Our PO semis against Wimbledon have come up a couple of times on Magpie Circle recently. I hope I get this right, the argument seems to go

1. The team was playing badly going into them

2. The atmosphere was very flat and nobody thought we could win

3. We were duly beaten by Wimbledon - easily

For me, that's about 75% right but it does stand out as something unusual, especially point 2. My take is

1. Absolutely, it was awful. SM still fiddling around the edges (i.e bringing in Austin for both games) while still neglecting the spirit of the team, it's motivation and readiness for battle.

   Turning us into the one of the worst clutch teams we've seen - incapable of coming out on top in a close game, or forcing equalisers when we really needed them.

2. Sure. The form and the spirit meant nobody was optimistic. But it was the play offs ffs! Perform, get the rub of the green and you can sneak through a surprise promotion. I was really up for those games. I knew we had a less than 25% of promotion, but we all should know that going in.

3. Kind of disagree - we were better than them, had better players, and they knew it. They had a great strategy to nullify us and it worked a treat for them. But the way they play they could only win 1-0 so each game was always going to be close. They would've seen their victory over two legs as a real triumph.

In the end it was like one of those bad dreams where you just can't do those basic things in order to avoid disaster. No.1 above, really did put us on a path for No.3. But I hope No.2 never reoccurs. If true, that's pathetic. You have to get to the games and be up for play-off matches when promotion is the prize. All of that can help the team succeed.

I liked Stuart Maynard. I thought he was a good Coach but not a Head Coach, & I think that his laid back personality rubbed off on the players somewhat, so that when it came to close games, Notts seemed to come out 2nd best most of the time especially toward the end of the season.

Stuart also had a propensity to be a bit negative at times. He would tend to want to play safe rather than go for th jugular to kill teams off, which cost Notts quite a few points during the season.

As far as the first semi final against Wimbledon at Meadow Lane, Notts were the better side for long periods & had plenty of chances to bury Wimbledon in the first & second halves. Grant had several gilt head chances, Jodi hit the post & Grant had one cleared off the line near the end.

Then the incidents that sealed out fate for the second leg, Didzy going off injured, & Jatta getting sent off due to his frustration.

On another day, or if Notts had had a different Head Coach who had installed a different attitude in the players to get on the front foot & overwhelm sides rather than just do enough to get over the line Notts could have easily won that first play off leg convincingly, which may have given Wimbledon too much to do in the 2nd leg.

I think that you are right @The Anti-Clough that the Notts side were just not up for the important matches last season. I just think it came down to Head Coach personality in the end. I do think we now have a Head Coach that will get the Notts players to win through on those important occasions because they will come thick & fast towards the end of this season too.

Top reply @Robbie agree with every word.

Yes, MP is a different kettle of fish. Obviously there's a massive psychological element to competitive, professional sport. We need a personality like Pato at the club. The culture at the top, and behind the scenes, is considered and quieter, so it's even more important that the intensity and passion comes from the Head Coach.

i much prefer martin paterson for how he reads the game and approaches them, not afraid to make changes or to sub important players. there feels a much better logic behind his decision. stuart maynard looked good on the training pitch, but his squad selections and changes often took any momentum out of games even before kick off.

1. i think it was more confidence than form that played part of the issue, we were thin in the attacking momentum.

2. the home game felt more like 50/50 in terms of winning, away i would say very few believed and the atmosphere at wimbledon was not very good. the performance on the pitch was not encouraging, as we looked unlikely to have an attack. i always felt junior morias should have started, as he made a difference coming on and did more in those minutes than mai traore did with much longer.

3. we could have done something had chances gone our way at meadow lane, but by the end of the game i did not fancy going to wimbledon without jatta. his absence caused the biggest impact, as with him there might have been a chance. wimbledon played us off the park at their ground, we never looked like scoring and even having a shot on goal seemed unlikely. for me, i think notts went feeling sorry for themselves.

I'm remembering now where this is taken on the podcast - Wimbledon's superiority as promotion candidates, especially in terms of their overall approach.

I definitely don't go along with that. As@Robbie said, the personality and methods of the coach, and the culture created (a topic MP picks up on), were enormous factors as to why we went out so lamely. A team that plays positive, attractive football doesn't have to such a passive, toothless mentality and not want to win enough. MP looks like he's really setting about to fix that thankfully.