Quote Originally Posted by drillerpie View Post
They really don't have to cover the work of 4 or 5 players. They have wing backs to help them. We would concede 5 or 10 goals per game if we had 3 centre backs covering the whole width of the pitch. That is nonsense.
Oh dear, oh dear....back again (as King Charles said to Liz Truss )

Here's the key...The Reedtz brothers arrived pledging attacking and entertaining football. The amazing thing is that they actually meant it!

[traditionally, that declaration is the football equivalent of a UK PM saying they'll govern for everyone, Theresa May as the champion of 'the just about managing'. Most new owners and managers tend to promise attacking and entertaining and then proceed to serve up exactly the opposite]

NA and IB didn't quite have the courage to implement the Reedtz vision (i.e. Kelly-Evans playing in place of Nemane, Turner as NA's first LCB when he had Chicksen), but under LW we've seen...

- a 3-2-4-1 formation, practically
- the high line and press
- positive team selection that sees Jones, Nemane, Austin in the wide slots. Midfielders who are technical rather than physical

Everyone can see that this iteration of Notts is different to what went before. We've really gone for it.

The opposite might be a solid 4-4-2 or a 5-3-1-1 we've seen under Curle, Derry etc. In these cases the front men are isolated, their shot and scoring rates suffer. Without support, front men can look very ordinary and the moaners might start on them.

Well this applies in reverse with attacking approaches. defenders can be left exposed and isolated. There just aren't the numbers or structure you'd have with 2 banks of 4 for example. In the defensive approach, pass up to a lone attacker who's easily dispossessed is a display of losing football. But a counter-attack in space against the last of our back-line is just another display of winning football. This is because winning teams mostly attack and losing teams mostly defend. As a general rule, set yourself up to mostly defend and you'll mostly lose and vice versa.

Kudos to everyone at the club for its determination to implement positive, entertaining football. You might think the biggest reward has been the results, but it's probably the doubling ofthe gate instead. Although it's measured and possession-based, I don't think we've seen a more attack-minded approach, in terms of selection and formation, not even under Moniz or all those years back under Wilko.

It's radical and it does look unfamiliar and different to what we've seen before. Some fans seem to be freaked out by how exposed and shaky at the back we can look as we're trying to play out or dominate and pin teams back. This is probably the source of all the moaning about our defenders. Hopefully the negative noise at selected targets will be drowned out by the thousands who turn up now to watch entertaining, attacking football.

Quote Originally Posted by drillerpie View Post
LW picks Cameron for every game, as would I if I were manager. There's no evidence to say he never criticises him though.

Our system has produced tremendous results, yes. Who exactly is suggesting we go back to playing route one? To me it looks like nobody. Total red herring.
Who said anything about LW criticising or not criticising the captain?

'no evidence to say he never criticises him' what kind of contortion is that?

And where did 'route 1' come from? The red herrings seem to be all yours.