Martin Paterson has experimented in.playing two Notts strikers alongside each other, however the results have been mixed.

Throughout the last several years the preferred formation has included one striker up front with another recognised striker playing just behind as an attacking midfielder.

Didzy was very successful in playing that role when he was in the side with Jatta up front. Stuart Maynard played Cedwyn Scott in that role on a few occasions but not with a lot of success.

The Notts formation has been set around just having one striker upfront & having two attacking midfielders behind them. Having two strikers can upset that balance somewhat.

I am sure that Paterson will persist in the two striker experiment & it could be a good move. Dennis has done so well playing upfront before Jatta returned & now he's back we need Jatta's presence upfront too.

But with Traore not even being on the substitutes bench can Notts afford not having a recognised striker on the bench in case Jatta or Dennis get injured or just get tired?

Should Notts play one of those two strikers as a number 10, or play up front together, or have one of them on the substitutes bench? It's a conundrum that Martin will have to decide.

What would PON members do in Martin's position?

I think MP wants it as a regular option for sure. At the moment though, he will also want it for (club) political reasons, fitting in the returning player we need to showcase + L2's current leading scorer.

Too many games like Saturday and he'll soon have to make it Plan B again.

IMO the problem isn't as much Jatta/Dennis as Palmer/Norburn. The skipper is doing a wonderful job showing for the ball, linking the play, holding his position - but because he's not strong defensively Pato is plonking another holding player beside him.

With these two CMs, wing-backs hugging the flanks, wide defenders off form, 2 strikers waiting for it upfield, there just isn't enough playmaking through the pitch to be able to play an effective passing game. It's too much to ask 1 player - Iorpenda for example, to do the job that was shared by Didzy and Crowley last season. It's too easy for L2 teams to snuff out that player, keep tight on the WBs and all the team can do is pass it for a bit, get frustrated, then hit it long.

Personally, I want Pato to try out Dennis in the Didzy role to help with linking up the build up play from defence ton attack. It may not happen in the Crawley game, and a win on Saturday may mask the problem, but over time games like the Gills would become the norm under the current configuration IMO

I like the idea of two strikers, but it does mean adjusting the formation to accommodate it. With two strikers I think you may have go 442 or 4312. We could do away with wingbacks. And have Jodi as a winger floating either side. And the two fullbacks maybe Mcari and Bedeau (I think they’re good at doing that)overlapping with Jodi. That way you have three options for creating crosses into the box. Without the ball we can revert to the 442 formation to defend.

@theAnticlough said, Personally, "I want Pato to try out Dennis in the Didzy role to help with linking up the build up play from defence ton attack".

Agree this would be a good move. It worked so well with Jatta & Didzy in the same team, one behind the other. I think it is worth Patterson giving it a go. This could also release Jodi from that number 10 role & put him back on the wing where he is much more influential & dangerous to the opposition.

Who would be the best alternative to place alongside Dennis in the AM role? Iorpenda, Grant, Jarvis or even Palmer. Could Palmer move up the field to play as an AM. He does have the talent.

Could Iorpenda play alongside Norburn in the centre of Midfield? There are alternative roles for players that Paterson could chew over. I'm sure that Paterson is the type of coach who will consider putting players in different roles as he did Jones.

I think @Robbie, @theAnticlough, looking at Dennis's first goal against Bromley, I think he can play the Didzy role. I would have a midfield 3 of Palmer, Robertson and Iorpenda. Palmer as the deeper linking the play and the other two supporting further forward when appropriate.

That's another solution @McPie, no Norburn, trust Palmer to play the midfield anchor on his own and either make it a midfield diamond or 2 mids ahead, either side of him, connecting with the 2 strikers.

Formations with a back 4 is another way to go, but I can't see him doing that.

Dennis as an inside forward seems the best way to go. He's shown aspects of his game that suggest he can do well there.

I haven't seen Alassana Jatta struggle so much with defenders as I have against Gillingham; there were several times he was literally pulled to the ground. Though tinted blue, glasses believe their team are saints in the dark arts department. Likewise, even Matthew Dennis struggled, but I think he coped a lot better than Jatta, which is why I think Gillingham started to fly in on Dennis.

Personally, I think it was, in hindsight, the wrong decision to play two strikers against Gillingham, but in principle it should have worked.

As much as they played quite deep, it's due to the midfield having little grip on the game and how the Gills created; they did force us to play quite deep. Every pass we made, they would quickly press and mark with multiple players, and our strikers never really had any service in the second half. We started to resort to attempting to get Jodi Jones to run, overlap, and create the space to attack.

It's too early to say if we are better with two strikers or not. It's possible that we simply need to choose more wisely, because at times it won't benefit us to play both Jatta and Dennis. Yet that presents the question: will Martin Paterson be brave enough to make the right call as to who should start?

And even then, how do you choose between either? As easy as we might think, both players have their strengths but are equally good on goal.

Against Gillingham, I would have played Jatta as the lone striker and then considered switching to two up top in the second half or withdrawing Jatta for Dennis. I don't think Ollie Norburn always offers much for his place in the team; it could be that he is still finding fitness and is naturally hit-and-miss due to coming back from injury, but I would much rather play Scott Robertson moving forward.

I would say to be a good number 10 you need to have a very high technical skill level, Ruben, Crowley and Didzy were all very skilful. I think that’s why we started the season with JJ playing this role because on paper he’s probably the most naturally gifted player in the squad.

I don’t think we should completely discard JJ in the No.10 role yet, he’s played about 6 matches here, but for some it feels like he was suddenly expected to turn into Cole Palmer. It’ll take time for him to adjust, I think playing as a No.10 has more challenges than a winger, he still needs more experience and time in the position.

I’d keep Jatta and Dennis as a pair, Dennis is in excellent goal scoring form and I think we’d be daft to change his role right now. I'd then have have JJ in behind and let him roam to make a kind of 3-4-1-2. I agree with the @theAnticlough in terms of the midfield pairing though. We need someone like Iorpenda playing with Palmer in midfield because he’s capable of getting forward, Norburn and Palmer are just too similar, they both prefer to be the deeper midfielder in a pair and want to do the same thing.