Two Rows of Four, 4-4-2 Flat

[CybrSlydr]

I'm interested in trying to make a flat 4-4-2 formation that's solid defensively. 

I want to try and replicate the solid, compact, "two rows of four" sort of defense and I'd like your folks input.

I'm thinking I would want a Highly Structured and Defensive tactic (though I think Counter would work as well).  Throw in Higher pace (for when we counter), play a narrow pitch (to keep compact), Deeper defensive line (again, for compactness), Much Less closing down (to retain formation shape), More Disciplined and Stick To Positions.  I have a CF(S)/P striker pair, so I'm thinking Hit Early Crosses to try and utilize the P on the back shoulder of the Defense.  I'm also thinking More Direct Passing to facilitate getting the ball up the pitch quicker to utilize the counter, but not Route One so we aren't just hoofing it.

As for positions, I'm thinking...

   FB(S) CD(D) BPD(D) FB(S)

WM(S) DLP(D) RPM(S) WM(S)

           CF(S) P(A)

 

The DLP(D) will stay back and help screen the back four, the RPM(S) will venture forward in offense and be the playmaker.  The WM(S) on both sides will support the strikers and help on defense.  The FB(S) will also do the same while the CD(D) will... defend and the BPD(D) will play passes to either CM.

Thoughts?

[BillHoudini24]

Your thoughts are logical and seem fine irl, but unfortunatelly in this year's fm logic is long gone. As long as you are having fast FBs with decent crossing you will win against anyone. As long as you press higher you are safe defensively and if you use the instructions "exploit the flanks" and "overlapping", you are good to go with every 4-4-2.

To prove my theory, you can check many "Leicester 2015-16" tactics with 4-2-4 formations (AMR/L instead of MR/L) which seem to work wonders with any team, in any league, no matter the players. You just need speed in every position, crossing in Full Backs and two decent DLFs upfront. Needless to say that this is not balanced, it doesn't represent real life football and it isn't in any way realistic. 4-2-4 doesn't work since the 50s.

I can upload you my results with my team in 2030, after I switched to a 4-2-4, with Advanced Playmaker (Support), Central Midfielder (Defend), AMR/L Wingers (Support), two Deep Lying Forwards (Support) and of course two Wing Backs (Attack). I was a mid table club struggling and we transformed into a top 5 Premier League club.

I'm really disappointed in terms of tactics this year, you only win regularly in you exploit the match engine.

[tmason122]

5 hours ago, CybrSlydr said:

I'm interested in trying to make a flat 4-4-2 formation that's solid defensively. 

I want to try and replicate the solid, compact, "two rows of four" sort of defense and I'd like your folks input.

I'm thinking I would want a Highly Structured and Defensive tactic (though I think Counter would work as well).  Throw in Higher pace (for when we counter), play a narrow pitch (to keep compact), Deeper defensive line (again, for compactness), Much Less closing down (to retain formation shape), More Disciplined and Stick To Positions.  I have a CF(S)/P striker pair, so I'm thinking Hit Early Crosses to try and utilize the P on the back shoulder of the Defense.  I'm also thinking More Direct Passing to facilitate getting the ball up the pitch quicker to utilize the counter, but not Route One so we aren't just hoofing it.

As for positions, I'm thinking...

   FB(S) CD(D) BPD(D) FB(S)

WM(S) DLP(D) RPM(S) WM(S)

           CF(S) P(A)

 

The DLP(D) will stay back and help screen the back four, the RPM(S) will venture forward in offense and be the playmaker.  The WM(S) on both sides will support the strikers and help on defense.  The FB(S) will also do the same while the CD(D) will... defend and the BPD(D) will play passes to either CM.

Thoughts?

It looks pretty solid and without you having tried it yet and encountering problems I would say go out and give it a runout against a few teams and see what happens. That being said, there are a couple of tweaks I would consider. 

1) Be weary of having two playmakers (DLP (D) and RPM (S)). Having two playmakers can work extremely well sometimes, and sometimes it does not. By having more than a single playmaker you have in essence two players in the park doing very similar roles. I would perhaps consider changing your DLP (D) to CM(D) or your RPM(S) to BBM(S) just to give you a better range of roles in the CM strata.

2) This is more of a concern, as you only have one attacking role in your entire team (P(A)). There are some more advanced formations which can be highly destructive that are based on support roles only, but with what you have envisioned I feel you need some more attacking roles. Essentially your Poacher is going be the only player moving between the lines, with all the other players being relatively stationary. I would advise consider changing some of your wingers, and FBs to more attacking roles or you might find your team's build up play a little predictable.

Hope this advice is useful. Let us know how it goes! 

[herne79]

5 hours ago, BillHoudini24 said:

Your thoughts are logical and seem fine irl, but unfortunatelly in this year's fm logic is long gone. As long as you are having fast FBs with decent crossing you will win against anyone. As long as you press higher you are safe defensively and if you use the instructions "exploit the flanks" and "overlapping", you are good to go with every 4-4-2.

To prove my theory, you can check many "Leicester 2015-16" tactics with 4-2-4 formations (AMR/L instead of MR/L) which seem to work wonders with any team, in any league, no matter the players. You just need speed in every position, crossing in Full Backs and two decent DLFs upfront. Needless to say that this is not balanced, it doesn't represent real life football and it isn't in any way realistic. 4-2-4 doesn't work since the 50s.

I can upload you my results with my team in 2030, after I switched to a 4-2-4, with Advanced Playmaker (Support), Central Midfielder (Defend), AMR/L Wingers (Support), two Deep Lying Forwards (Support) and of course two Wing Backs (Attack). I was a mid table club struggling and we transformed into a top 5 Premier League club.

I'm really disappointed in terms of tactics this year, you only win regularly in you exploit the match engine.

If that's your experience, then that's your experience.  Turning that into generalised (and very incorrect) statements about logic and exploits takes your experience of the ME and tries to turn it into something it isn't, and does nothing to help the OP with their issue.

You may only be able to win by exploiting the ME, but that doesn't mean by any stretch of the imagination that the rest of us are in the same boat, which is what you are stating. 

Whilst there are, and always have been, issues with the ME (which SI acknowledge) that doesn't mean it's impossible to to build simple cohesive tactical systems.  If you (or anyone else who thinks the same as you) are unable to do that, then you'll benefit from spending more time learning and understanding how the tactical creator and ME works.  Or just keep trying to game the system and then attempt to have other people believe it's the only way of doing things.

[eriktous]

I grew up in the land of 433, so my knowledge of the 442 is weak at best, but I always assumed a large part of its threat was fast players running into the vacated wide forward areas. Having no attack duties on the flanks feels like wasting that opportunity. Personally, I'm not a fan of playmakers to begin with, but when playing counter football, you want fast transitions from back to front. Do you really want two ball magnets in midfield, asking the ball to feet?

Now, on your team instructions, a lot of what you want is already part of the defensive mentalities, i.e. play narrower, deeper defensive line, close down less, and more, so you may want to try it first with a minimal set of TIs, and look at the actual play if it's really needed to tweak the defaults a bit more.

 

Good luck with it and let us know how you fare.

[CybrSlydr]

Thanks for the input folks - I'm currently playing a ManU save.  I picked up Wilian from Chelsea for $36.5m USD and, of course, I have Pogba.  He's best as a DLP(S) in CM and I'm training Wilian as an RPM - my main desire for him was that he's pacy (18/16 A/P) and insane workrate (20).  With the above suggestion for a BBM instead, I'm wondering if I should try and train him as that instead.  Especially with his workrate and acc/pac.

I've also got Luke Shaw on LB (who is good on the attack) and I pried Callum Chambers away from Everton as well as already having Darmien, so my FBs could easily be put on an attack duty.

[CybrSlydr]

I played my first match with the above-mentioned tactic with a few modifications based upon the suggestions of folks on here.

The first game I tried it was against Feyenoord in the Euro Cup.

We handily lost the possession battle (unsurprising with such a low-pressure tactic and more direct passing). 

However, the freedom I -briefly- saw that the other team got from their wide players in allowing crosses in to the box is a little concerning.  Granted, it's a trade-off - I either close down and have fewer in the box to deal with crosses or I let them cross all they want and hope my superior numbers/players in the box can deal with them.

I have a feeling that though it worked against Feyenoord, I won't have such luck against Arsenal in the upcoming game.

[ajsr1982]

I'm not sure you get 'solid and compact' out of this, and the reason for that is the RPM. The RPM is a bit of a loose cannon in my opinion. He's going to go looking for the ball, get hold of it, and the dribble from the centre of the pitch, as well as looking to get into the box to get on the end of things. Imagine playing Eden Hazard as part of a central midfield two and you get the picture.

As others have mentioned, I'm not so sure about some of the player roles for what you're trying to do. Your highly structured, defensive tactic is going to stifle creativity, which is fine, but you have four specialist roles in your BPD, DLP, RPM and CF which means pretty much all your play is going to go through those four - they're all in the spine of your team, which could make things predictable. I've had a 4-4-2 work with a DLP/AP combo before, but that was with a 'Control' mentality. With a Defensive mentality, your playmakers are going to lack options, as your WMs and FBs will be risk averse. Meaning everything will go into your CF. If he's heavily marked or has a bad game, what do you do?

This is just my own personal view, but I think 4-4-2 is a difficult one to make work in FM. It has a nice, even spacing between the players, but it operates in straight lines, which means two things.

Defensively, you have to close the gaps between those lines, predominantly between defence and midfield, because that's where the opposition hurt you. To do that, you either play high, or you play deep. A medium block will see you struggle. You also need to keep those two lines of four as well.

Offensively, you need players to break the lines so you're not so predictable, but you need to think about the risk that arises from doing this. 4-4-2 is one of the easiest formations to expose in my opinion. One player out of position and you can really see your shape completely dissolve. Players with attack duty (apart from up front) will see them with a less diligent attitude to defence. Support roles with PI to 'Get Further Forward' are a decent way around this.

Ideally, you'd mitigate this by having dynamic players with good workrate and teamwork. The player roles available don't really help a 4-4-2, especially in central midfield, as I find them too specialist. Two CM-S players with PIs might be a good way to go. Look at some of the best CM partnerships in 4-4-2s in the Premier League. Scholes and Keane, Vieira and Petit/Gilberto, Drinkwater and Kante. You could try to paint Scholes and Keane as specialists, but that's not quite right. The AP in FM doesn't offer the defensive cover that Scholes provided. The BWM or CM-D ignores the fact that Keane often got on the end of attacking moves. A CM in a 4-4-2 needs to be able to do everything.

[CybrSlydr]

13 minutes ago, ajsr1982 said:

I'm not sure you get 'solid and compact' out of this, and the reason for that is the RPM. The RPM is a bit of a loose cannon in my opinion. He's going to go looking for the ball, get hold of it, and the dribble from the centre of the pitch, as well as looking to get into the box to get on the end of things. Imagine playing Eden Hazard as part of a central midfield two and you get the picture.

As others have mentioned, I'm not so sure about some of the player roles for what you're trying to do. Your highly structured, defensive tactic is going to stifle creativity, which is fine, but you have four specialist roles in your BPD, DLP, RPM and CF which means pretty much all your play is going to go through those four - they're all in the spine of your team, which could make things predictable. I've had a 4-4-2 work with a DLP/AP combo before, but that was with a 'Control' mentality. With a Defensive mentality, your playmakers are going to lack options, as your WMs and FBs will be risk averse. Meaning everything will go into your CF. If he's heavily marked or has a bad game, what do you do?

This is just my own personal view, but I think 4-4-2 is a difficult one to make work in FM. It has a nice, even spacing between the players, but it operates in straight lines, which means two things.

Defensively, you have to close the gaps between those lines, predominantly between defence and midfield, because that's where the opposition hurt you. To do that, you either play high, or you play deep. A medium block will see you struggle. You also need to keep those two lines of four as well.

Offensively, you need players to break the lines so you're not so predictable, but you need to think about the risk that arises from doing this. 4-4-2 is one of the easiest formations to expose in my opinion. One player out of position and you can really see your shape completely dissolve. Players with attack duty (apart from up front) will see them with a less diligent attitude to defence. Support roles with PI to 'Get Further Forward' are a decent way around this.

Ideally, you'd mitigate this by having dynamic players with good workrate and teamwork. The player roles available don't really help a 4-4-2, especially in central midfield, as I find them too specialist. Two CM-S players with PIs might be a good way to go. Look at some of the best CM partnerships in 4-4-2s in the Premier League. Scholes and Keane, Vieira and Petit/Gilberto, Drinkwater and Kante. You could try to paint Scholes and Keane as specialists, but that's not quite right. The AP in FM doesn't offer the defensive cover that Scholes provided. The BWM or CM-D ignores the fact that Keane often got on the end of attacking moves. A CM in a 4-4-2 needs to be able to do everything.

You proved to be quite prescient with what you say.  My game against Arsenal was an utter disaster (I didn't even expect it to go this poorly).

We were down 3-0 at the half and gave up the first within 5 minutes.  They were just carving us up, passing and moving at will.

Even though we're only barely "competent" with the tactic at the moment, I honestly don't see this tactic getting much better results-wise against top-tier Premiere League teams.

[ajsr1982]

I wouldn't give up just yet. Herne has an excellent 4-4-2 thread that's well worth a read.

One of the things that a lot of people forget is that if you're going to let the opposition have the ball, you need to have players that can defend, particularly in midfield. That means all four midfielders need to have decent ratings for marking, tackling, teamwork and probably concentration and positioning as well. 4-4-2 is heavily reliant on getting the right personnel in there. It's tempting to stick your creative, slightly flaky players in there because they make things happen, but are they fit for the system you're trying to create?

You really need to squeeze that gap between defence and midfield, but you also need to be resilient in the face of aerial bombardment from crosses. On top of that, you need to be capable of holding on to the ball to give your defence some respite. Not easy, but I'd be tempted to go with Standard and Flexible as a starting point and work from there. Depending on whether you expect to see more of the ball than the opposition, either push your defence up to squeeze the space, or drop them deeper and bring your two CMs into the DM position.

Look at the opposition. You can't compete against a three-man central midfield if you insist on chasing the ball. Your CMs need to protect the space in front of your defence first and foremost. Against a two-man central midfield you can probably afford to go toe-to-toe, but you need to pick your battles.

It would be easy to say the blueprint for this is Leicester, but that's setting the bar pretty high and it's hard to pull off. A better starting point might be United of 99 or Arsenal's Invincibles - you are one of the top teams in the league after all, yet you're trying to play like a Tony Pulis team. Cleon did a decent thread on The Inviincibles. Have a read.

[CybrSlydr]

The whole point of trying this is I find the 4-2-3-1 and single-striker formations to be exceedingly boring and dull.  So I'm looking for multi-striker formations that can work.  I've made 3-4-1-2s and 3-4-3s work in the past before but I think it was with brute-force rather than finesse. 

As you said, the 4-4-2 is a tough nut to crack.

Is this the thread you were talking about?

 

[ajsr1982]

That's the one. Take it with a pinch of salt because Herne created a custom team and tailored the players to the roles, up to a degree, so it's not quite the same thing. But there are some really good principles in there and some great examples of how to tweak a tactic.

4-4-2 is difficult to perfect, but versatile, and your player roles should reflect that. That's why I say that you should go with generalist roles. Playmakers demand the ball, but if you have a player demanding the ball in CM, he may very well get pressured out of the game by a hard-working three-man midfield. If you have generalist roles, your team will work the ball out from the back according to who is available. So, against narrow teams the ball comes out via the full backs and the wide men, and against high-pressing teams your defenders will naturally look to play longer.

If you start restricting this by imposing TIs, you can run into trouble. Your game against Arsenal is a great example of that. They play a high 4-2-3-1 and you're asking your defence to play it into a two-man midfield. The way around that (at least in theory), is to go long, either over the top into space, or into a TM, but then you need to get players around him fast. Probably from the wide positions, as you don't want to compromise your central midfield. If their full backs are pushed on though, you could easily get a 3 v 2 or 4 v 2 overload if your wide men are up to the task. Clear ball to flanks with your wide players pushing on and cutting inside could work nicely, and you're still defending with six.

[CybrSlydr]

I also think my problem is trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

I start with United and end up selling a ton of people and trying to make the rest do what I want.  United just aren't set up personnel wise to play the kind of formation I want.  They have AMs and DMs, I'm looking for LM/RM and CMs.

[ajsr1982]

1 hour ago, CybrSlydr said:

I also think my problem is trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

I start with United and end up selling a ton of people and trying to make the rest do what I want.  United just aren't set up personnel wise to play the kind of formation I want.  They have AMs and DMs, I'm looking for LM/RM and CMs.

I wouldn't pay too much attention to that. If someone has the attributes to play the role, put them there. Remember that the formation is only how your team looks when you don't have the ball.

[AFCBeer]

1 hour ago, ajsr1982 said:

I wouldn't pay too much attention to that. If someone has the attributes to play the role, put them there. Remember that the formation is only how your team looks when you don't have the ball.

Yes and no. I agree if the attributes match, then you will be fine with a player in an unatural position. 

However, the players who excel between the lines tend to be the more creative players. So if you have decent AM's then you don't necessarily want a system that stifles that creativity. 

I'm not saying don't play 4-4-2 or even direct passing. But combined with Highly Structured, Be More Disciplined and Defensive it's a little bit of an overkill. 

[tmason122]

I have also made 4-4-2 work (winning the premier league with Burnley using it), so more than happy to give advice. What I think is to key to remember (and what I feel many people forget) is that it is a 2 striker formation. By having 2 strikers you are always going to be short of a man in the middle of the park, and against the better teams that can hurt you. In my save when I  was playing against the other best team I usually reverted to a 4-5-1 (or variant) to give me that extra strength in the middle of the park. It can be difficult to get a 4-4-2 to work against the best teams, which is why I am not so surprised you got steamrollered by Arsenal. 

[summatsupeer]

On 9/12/2016 at 03:14, CybrSlydr said:

I'm interested in trying to make a flat 4-4-2 formation that's solid defensively. 

I want to try and replicate the solid, compact, "two rows of four" sort of defense and I'd like your folks input.

I'm thinking I would want a Highly Structured and Defensive tactic (though I think Counter would work as well).  Throw in Higher pace (for when we counter), play a narrow pitch (to keep compact), Deeper defensive line (again, for compactness), Much Less closing down (to retain formation shape), More Disciplined and Stick To Positions.  I have a CF(S)/P striker pair, so I'm thinking Hit Early Crosses to try and utilize the P on the back shoulder of the Defense.  I'm also thinking More Direct Passing to facilitate getting the ball up the pitch quicker to utilize the counter, but not Route One so we aren't just hoofing it.

As for positions, I'm thinking...

   FB(S) CD(D) BPD(D) FB(S)

WM(S) DLP(D) RPM(S) WM(S)

           CF(S) P(A)

 

The DLP(D) will stay back and help screen the back four, the RPM(S) will venture forward in offense and be the playmaker.  The WM(S) on both sides will support the strikers and help on defense.  The FB(S) will also do the same while the CD(D) will... defend and the BPD(D) will play passes to either CM.

Thoughts?

I haven't read the full thread but I haven't seen any replies to your OP explaining how some of these settings work as it looks like you might not be clear on them.  I recommend reading the FAQs if your new or an older player. I'll add some tactical input as well as explaining some of the mechanics.

If a counter attack is on, your players ignore all instructions (roles, duties, team instructions, mentality, shape etc) and spring the counter attack.  They go all out attack, play as fast as possible, play through balls, cross etc, whoever is in an area to counter attack will do, even if they're a DLP-D or A-D.  You do not need to tell your team to play faster to counter faster.  Your instructions will be used when a counter attack isn't on.  Have a read of Cleons counter attack guide, its linked in the stickies.

Defensive / Counter already drop your d-line deeper, press less and play narrower without you having to add to it.  Very Structured gives almost-no creative freedom for for your defenders and very little for the more attacking players, adding More Disciplined will remove any unpredictability from your team, would make LVG's utd look creative .  Counter mentality tells your deeper players to play more direct and your more advanced players to play shorter, adding to this with "More Direct Passing" could make your team bypass your midfield, especially the BPD.  Why have two playmakers in central midfield who are looking to collect the ball to there feet if your bypassing them?  You would be better having them stay further up to offer support to the forwards if they win the long ball or to help collect loose balls.

Finally your Man Utd, only against the other big teams are you likely to find space to counter attack with direct balls.  The Defensive/Counter mentalities will make your team very risk adverse, this can be good to keep possession and work the ball around patiently, but you would need to adjust your instructions to do so.  Remember to setup your GK so he doesn't just hoof it, work the ball forward through your playmakers.