Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
[Rs] is planning maintenance to transition to its new domain name on Thursday, November 21, beginning at 8:00 PM ET. The process is expected to last no more than 4 hours.1
This has become an age-old debate. So many people believe that 4-4-2 is better, while some people believe that 4-3-3 takes the lead. Who takes the lead when it comes to formations? From my personal viewpoint, I think that 4-4-2 seems to offer more defensive play, while 4-3-3 seems to give dominance in the midfield.
I like the 4-3-3 formation. But it's ideal for teams whose midfield players possess the ability to change the game. Secondly, it could be used depending on the game that is being played. The 4-4-2 formation can cause weaknesses in the midfield area which I don't like.
Both are extremely good. The one to choose depends on the match to play. If you want to defend or if the opponent has strong attacks, 4-4-2 would be the best. But if you want to go all out to play with the opponent, 4-3-3 is ideal .
I think players' skill is more important than team formation. It also depends on whether you want to defend or attack. The team formation should entirely depend on who you are playing with.
