking a parked bus you need to get more players involved in the attacking transitions to break down defensive sides, this is where a PF is a liability. 

[Robson 07]

There is some nice bits and pieces in this thread @scwiffy 

[scwiffy]

On 23/02/2019 at 02:14, Rashidi said:

I think you may have wondered if you needed to change your OP, which you don't really need to do, incidentally if you are attacking a parked bus you need to get more players involved in the attacking transitions to break down defensive sides, this is where a PF is a liability. 

 

Yes, I’am starting to notice this, liability is a strong word but I’m starting to think I need to rethink the role (and type of player required) entirely. It probably needs to be more of a creator role now, a DLF as you suggested or F9, I did try a SS one match but the penetration from him was completely inadequate. It doesn’t help that I don’t have this type of player in my squad, I have 2 great AFs and two meatball PFs, both their passing abilities are average at best

[thegoon65]

Have a read of this, its an older FM version but some very interesting ideas based on similar thoughts of your own.