⚽ Match Thread vs. AFC Wimbledon 10.05.25 [EFL L2 POSF1]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slack_pie

We play "better" football now, but I'm getting frustrated by how easily we're bullied and the lack of bite and aggression we show. As someone else perfectly said, it's like the opposition come to ML week in, week out and steal out dinner money, and we're incapable of standing up for ourselves. I want my team to stand its ground and give a little back, especially home.

---

I think Richard Montague neglected the physical side of the game with many of his L2 signings. We’ve only got three players I’d really back in a physical battle - Bedeau, McDonald and Robertson, and even then the latter appears to be made of glass. Too many of our midfielders are outfought or outmuscled, and we’ve seen how Jatta isn’t powerful enough when playing with his back to the goal (it’s amazing how few free kicks he wins in that position, when you’d want him to be drawing fouls to get us up the pitch and to relieve pressure).

The question is whether we can get bigger, stronger athletes in while still keeping our current footballing philosophy, which I’d hate us to jettison. We just need to do it better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nw6pie

I think Richard Montague neglected the physical side of the game with many of his L2 signings. We’ve only got three players I’d really back in a physical battle - Bedeau, McDonald and Robertson, and even then the latter appears to be made of glass. Too many of our midfielders are outfought or outmuscled, and we’ve seen how Jatta isn’t powerful enough when playing with his back to the goal (it’s amazing how few free kicks he wins in that position, when you’d want him to be drawing fouls to get us up the pitch and to relieve pressure).

The question is whether we can get bigger, stronger athletes in while still keeping our current footballing philosophy, which I’d hate us to jettison. We just need to do it better.

---

That?s how I see things too.

It?s not the usual we need a complete overhaul and clear out type post season, those used to be annual events at Meadow Lane regardless of the style adopted by the latest manager. We naturally need some adjustments, increased physicality, better balance, perhaps a slightly larger squad but not mass changes. Even if fans wanted that I?m not sure the contractual situation would allow.

Like nw6pie what i do not want is us to jettison our footballing philosophy and return to the days of all change every season in terms of manager, style of player, playing squad. This wasn?t only an inconsistent approach but it was counter productive as we went from one extreme to another and back

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boomerangpie

That?s how I see things too.

It?s not the usual we need a complete overhaul and clear out type post season, those used to be annual events at Meadow Lane regardless of the style adopted by the latest manager. We naturally need some adjustments, increased physicality, better balance, perhaps a slightly larger squad but not mass changes. Even if fans wanted that I?m not sure the contractual situation would allow.

Like nw6pie what i do not want is us to jettison our footballing philosophy and return to the days of all change every season in terms of manager, style of player, playing squad. This wasn?t only an inconsistent approach but it was counter productive as we went from one extreme to another and back

---

Yeah, I don't want us to rip up the philosophy either. But we need to be more pragmatic. I actually think we're pretty good at learning lessons the hard way. After last season's defensive debacle, we signed two quality CBs and a great keeper. Problem solved. This summer, we need to focus on the midfield. We need at least two combative midfielders who can play with energy and intensity.

I'd also question our choice of captain. We switched from Cameron to Palmer last summer, but neither are captain material for me. I get that Palmer is a solid, reliable, hard-working pro, and I want him to stick around for sure, but he's simply not vocal enough to lead the team on the field. Give the captaincy to Platt or Bedeau.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slack_pie

Yeah, I don't want us to rip up the philosophy either. But we need to be more pragmatic. I actually think we're pretty good at learning lessons the hard way. After last season's defensive debacle, we signed two quality CBs and a great keeper. Problem solved. This summer, we need to focus on the midfield. We need at least two combative midfielders who can play with energy and intensity.

I'd also question our choice of captain. We switched from Cameron to Palmer last summer, but neither are captain material for me. I get that Palmer is a solid, reliable, hard-working pro, and I want him to stick around for sure, but he's simply not vocal enough to lead the team on the field. Give the captaincy to Platt or Bedeau.

---

I think Palmer was chosen when Langstaff left because he was one of the longest serving players. It should have been McGoldrick or Platt for me but can't remember if Platt was in the door when the decision was made?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chicken Balti Pie

I think Palmer was chosen when Langstaff left because he was one of the longest serving players. It should have been McGoldrick or Platt for me but can't remember if Platt was in the door when the decision was made?

---

Didzy definitely not sure Platts a big talker either. It?s a pity McDonald?s not a mainstay in the side, he does talk and when ivd seen him interviewed does jump out to me as possible Captain material.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chicken Balti Pie

I think Palmer was chosen when Langstaff left because he was one of the longest serving players. It should have been McGoldrick or Platt for me but can't remember if Platt was in the door when the decision was made?

---

McGoldrick would be perfect but he has missed quite a few games.
Beadau seems the most dynamic of the rest.
Mat Palmer could then concentrate on doing what Mat Palmer does best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matt_magpie

I think some people do care though, I wouldn?t want us lumping it 99% of the time as I saw under Nolan. People asked me what was the football like, I?d say ?dreadful? but we?re winning a few till we didn?t.

I?m happy with middle ground, mixing it up, a few tackles flying in. That?s what I remember in the Warnock days, it wasn?t all long ball as many outsiders believed, we had enforcers like Harding, we had guile with the likes of Donno, we had culture with drapes, a great finisher in Tommy, pace with Bartlett, it was just a really good mix and now we don?t have a mix, just very very similar players.

---

There's a huge difference between getting the ball forward quickly and lumping it forward. Nothing wrong with either technique, as long as you have the players to play that way - in my opinion. It wouldn't bother me if all of Notts players were giants.

Putting the ball forward quickly though allows you to clear any danger and puts the opposition on the back foot all around.

I was always taught, if you can make the opposition have to turn around and run, then you are heading in the right direction.

Too much of Notts' football is not only played in their own half, but also in front of their own goal, meaning that it is Notts who are having to turn and chase, even when they're in possession.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lullapie

There's a huge difference between getting the ball forward quickly and lumping it forward. Nothing wrong with either technique, as long as you have the players to play that way - in my opinion. It wouldn't bother me if all of Notts players were giants.

Putting the ball forward quickly though allows you to clear any danger and puts the opposition on the back foot all around.

I was always taught, if you can make the opposition have to turn around and run, then you are heading in the right direction.

Too much of Notts' football is not only played in their own half, but also in front of their own goal, meaning that it is Notts who are having to turn and chase, even when they're in possession.

---

This is my view too. Whether we play on the ground or in the air, I want us to play with urgency and desire, especially at home. I want us to get the ball forward quickly at any opportunity.

I understand that our current approach requires players and fans to be patient as we build an opening rather than force one, but it sometimes seems like the players are so drilled to be negative that their first instinct is to turn backwards, even if it's not necessary. The amount of times I've seen a player receive the ball in a good position and then, without thinking, turn so that they're facing away from goal rather than towards it.

Also, possession-based football prioritises keeping the ball. Our players often seem more concerned with keeping possession than making something happen. This results in playing the safer pass, or what I mentioned before - deciding to turn away from goal and pass backwards. But when you look at the goals we score, they almost always happen because someone took a risk and did something positive. I'd rather we focused primarily on creating chances or playing in the final third than keeping the ball and waiting for the perfect opening.

Maybe I'm just a dinosaur, but lots of other teams seem to do what I've described above. One thing seems clear though: having more possession doesn't seem to translate into winning more games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lullapie

There's a huge difference between getting the ball forward quickly and lumping it forward. Nothing wrong with either technique, as long as you have the players to play that way - in my opinion. It wouldn't bother me if all of Notts players were giants.

Putting the ball forward quickly though allows you to clear any danger and puts the opposition on the back foot all around.

I was always taught, if you can make the opposition have to turn around and run, then you are heading in the right direction.

Too much of Notts' football is not only played in their own half, but also in front of their own goal, meaning that it is Notts who are having to turn and chase, even when they're in possession.

---

Totally agree on a getting the ball forward quickly I want us to it do more but for me personally doing long balls 99% of the time from the goal keeper isn?t for me.

That tactic doesn?t turn around teams as they are sat in place and ready for it. As I said under Nolan it fell to bits when we no longer had Yates picking up 2nd balls and for me was dreadful to watch winning or losing.

I?m definitely up for mixing up our current style and playing out quickly and getting a ball down the channel where you have a chance of getting on to it or maybe getting a throw and gaining territory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slack_pie

Maybe I'm just a dinosaur, but lots of other teams seem to do what I've described above. One thing seems clear though: having more possession doesn't seem to translate into winning more games.

---

Having more possession does translate into winning more games, but only when you have the players and formation to make it work. Leeds topped the possession stats in the Championship (61%) this season, Liverpool were second in the Premier League (58%, only behind - unsurprisingly - Man. City), Bayern Munich were top in Germany (63%).

We’re doing a “discount” version of the possession-based game that’s far more conservative than the teams mentioned above. Also, all of those teams play a 4-2-3-1 formation, compared to our 3-4-2-1. Maybe this needs to be the biggest change next season?