4-4-2 midfield question.

[EnigMattic1]

In a flat 4-4-2 with an inverted winger on the right and a winger on the left, what would be the ideal partner for a roaming playmaker in the middle?

I'm leaning towards a cm(d) but I'm not entirely sure.

For what it's worth, the formation is as follows:

Gk

Wb right (a) 

Fb left (s) 

2x dc (d) 

IW right (s) 

? 

? 

W left (a) 

Poacher

Deep lying forward (d) 

 

[Experienced Defender]

So this is your setup:

DLF??   PO

Wat      XX     YY     IWsu

FBsu   CDde  CDde  WBat

GKde

And you want to use the RPM and another CM role that would be compatible, right?

What's the duty of your DLF? You wrote DLF (d), but it does not exist. I guess you meant support duty?

[EnigMattic1]

21 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

So this is your setup:

DLF??   PO

Wat      XX     YY     IWsu

FBsu   CDde  CDde  WBat

GKde

And you want to use the RPM and another CM role that would be compatible, right?

What's the duty of your DLF? You wrote DLF (d), but it does not exist. I guess you meant support duty?

Yeah, I meant support. I was away from my save at that point. It doesn't have to be a RPM, I would just like a playmaker type role (someone who can run the show and spray key passes forward) but I am unsure as to which role to go for and what to partner him with. I was originally looking at a BWM but, as the BWM will move up to intercept the ball, that will leave the defence vulnerable. 

In your layout, I was also looking at playing the 'creator' in the position you have down as XX.

[Experienced Defender]

21 minutes ago, EnigMattic1 said:

I was also looking at playing the 'creator' in the position you have down as XX

Creator in the sense of a playmaker role or a creative type of role in general (mezzala) or a creative player irrespective of the role? 

I don't know which style of play you want to implement. The 442 is not ideal for possession-oriented styles, so I would assume you want either counter-attacking or some sort of "hybrid" football that combines different styles?

In any case, a WB on attack could prove too adventurous as a role in a system without a DM. Having an attacking fullback behind an IW on support is a good idea, but in this system I would rather opt for standard FB on attack.

[EnigMattic1]

25 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Creator in the sense of a playmaker role or a creative type of role in general (mezzala) or a creative player irrespective of the role?

I would like a creator irrespective of the role. Something like a Scholes - Keane or a Gerrard - Mascherano (I know he is more of a dm). 

I don't know which style of play you want to implement. The 442 is not ideal for possession-oriented styles, so I would assume you want either counter-attacking or some sort of "hybrid" football that combines different styles?

I don't want anything fancy. No tiki-taka or gegenpress. I would like a balanced tactic that allows me to attack but not be too vulnerable. 

In any case, a WB on attack could prove too adventurous as a role in a system without a DM. Having an attacking fullback behind an IW on support is a good idea, but in this system I would rather opt for standard FB on attack.

I agree with you on the rb. Must have had a brain fart when I set it as a wb. 

 

[Experienced Defender]

6 hours ago, EnigMattic1 said:

Creator in the sense of a playmaker role or a creative type of role in general (mezzala) or a creative player irrespective of the role?

I would like a creator irrespective of the role. Something like a Scholes - Keane or a Gerrard - Mascherano (I know he is more of a dm). 

I don't know which style of play you want to implement. The 442 is not ideal for possession-oriented styles, so I would assume you want either counter-attacking or some sort of "hybrid" football that combines different styles?

I don't want anything fancy. No tiki-taka or gegenpress. I would like a balanced tactic that allows me to attack but not be too vulnerable. 

In any case, a WB on attack could prove too adventurous as a role in a system without a DM. Having an attacking fullback behind an IW on support is a good idea, but in this system I would rather opt for standard FB on attack.

I agree with you on the rb. Must have had a brain fart when I set it as a wb. 

So, if this is the part of your setup you are sure about:

DLFsu   PO

Wat      XX     YY     IWsu

FBsu   CDde  CDde  FBat

GKde

then this are CM combos I would consider following what you said previously:

MCL (Scholes) - APsu

MCR (Keane) - BWMde

Or:

MCL (Gerrard) - BBM

MCR (Mascherano) - BWMde

However, Gerrard and Masch did not actually play in a 442 under Rafa, so you need to take that into account as well.

And of course, always be careful when you use a BWM in a midfield without a DM.

[EnigMattic1]

49 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

So, if this is the part of your setup you are sure about:

DLFsu   PO

Wat      XX     YY     IWsu

FBsu   CDde  CDde  FBat

GKde

then this are CM combos I would consider following what you said previously:

MCL (Scholes) - APsu

MCR (Keane) - BWMde

Or:

MCL (Gerrard) - BBM

MCR (Mascherano) - BWMde

However, Gerrard and Masch did not actually play in a 442 under Rafa, so you need to take that into account as well.

And of course, always be careful when you use a BWM in a midfield without a DM.

Yeah, I know Gerrard and Masch didn't play in a 4-4-2, it was more for use as a 'player type'. Which side would you suggest for the BWM?

[Spiegel]

I've had success with a DLP(S) and CAR(S) pairing. But if you're committed to using a RPM, a BWM(S) should make a good partner.

I think a dedicated Defensive role is too conservative in a 4-4-2.

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, EnigMattic1 said:

Which side would you suggest for the BWM?

I already wrote: 

 

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

MCR (Mascherano) - BWMde

Therefore - the right CM.