- Comment on the Richard Montague interview here
- Who should be recruited in January? Read this excellent recruitment doc from member ARLukomski
- PoN member McPie asks have we progressed under Martin Paterson? Join the conversation here.
- PoN member theAnticlough poses a new set of questions about the team, click here.
- Notts confirm Belshaw signing
- ๐๐ป Welcome the newest members of Pride of Nottingham! Drop by and say hello, itโs always great to see fresh faces joining the community. ๐ซฑ๐ผโ๐ซฒ๐ผ
- ๐ Check out our activity stream to see the latest content as it happens live. Join in with the conversation on Pride of Nottingham.
- Got thoughts on Notts? Share them and help Pride of Nottingham hit its content target! ๐
- Reply to and read discussions without leaving your screen. Check out the Pride of Nottingham 'Topic Feed', which brings you all the latest content from our community forum in one place.
-
Footymad Notts County
The old Notts CountyMad is dead. Everyone has moved to a a new site (ironically also called Notts CountyMad) which already has 280 members and is very busy. I won't post a link as it would be inappropriate on here.
-
Match Discussion: Game 27 - The U's (H)
I saw it differently. What happened after we got back to 3-3 was a real concern. When we should have been going all out for the winner, we were totally bossed at home by the worst team in the division. It was like we'd thrown in the towel, the lack of fight was alarming.
-
Match Discussion: Game 35 - The Daggers (H)
The referee's decision on the Langstaff penalty wasn't in the least bit questionable. It was a blatant, obvious foul which any semi-competent referee would see as a definite penalty and definite red card under the laws of the game which the ref is paid to apply. I thought it at the time, but on watching the replays there is absolutely no doubt at all, the ref and his lino had an unobstructed view. I accept that we made a couple of defensive errors, I accept that we missed loads of chances, but I can't accept that the result of this game was decided more by incompetent officials than the 22 players on the pitch.
-
Match Discussion: Game 32 - The Glovers (H)
That's a good summary. Based on the clear cut chances we created in the first half it's a game we should have won, but once we had given them a goal we were truly awful and a bit fortunate that their marking was lacking in stoppage time. We look good when we are on it, but hard working, well organised, but limited teams like Yeovil cause us more problems than they should. I think we'll make the playoffs, but winning them looks a bit of a dream at the moment.
-
Match Discussion: Game 29 - The Spitfires (H)
A straightforward win against very limited opposition. We should have scored more, but taking the three points is the main thing. We now need more of the same against Halifax on Tuesday.
-
Match Discussion: FA Cup - The Dale (H)
Probably an age thing because I don't do emoticons, but does your smiley face mean that you find my post laughable? If so, I would be interested to know why.
-
Match Discussion: FA Cup - The Dale (H)
Does saying "end of" mean nobody else can comment? Of course his performance can be defended, and to prove it here are a few match ratings from elsewhere: Chicksen 7 - Flipped a switch 10 mins into 2nd half and had a fantastic 15mins. More of that, please. Chicksen - 8* - Thought he was excellent. Another assist too Chicksen - 8* - Was troubled a couple of times by Rochdale's high press early on but recovered and delivered a sublime cross that led to the equaliser. Was brilliant in the second half. Two of them made him their man of the match, I would have rated him a solid 7 and thought he had a decent game.
-
Match Discussion: FA Cup - The Dale (H)
Adam Chicksen wasn't played as a centre back, he was played on the left side of a back 3 which is his best position and in my opinion he did a pretty good job.
-
Match Discussion: Game 9 - The Cardinals (H)
Right from the start of the season I've given 3 reasons why I don't think we'll succeed: 1. We concede too many soft goals. 2. We are lightweight in midfield and are too easy to play against. 3. Our style of play seems based more on stats and analytics than what's needed to get you out of the National League. Today only reinforced that opinion. For 70 minutes we didn't look in any real trouble, but once they equalised the way we fell apart was embarrassing. In short, they wanted it far more than we did. They grew in confidence, we hid. I don't know why they resorted to all the time wasting and play acting near the end, if they had gone at us we were in such disarray they could have ended up with 5 or 6.
-
Match Discussion: Game 8 - The Robins (A)
I would agree with that, Ruben has reverted to the inconsistent player he was under Ardley last season rather than the exciting player we saw later on under Burchnall. Whether it is down to a reaction from him catching Covid, who knows? He's looked a bit lost and indecisive in recent games, and I'm not sure the deeper role he seems to be playing suits him. Hopefully he'll play further forward against Woking with Roberts suspended, and we'll see an improvement.
-
Match Discussion: Game 8 - The Robins (A)
Why is it nonsense, and why is it argumentative? Are differing opinions not allowed on here? Last season when we were playing twice a week we had a large enough squad to rotate players frequently, whereas some of our rivals didn't even have enough players to put 5 subs on the bench. Also, for this level, we have state-of-the art facilities and medical back up that other clubs just don't have. That must mean that we should suffer from fatigue less than many of our rivals. Of course it makes a difference, just ask King's Lynn or Dover. If a club like ours has 'fatigued' players after 8 games, this division will be played at walking pace after Christmas!
-
Match Discussion: Game 8 - The Robins (A)
Really???? We have players who are fatigued after eight games, mostly playing once a week??? When did professional footballers become so weak? Other teams have played a similar number of games, so are their players equally "fatigued"? Sorry, but of all the excuses we can come up with fatigue isn't one of them given our facilities and squad depth.
-
Match Discussion: Game 6 - The Stones (H)
An entertaining game, but one we were a bit lucky to win. My main concerns about a dodgy defence and a midfield that gives it little protection were only reinforced. Delighted with a 3-2 win, but it could easily have been 5-5. A special mention for Wealdstone, I thought both their team and support were very good. They were comfortable on the ball, and most of their passes whether long or short found a team mate. Their fans were still making plenty of noise even when they were 3-1 down, and they must be gutted to be going home with nothing.
-
Match Discussion: Game 42 - The U's (H)
I have a feeling we might just sneak an undeserved point. After Torquay's win today, it's a game Sutton can't really afford to lose. Hopefully the pressure will get to them and after being outplayed, we manage a late equaliser.
-
Match Discussion: Game 41 - The Robins (A)
Agree, the season is far from over but it does seem that way. Unless something strange happens, it looks like Sutton, Torquay, Hartlepool and Stockport will occupy the top 4 places. It also looks like the other 3 playoff places are between 6 clubs - us, Halifax, Wrexham, Chesterfield, Eastleigh and Bromley. This is the maximum points total each of those 6 clubs can achieve: Wrexham 75 Notts 75 Halifax 74 Chesterfield 74 Bromley 73 Eastleigh 71 On current form tables, we have no chance of getting near 75 points, but current form is really 'past 6 games form'. It tells you what has happened, but it doesn't predict the future. We've been at or near the top of the current form table this season, but then gone on a poor run. I honestly can't see us suddenly going on a winning run, but there's still a very tempting prize on offer if we do.