4132 Narrow Help

[Spartak Trigger]

I'm in my first season with Fiorentina and trying to implement a 4132 DM Narrow with a Vertical Tiki-Taka. I thought this would be a reasonably attacking set up but at the moment i am not creating much, but neither are the opposition.

I find if I leave work ball nto box they just dilly dally on the edge of the area and if if I remove it they just waste build up play

I'm not sure about the two striker roles and the DM and two of the CM roles (the central one and the mezalla  on support) . Any suggestions about how to create more chances would be amazing

 

Thanks in advance

Edited March 6, 2021 by Spartak Trigger

[Experienced Defender]

An extremely vulnerable left flank and a huge number of needless instructions are the most pressing issues in this tactic. Plus, the formation is rather bottom-heavy and hence not quite suited to the style of play you want to implement.

The narrow 442 diamond would make a lot more sense in that regard, but the tactic would still need a fair amount of tweaking anyway. 

Btw, TM is a bit strange choice of a striker role for a tiki-taka/possession-heavy style of play. 

[Spartak Trigger]

I had selected the style because that was recommended but I see your point now!

Does this look better?

[Johnny Ace]

Why the Run at Defence? 2 wing backs & 3 midfielders will already do that. Why play a Target man & ask your team not to cross? Roles look sound 

[Spartak Trigger]

I originally had Vlahavic as a DLF but i found that he gets into the box more as TM after he links play up. I think my issue is that I'm not sure what type of system the formation suits, i have always played 4231 or 442 so this is really out of my comfort zone!

[Johnny Ace]

22 minutes ago, Spartak Trigger said:

I originally had Vlahavic as a DLF but i found that he gets into the box more as TM after he links play up. I think my issue is that I'm not sure what type of system the formation suits, i have always played 4231 or 442 so this is really out of my comfort zone!

It's a fairly neutral formation so any really, base the style off your player's attributes 

[Spartak Trigger]

great thanks

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, Spartak Trigger said:

Does this look better?

The left flank looks good now, but the right is problematic. You absolutely do not need an attacking mezzala in this kind of system (and the question is whether you need any mezzala at all).

To cut a long story short, if you insist on this specific formation (4132 narrow), this is an example of a well-balanced setup that can work fine:

DLFsu   PFat

DLPsu  CMat   CAR

HB

WBat   CDde  CDde   WBsu

But then your instructions are contradictory, which is another problem. Do you still want a tiki-takish type of style or you have changed your mind in the meantime?

[Spartak Trigger]

I'm trying to build around my two best players, Castrovilli and Vlahovic.

I thought the Mez would provide a second runner into the box and also offer a link up player on the right.

I swapped the TIs based on the original feedback, I usually just use some of the presets but trying to get away from them on this save

[Domus Clamantium]

The two outer midfielders should contribute significantly to defence and that means some kind of support role on both slots with both told to close down more and possibly tackle harder. BWM(S), DLP(S), BBM(S), CM(S), CAR(S).

I also find telling each to run wide with the ball contributes a good amount of chances per season, because you're getting them to drag the opposition players wide which frequently creates gaps in the channels, which means you want both strikers moving into channels.

With those two helping their full backs, your central CM is free to be offensive.

I like a combo of Anchor Man, DLP(S)/CM(S) with hold position on the attacking full back flank, BWM(S) on the other flank, CM(A) or AP(A) in the middle, but you could easily have joy with just 2xCM(S) and customising those. And instead of wingback roles, use full backs with one attack and one on support or defend depending on the match situation. The CM(A) is a good choice because with both strikers moving into channels, sometimes the central space will be unoccupied.

Full backs can also be told to run wide with the ball and/or stay wider. I had some joy with Stay Wider by playing the FB(A) on the same flank as the attack duty striker (IMO Advanced Forward and Deep Lying Forward works best in this system)