Defending against a 4-4-2

[Tcufrog]

I play an asymmetrical 4-1-2-3 and can’t stop a 4-4-2 to save my life. It seems like all of the goals I allow are either cheap goals off of set pieces in the box or strikers moving wide to beat my FB’s to the edge and lob a cross into the box that my CB can’t match. Granted my side isn’t talented, but I have toyed with everything to try to protect the flanks(switching roles of the FB as well as trying to close down the wide midfielders more) and I can’t seem to find anything that works. Does anyone have any suggestions?Losing my mind over here... thanks!

[Keyzer Soze]

Have you try dropping the DM to a third centerback, so that you'll have numerical advantage against the opponent forwards?

[permanentquandary]

Use a half back.

I like to use one that's actually a deep lying playmaker with good marking positioning tackling (MPT) too but who also has a decent jumping reach.

In my team I use Rui Pires, but I suppose you can use a defensive midfielder with good passing only. But the main ones to look for are MPT and jumping.

 

[Tcufrog]

I've been using a DM-S and have been fine coping with pressure in the middle.  It seems that I just get beat on the edge too often by strikers roaming wide then beating me to the line.  I play on counter too. Should a HB or third CB negate these risks?

[permanentquandary]

5 minutes ago, Tcufrog said:

I've been using a DM-S and have been fine coping with pressure in the middle.  It seems that I just get beat on the edge too often by strikers roaming wide then beating me to the line.  I play on counter too. Should a HB or third CB negate these risks?

The HB will drop in between your two CB's when your team doesn't have the ball and move up to DM when they do. So it's perfect against 442. You will still match them man for man in centre mid when they have the ball, but outnumber their strikers.

You can also try to tell your full backs to close down less and your ML/MR/AML/AMRs to close down more. That way your back line keeps shape.

If you're using wingbacks they have default higher closing down and that leads to more goals conceded.

We can't really diagnose the problem without a screenshot of your tactic though.

[Tcufrog]

Here’s my formation. I usually don’t play with any TI’s either unless I see something in-match that I want to fix. With my DM being offset, would a HB still drop between my two CB’s?

thank you again for the help!

[permanentquandary]

4 minutes ago, Tcufrog said:

Here’s my formation. I usually don’t play with any TI’s either unless I see something in-match that I want to fix. With my DM being offset, would a HB still drop between my two CB’s?

thank you again for the help!

In that formation you can't really use a half back because there's not enough central cover when he drops in to the defensive line. I personally use a half back with a DLP(S) and BBM(S), so there's always a player holding in midfield when the HB drops in.

I suggest using an alternative formation against a 4-4-2 that involves 5 midfielders.

I also think you may be struggling for offensive penetration with those current roles and duties.

[Tcufrog]

Got it, I'm open to any and all ideas as this formation has been awful for me.  I used it in FM17 and it performed very well.  Had been playing with Cleon's 4-2-3-1 but that's been really bad against better competition even with a normal defensive line.

[permanentquandary]

Just now, Tcufrog said:

Got it, I'm open to any and all ideas as this formation has been awful for me.  I used it in FM17 and it performed very well.  Had been playing with Cleon's 4-2-3-1 but that's been really bad against better competition even with a normal defensive line.

This is what I'm using. Working good for me so far.

 

[Tcufrog]

I like that, looks very nice. What ti’s Do you use?

Also, why an AP on the front left? Always stayed away from those.

[juusal]

1 hour ago, Tcufrog said:

I play an asymmetrical 4-1-2-3 and can’t stop a 4-4-2 to save my life. It seems like all of the goals I allow are either cheap goals off of set pieces in the box or strikers moving wide to beat my FB’s to the edge and lob a cross into the box that my CB can’t match. Granted my side isn’t talented, but I have toyed with everything to try to protect the flanks(switching roles of the FB as well as trying to close down the wide midfielders more) and I can’t seem to find anything that works. Does anyone have any suggestions?Losing my mind over here... thanks!

Half back is an option like suggested, but it's not a complete solution. There are a few things that have really worked for me though. Starting with the defensive line. If your fullbacks are pushing up, your center backs are 2v2 (or 2v3 if your midfielder drops in to help) and they will for sure exploit spaces and stretch your defence. If you drop your defensive line, your center backs allow less space in behind (I find this really important if they have as many strikers as you have center backs, or even more like narrow 4-3-3) and forces your midfielders to drop deeper to give cover. Secondly, reduce the space behind your fullbacks. Simply make sure they are not venturing too far forward, as strikers moving into channels really pose problems, especially since center backs in FM are really poor at covering wide areas. I played a lot of 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 with a defensive midfielder and wide players in AML/R positions. I always started my fullbacks on FB/S and only pushed them up if I was chasing the game and had to score. It really reduces risks of counter attacks as there is much more coverage across your defensive line.

Of course, a formation switch to three at the back works as well, as with wingbacks there is much less space between your defenders and outside your center backs but that is obviously a bigger switch. If you play three at the back, you can also push your wingbacks up with less risk of counter attacks in the wide areas as the outer center backs provide more coverage.

[permanentquandary]

17 minutes ago, Tcufrog said:

I like that, looks very nice. What ti’s Do you use?

I use the offside trap to account for a slightly high defensive line, I work ball into box to encourage more central ball supply and penetration and I exploit the left flank to account for the acres of space created by the inside movement of my AML and the naturally overlapping WB(A) should be more aggressive as a result.

I'm keeping it pretty simple. The only change to PI's is close down less on the WB(A) (DL) and close down more on the AP(S) (AML).

[Tcufrog]

19 minutes ago, juusal said:

Half back is an option like suggested, but it's not a complete solution. There are a few things that have really worked for me though. Starting with the defensive line. If your fullbacks are pushing up, your center backs are 2v2 (or 2v3 if your midfielder drops in to help) and they will for sure exploit spaces and stretch your defence. If you drop your defensive line, your center backs allow less space in behind (I find this really important if they have as many strikers as you have center backs, or even more like narrow 4-3-3) and forces your midfielders to drop deeper to give cover. Secondly, reduce the space behind your fullbacks. Simply make sure they are not venturing too far forward, as strikers moving into channels really pose problems, especially since center backs in FM are really poor at covering wide areas. I played a lot of 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 with a defensive midfielder and wide players in AML/R positions. I always started my fullbacks on FB/S and only pushed them up if I was chasing the game and had to score. It really reduces risks of counter attacks as there is much more coverage across your defensive line.

Of course, a formation switch to three at the back works as well, as with wingbacks there is much less space between your defenders and outside your center backs but that is obviously a bigger switch. If you play three at the back, you can also push your wingbacks up with less risk of counter attacks in the wide areas as the outer center backs provide more coverage.

Thank you for your feedback.  So if my fullbacks are getting beat on FB-S, you'd recommend closing down less?

[Tcufrog]

8 minutes ago, permanentquandary said:

I use the offside trap to account for a slightly high defensive line, I work ball into box to encourage more central ball supply and penetration and I exploit the left flank to account for the acres of space created by the inside movement of my AML and the naturally overlapping WB(A) should be more aggressive as a result.

I'm keeping it pretty simple. The only change to PI's is close down less on the WB(A) (DL) and close down more on the AP(S) (AML).

That sounds very good, I like it and might give it a go.  With a higher defensive line, do you get beat over the top often?  I found that even with a good side, anytime I played a 4-4-2 i'd give up a ton of goals over the top

[juusal]

3 hours ago, Tcufrog said:

Thank you for your feedback.  So if my fullbacks are getting beat on FB-S, you'd recommend closing down less?

I would probably look at the situations where they are leaving space behind. If it's quick counter attacks, I would think that the issue is not so much about closing down but rather them being too high up the field when you lose the ball to get back in time. If they have PPMs like get further forward this or PIs to get further forward then that could be a reason. Also if they are positioned really wide they have more ground to cover to close down the channel. I always close down less with my fullbacks though as they tend to close down opposition fullbacks too aggressively and thus get dragged out of position.

I think the defensive line is key here. Just lower your defensive line by a notch. If I play with a back four and I am facing a single striker, I often try to be aggressive with my defensive line and often start with slightly higher line. Or something that is approximately slightly higher with a standard mentality and normal closing down. Against two strikers, I would opt for a normal defensive line, and if the opponent looks like they are playing a really direct attacking game then I can even drop my line a bit deeper. Just remember that the ability of your defenders affects this too - defenders with good acceleration, pace, agility, positioning and anticipation can pull off a slightly higher line as they are able to read threats and cut out passes quicker.

[alanschu14]

9 minutes ago, juusal said:

Also if they are positioned really wide they have more ground to cover to close down the channel. I always close down less with my fullbacks though as they tend to close down opposition fullbacks too aggressively and thus get dragged out of position.

I have noticed this myself and this is a good tip I'll have to try myself.

That said, one context I do struggle with is when and why I would set an offside trap.  I'm still new to football, but my understanding is that it means that the back line tries to move as a unit so no one can get behind any defender, but I don't truly understand the pros and cons of that. Hmmm maybe I should start a thread...

[juusal]

2 hours ago, alanschu14 said:

I have noticed this myself and this is a good tip I'll have to try myself.

That said, one context I do struggle with is when and why I would set an offside trap.  I'm still new to football, but my understanding is that it means that the back line tries to move as a unit so no one can get behind any defender, but I don't truly understand the pros and cons of that. Hmmm maybe I should start a thread...

Offside trap is basically when your defenders move up in a line, leaving the opposition forwards in an offside position. It's a risky tactic as your defenders are looking to push forward instead of dropping back, so if it fails your keeper is likely to face a one on one. You can try it if you want to be really aggressive with your defensive line but if in doubt it's better to not play the offside trap.

[alanschu14]

18 minutes ago, juusal said:

Offside trap is basically when your defenders move up in a line, leaving the opposition forwards in an offside position. It's a risky tactic as your defenders are looking to push forward instead of dropping back, so if it fails your keeper is likely to face a one on one. You can try it if you want to be really aggressive with your defensive line but if in doubt it's better to not play the offside trap.

Sounds like with current ME, pacy defenders don't do much to circumvent it either, correct? (I heard they prefer to backpedal, instead of turn and run, so any forward with decent pace will be off to the races).

[permanentquandary]

2 hours ago, alanschu14 said:

I have noticed this myself and this is a good tip I'll have to try myself.

That said, one context I do struggle with is when and why I would set an offside trap.  I'm still new to football, but my understanding is that it means that the back line tries to move as a unit so no one can get behind any defender, but I don't truly understand the pros and cons of that. Hmmm maybe I should start a thread...

Best to use when you have set a high or medium high defensive line. In that situation, the opposing team will play direct balls over the top as their primary penetration. The offside trap counters against that.

But you need quick defenders and a keeper with good 1v1 ability.

[juusal]

1 hour ago, alanschu14 said:

Sounds like with current ME, pacy defenders don't do much to circumvent it either, correct? (I heard they prefer to backpedal, instead of turn and run, so any forward with decent pace will be off to the races).

Pretty much. Pace and acceleration helps, but they are still idiots, what can you do except just be wary of pushing your line too high.