Can I make my 442 solid

[Conflictinbanno]

Hi Guys I'm a happy man as I managed to recover my Ipswich save which I thought I had lost. I'm in my second season and I've started with a lot of draws.

I have two formations that I would primarily use. A 442 as mentioned in the title and a 4141 which I'm still getting to grips with, now my major issue I know is my defence. I know it isn't the best I have. I was very unfortunate in the transfer market at the end of the season to lose probably my best CB and my best LB. So I'm left with the following (apologies for no screenshots, I currently am on a different device so when I get a chance I will upload some).

My 442 is as follows

GK/D - Bialkowski (a bog standard keeper, although I do think he's a bit hit and miss on this game at times but this isn't my main issue)

FB/S - Jonathan Grounds (signed for LB role to replace Knudsen, he's not the best going forward but looks okay defensively)

LD/D - Malarczyk or Matthew Clarke (this is probably my weakest of defenders as I lost Berra)

CD/D - Chambers

FB/S - Varela (a free signing as I was in desperate need of a RB, a bit inconsistent thus far but looks okay overall)

W/S - Oar

CM/D - Skuse

DLP/S - Bishop (arguably my best midfielder, sometimes Bru or Benyu come into this position)

W/A - Hamad (one of my better signings a very good winger overall, also have Korte as backup for this position or to play where Oar does)

AF/A - Gayle (could also be Sears in this role but he is currently out injured)

F9/S - McGoldrick

Team Shape - Structured

Mentality - Standard

TI's - Close down less, stay in position (might have stay on feet).

Now my thinking behind Structured and the TI's is to basically try to keep my team to hold shape with 2 banks of four when defending. I may add close down more to my attackers, but not sure this will help. Basically I'm trying to think how to get them to help defensively, possibly like Leicester have (although I don't know much about how they play as I haven't seen them enough). I want them to be hard to break down, as I know my defence is probably my weakest area. Which is why I've tried to avoid, using a defensive mentality. As I feel my back line could crumble. Which I have noticed a fair bit already about 10 games into the season.

I know not having a DM can hurt me defensively a bit so I'm trying to think of a way to protect this. By having my team when they lose the ball retreat into shape and hold position and be harder to break down. Yet still to utilise my attacking threats which I feel with my wingers, Bishop, and attackers, is very good.

I just wondered, does this look like it could be okay defensively? The one thing that worries me a bit is the team shape as I'm not sure this will encourage my strikers to help defensively. Also because of my weaker defence, should I actually be thinking, instead of holding shape and being hard to break down, would I be more suited to doing the opposite and trying to win the ball back quickly high up the pitch by using things like Close down more or much more and a mentality that is a bit more attacking?

[Yankee112DK]

Well, you should ask yourself - how are your defenders weak? Poor intelligence/speed/marking/physichally?

Generally, the 4-4-2 allows you to defend the width very well and allows you a great shape for "first pressure" from the two forwards and a good overall shape for counterattacking. You might, however, face two issues when defending:

1) The gap between your 4-lines may become exposed. You should either have a CM on defend duty and/or deploy a rather high D-line to compensate.

2) You may be outnumbered in the center of the park. A narrow shape or a deep/defensive forward to pick up an opposition DLP could remedy this.

[Conflictinbanno]

In terms of weakness, I feel it is mostly just their defensive ability, Clarke is very much still learning and developing so he could improve, while Malarczyk is only really good at your basics hence the choice of LD for that position, the basics being marking, tackling, heading, strength. I might check the pace of my defenders to see if I could consider a higher defensive line. While the defensive duty in CM is already covered with Skuse or Hyam. I might have a look to see if I could utilise my F9 to mark someone when off the ball to help as I didn't really think of that to help pick up a DM possibly.

[herne79]

Now my thinking behind Structured and the TI's is to basically try to keep my team to hold shape with 2 banks of four when defending.

The one thing that worries me a bit is the team shape as I'm not sure this will encourage my strikers to help defensively.

I think you may be trying to over think Team Shape. Team Shape basically affects player creativity and space. Structured systems reduce creativity and increases space between players. Fluid systems are the opposite. Essentially that's it.

With that in mind, perhaps rather than focussing on Team Shape to give you "2 banks of four when defending" and "encouraging your strikers to help defensively" you may get better results by focussing on player roles and duties. For example - if you want a striker to help defensively, consider the Defensive Forward role, along with a suitable player.

Also because of my weaker defence, should I actually be thinking, instead of holding shape and being hard to break down, would I be more suited to doing the opposite and trying to win the ball back quickly high up the pitch by using things like Close down more or much more and a mentality that is a bit more attacking?

It's entirely up to you and how you want your team to play. With the 442, your main issue defensively is the space between your midfield and central defenders. There are different ways of reducing this space - telling your back line to push higher up; using at least one midfielder with a defend duty; using a more Fluid Team Shape; using Shorter Passing and/or Retain Possession to reduce space between your players; more closing down. They all have pros and cons, so it comes back to how you want your team to play.

[Conflictinbanno]

Thanks herne. I think you are right, I've been very much looking at shape at bit too wrong, I think I've over complicated it myself a fair bit. I think the creativity bit made me just assume players with more creativity would break shape a lot.

I made a change for my next game. I changed to Standard/Fluid as based on this it should not only bring my defenders and midfielders closer but would this also pull my strikers closer to my midfield? The only other additions I had was shorter passing, this is more of a personal preference but also because the game prior I felt too many long passes went astray so wanted to nullify that a bit too and also it should also bring them a little closer as they look for a shorter pass and also slightly higher defensive line just to push my team up a little more so they aren't getting pinned in their own half as much and with the pace of my defence I felt it should be okay.

Will keep a closer eye on it though throughout the season!

[marsh82]

What OI's do you use? These can be utilized to encourage pressing from the front more.

[Conflictinbanno]

What OI's do you use? These can be utilized to encourage pressing from the front more.

I used to let my AM set these if I'm honest, now however, I'm using none. Mainly because I don't want certain players pushing onto a player and breaking the shape and leaving spaces to exploit. I might use set PI's on my strikers now and then to get them to press a bit or help out defensively as I don't really have anyone who could play as a DF.

[Craigus89]

I used to let my AM set these if I'm honest, now however, I'm using none. Mainly because I don't want certain players pushing onto a player and breaking the shape and leaving spaces to exploit. I might use set PI's on my strikers now and then to get them to press a bit or help out defensively as I don't really have anyone who could play as a DF.

From my experience - and obviously depending on what you want him to do - all you really need from a DF on top of the other typical striker stats is work rate and stamina, as you probably want him to press. Don't overthink it and most importantly don't pay too much attention to all the green wheels and stars on the tactics screen telling you how suitable someone is for a role.

[Conflictinbanno]

From my experience - and obviously depending on what you want him to do - all you really need from a DF on top of the other typical striker stats is work rate and stamina, as you probably want him to press. Don't overthink it and most importantly don't pay too much attention to all the green wheels and stars on the tactics screen telling you how suitable someone is for a role.

I was more going by the highlighted attributes for the role. Also I worry taking a DF might not work in the way I have it set up. I'll briefly explain how I see the tactic working with and without the ball to try to get an idea. I've already been informed here before to ignore the wheels and stars as they can be a little misleading.

With the ball.

Centre backs to sit, I don't want them leaving their station, only reason I have a LD is because of the limited ability of my other CB's compared to Chambers and I don't want them giving the ball away in a silly manner. Although I may test the other as a CB eventually.

Full backs. Provide width from deep, I don't expect them to overlap the wingers, as I feel it will be too congested.

Wingers, provide the attacking width, deliver crosses and the RM of the two to maybe crop up in the box now and then too, hence the attack duty for him.

CM/D to be my holding midfielder of sorts I want him to sit when people attack to help add protection from any counters.

DLP/S to be my main man who gets the ball, I want him to find the wingers in space or go forward to my attackers. Reason I wanted a DLP is for the hold position, I don't want him venturing too far out of position and leaving my CM/D with too much work to do.

F9 this is my link up man, I want him to drop and help work the ball forward, but when the ball goes out wide I want him to become a threat in the box and also be ready to make runs forward when he can.

AF my main goal threat, when the ball is out wide I expect him to already be in the box, also the DLP could look for ambitious through balls to him if he makes a run at the defence and also to pressure the defenders.

Without the ball

Flat back four I want them to protect the goalkeeper as much as possible

Wingers I want to see come back and help the full backs and prevent any overloads from the oppositions wingers/full backs

CM/D to harras the players in the middle with the ball and try to win it back

DLP to be in the middle helping the CM out to try to win the ball back.

F9 to drop to give an easier outlet for the defence to clear to who isn't so far forward, if I can get him too, I would like him to harrass any DM's if the opposition has one but I feel this would have to be done by PI's and would depend on who I'm playing.

AF to harrass the defenders who have the ball, maybe try and force them to rush their play and make them make a mistake or retreat the ball back towards their goal. (I think the description of the AF has this already).

[OrientTillIDie]

I have used a 4-4-2 system on my Orient save which I'm now in 2020/21 on. I'm in the Championship and have been for the past 3 and a half seasons (trying to slowly tweak my system so it's not stagnant). I've found that having a Fluid shape works better with a 4-4-2 purely because Structured separates out the defence and the midfield too much. I realised that my midfield wasn't tracking back enough when I didn't use Fluid and that left my defence massively exposed. When I changed to Fluid, my midfield started dropping in and helping out more which tightened me up defensively. It's not perfect by any means but I'm getting decent results.

[Conflictinbanno]

I have used a 4-4-2 system on my Orient save which I'm now in 2020/21 on. I'm in the Championship and have been for the past 3 and a half seasons (trying to slowly tweak my system so it's not stagnant). I've found that having a Fluid shape works better with a 4-4-2 purely because Structured separates out the defence and the midfield too much. I realised that my midfield wasn't tracking back enough when I didn't use Fluid and that left my defence massively exposed. When I changed to Fluid, my midfield started dropping in and helping out more which tightened me up defensively. It's not perfect by any means but I'm getting decent results.

Orient, I completely agree with the feeling of Structured, it seemed almost every time I was attacked against that the team was carving out good chances but I couldn't see a glaring issue, just that my players were too separated. I'm hopping this change to fluid will help it in the long run, while the other options were added more for trying to get them to play a bit more like I want to. Going forward I do feel like it is okay, it is just defensively where I noticed it was weak at times and I'm hoping this will just prevent the leaking goals a bit and hopefully turn a lot of these draws I've had into wins!

My only other issue now is my teams condition, I feel like I'm having to rotate quite a few players almost every game despite the fact their condition and match condition is at 95% plus! I feel this could just be the quick succession of games though, I'm not sure!

[OLLMEISTER1]

I find a lot of people playing this game confuse the structured and fluid specs.

Simply people believe against stronger teams you need to me more structured, when in fact this is often the worst thing you can do as it creates spaces between the lines allowing top quality opposition players to float in and cause havoc.

Fluid compresses players together making it harder to break down and essentially less space. Downside of fluid tactics is they can become quite easily stretched if the ball is moved across field cleverly and quickly by opposing teams. Depending on how you set your defensive line, either high or deep you can quite easily be caught out by pacy players if its set too high by over the top balls etc.

[Conflictinbanno]

I find a lot of people playing this game confuse the structured and fluid specs.

Simply people believe against stronger teams you need to me more structured, when in fact this is often the worst thing you can do as it creates spaces between the lines allowing top quality opposition players to float in and cause havoc.

Fluid compresses players together making it harder to break down and essentially less space. Downside of fluid tactics is they can become quite easily stretched if the ball is moved across field cleverly and quickly by opposing teams. Depending on how you set your defensive line, either high or deep you can quite easily be caught out by pacy players if its set too high by over the top balls etc.

Olimeister I kind of agree, I never changed depending on who I was playing, but I often thought going structured was a better option for my tactics because of the description the game gives it. Where it states under structered how the central defenders defend, the full backs and midfielders are involved in the transition phase, while attacking midfielders and strikers deal with the attacking phase. It often made me think, the more structured you went, just that the team would obey their roles more to the dot, which I guess is true but as a result that will separate the players more as they stick to their job. I think if I came up against a tougher opponent though, I wouldn't think to change team shape, if anything I'd rather avoid changing the shape unless I felt my own team was too on top of each other (something which I don't think the flat 442 should experience), if anything I'd probably consider moving my d-line from higher to a deeper position if they were doing successful balls over the top or if they were using incisive short passing I could consider pushing it up even more to make less space or instruct the team to stay on feet so they don't/close down less to make them hold shape a lot more. Obviously I need to play a few more games to have that situation crop up though.

I think it was just me complicating what it means a lot more.