I think the thread might need a disclaimer. Us fans will always comment honestly on how we see the team, sections of the team, and individual players....usually from the standpoint of wanting success and the advancement of our club.

But when we have doubts about players, I think we all want to be proven wrong. We want nothing more than players proving themselves and making the critics eat humble pie.

I'd be over moon if, say, Grant and Iorpenda proved themselves to be promotion calibre No. 10s. The club's advancement is pretty much the be all and end all of being a fan. This should go without saying, but may get a bit lost on forums when debates and discussions get going.

I think that as a CM pairing, they don't come much better than Robertson and Palmer who really compliment each other.

It's the AM duo that's gonna cost us. I personally think Grant is the weak link. Sure he's got intelligence and presses well, but it's only good up until he's 20 yards and closer to the goal that he turns to mush.

Hall I think deserves more time to really make the position his own.

I'd like to see Jarvis and Traore there as they both look intelligent and can drift out, but for the love of god don't put Jones back there.

Fwiw, had Luker been here the whole season, we would be smashing the league and probs go up.

Scott Robertson is quickly becoming as important to the squad as Matt Palmer is; yesterday, for example, we desperately missed Palmer in the first half. Robertson is a brilliant player; he works so hard, and in time he should be exactly what Palmer is to us. Right now, they are the midfield pairing that we need to win games. These two work so well together; it seems unlikely that they wouldn't be starting together at the beginning of the season, especially with the arrival of Ollie Norburn.

Norburn should be pushing his experience as a contender to be starting, and I think he's okay, but for me, he's more of a rotational player. Tom Iorpenda, for me, is the more exciting option, who could come in for either Palmer or Robertson.

Conor Grant moves brilliantly; he's intelligent on the field and wins the ball back in situations where it could create a lively encounter. He does struggle at times to pick his pass, and yes, his finishing could do with work, but he's one of those unappreciated players that can move between the channels and into attacking positions in front of the opposition's D, and it just takes someone else to make the run for him to assist.

The main thing is we have options and players who can do different things. I overheard a fan say, "Grant is exactly the same as Sam Austin," and to some degree I can see the similarities.

@Chris said: Conor Grant moves brilliantly; he's intelligent on the field and wins the ball back in situations where it could create a lively encounter. He does struggle at times to pick his pass, and yes, his finishing could do with work, but he's one of those unappreciated players that can move between the channels and into attacking positions in front of the opposition's D, and it just takes someone else to make the run for him to assist.

I agree. He's so unappreciated & always seems to get the criticism from some Notts fans. The thing is, the Head Coach rates him or he wouldn't pick him. Grant is one of those unsung players who's work never seems to get noticed, but he is a vital member of the squad in my opinion.

I'm one of the detractors in the everyone vs Grant case. I think with this formation and its iterations over the last couple of years, I've been spoiled in Ruben and more-so Crowley. Ruben was brave and clinical - almost a second striker. Crowley was very technically gifted with decision making and vision alongside being brave. That said I have just re-watched quite a lot of Crowley and Ruben's goals/assists and see closer similarities in Kouhyar than I see in Grant. With the way we play, we put so much stock in this position and when the AM's fail, we fail given that Jatta is not a big brutish bastard and he plays better when stuff is played in front of him.