Ohh Tommy Johnson

To be fair to Maynard a lot of the recent changes have been brought on by illness, injury and suspension (Chicksen, Baldwin, Robertson, Nemane, Slocombe to name a few). Prior to that I think he was trying to find out about the players. I don't think he is as big a tinkerman as he appears.

I thought it was like that. It seems that the whole idea is to get more money to the big Premiership clubs, and the more I think about it, to get the 'old names' back in the fold. I think only Wasps are looking at the URC. I gather there is some support for London Irish and Worcester to be parachuted into the Championship (or Premiership 2), but there is resistance to Wasps joining which is why they are looking at the URC. It's all rather reminiscent of when the RFU was first set up and the Wasps rep was told the wrong venue so they couldn't join the 'club' for several years.

Do you know where Nottingham stand on Premiership 2? Is that something they would be looking to join? I used to follow Wasps and there is talk about joining a Premiership 2, but I'm not sure how I feel about that. Another option is to join the URC which I think many Wasps fans would prefer as it wouldn't feel like being parachuted in because we were a big name. It would also stick one to the RFU which I think is also appealing to many as they stand aside when Saracens cheat (18 internationals in the match day squad whilst staying under the salary cap????) but stood aside when 3 clubs, so far, folded and then hindered attempts to rescue them from administration.

I think it's the system or the manner in which we ask them to play. I think even our defenders would be more effective if the stuck it in Row z whenever playing out from the back is definitely not on, and only played out when there was no / low risk. It doesn't play to our philosophy, but I think a significant part of our problem is a lack of confidence. I think our defence has lacked confidence for far longer than the rest of the team, possibly as far back as last season. I would choose a goalkeeper and then tell the back 5 (if you include the wing backs when they are defending) to take no risks. Get some belief that they can do it and then recruit players that can play the way we want to. Our midfield needs to support too - Crowley and Jatta / McGoldrick / Austin need to make themselves available more and Bostock / Robertson/ O'Brian / Colkett / Austin need to concentrate on providing a screen to the defence. It's not the sort of thing we are going to get sorted over night though,

That was a few months ago. Since then things have improv........

He faces all sorts of problems - the constant chopping and changing of the goalkeeper (not just SM) breeds a lack of confidence in the defence. Our defence is ropey (Baldwin vs Warner???) and our midfield is threadbare. I would go with the team for Bradford and cross my fingers. At least it's away; Meadow Lane will be toxic on Monday regardless of the result so they need to make the most of Friday.

On recruitment, there is always the assumption that if a player goes for £x the £x will be invested in new players. The truth is that the money available would be £(x-y) where y could include agents fees, legal fees, tax etc etc. Then there is the amount of money that is put back into the club to cover other costs and projects. It wouldn't surprise me if less than 50% is reinvested in new players... but the club would be financially more secure for a season or two. I can't imagine that the Head Coach isn't part of the recruitment team. It would be good to know how it works, but I can't imagine that the Head Coach is just told 'here's a player, crack on'. Even if the Head Coach was totally responsible for recruitment, I can't imagine that he would have the time to watch a lot of players himself and then make contact and negotiate the contracts. Surely he would rely on scouts and the clubs lawyers etc for the nuts and bolts. The model we have could be very similar, other than the Head Coach is only one of the ways we identify potential targets. It has to be a two way street between the Head Coach and Head of Recruitment, otherwise I can't see that it would work.

I don't think that it really matters now SM is a dead man walking. Even if he won the next 7 matches if he loses the first next season the pressure will be huge. To be fair, I don't think he has really ever had any chance. Things were stuttering before he joined, but instead of having a pre-season to try stuff out he has had to do it mid season. Given that LW had been successful and was popular, and the team was still riding quite high, just coming in an making big changes wasn't really an option either. But none of that matters, he has lost the fan base, and even if he hasn't lost the players, he will always be under pressure to win every match which is basically unachievable.

@RobbieI totally agree. I expect they will just get a fine anyway.... but can you imagine Cammel Laird 1907 or Holker Old Boys turning up at the Emirates? That would be so funny!!

Another thing.. are we likely to see Cedwyn Scott back this weekend? We could suddenly have a stronger bench - McGoldrick, Bostock / O'Brian, Scott (although I wouldn't expect a lot from him to begin with). That could be quite important going into the last few games.

I think Maynard has had a difficult job. The team he came into was riding high, but stuttering. and he followed a very popular head coach. There were (are) clear problems which he identified early one, however how do you change that? . Then what do you do, leave things as is and hope that we outscore the opposition? Whilst that had been successful at the start of the season it was less reliable. Injuries have curtailed rotation options so some players have been showing signs of fatigue. Finally, the side has been so drilled in one approach makes any change risky. If the change had happened at the end of the season, then I think a lot of the tinkering would have happened in pre-season matches, but he has had to do it during the season, and I think to take it on has been quite a brave thing to do. I hope that the upward turn we have seen over the last few matches continues at home and Maynard is successful.

I see their defence is 'you can't charge us as we aren't in the PL', and their defence against producing a business plan (it may have been something else, but that isn't important) is that they were in the PL last season. I think they will be starting off next year with a points deficit assuming they get promoted, and then may be in problems with the EFL when they inevitably get relegated again. The rules do need changing, but that doesn't excuse flouting those that exist currently. Change the rules, don't break them.

It needs to be stopped... you can beat a 4 hour long 50 from Geoff Boycott! England tests have often been only 3 days, but generally that was because we were so easily beaten!

Anything shorter than a 5 day test is a slog fest!!????????

I saw that there is a new competition coming to the cricket world - the T10 in Scotland. Now maybe they can only fit 10 overs in between rain storms, but a. is there a need for an even shorter format of cricket and b. can you see it catching on? At this rate we will end up with a 1 over competition with 6 players on each side, each player bowling one ball. You may want to make it 2 innings with a concert and fireworks after each side has batted once.

@Piethagoram I'm just catching up with things, and was really saddened to read that you are having some issues. I really hope you get better shortly and we see you back in the thick of things again soon

I understand that it has been laid over a concrete bed, not immediately below the surface, but close enough to mean it won't drain. The cost to remediate it is prohibitive, so they (and everyone else) will be living with it for a few seasons yet.

I wonder if Jatta also helps our defence in many ways. We play around the back a lot, and I think a number of errors come from not wanting to put it into row Z, or getting it down field to relieve pressure, and so choosing the wrong option from time to time. With Jatta we have that, so the defence can now get rid quickly and that will eliminate the opportunities for errors. The team have been drilled very hard over the last 18 months in possession at all costs football, and overall it has been successful, but increasingly predictable and easy to counter. I think SM is a little more pragmatic, and in time will help us progress. With a win on Saturday we may be seeing the turning of the corner. I really hope so as I am beginning to think there is a decent Head Coach in SM (if we are patient).

Keep last nights side. If Scott / McGoldrick / Chicksen are fit then put them on the bench. Last night's team picks itself really...unless there were any knocks.

Let’s hope we can get another early in the second half to settle the nerves.

@Robbie I agree the rules are hugely unfair... but they weren't hidden or brought in at the last minute. Luton have stuck to them (being in the same situation as Forest) and may get relegated, whilst Forest who broke the rules may have stayed up by virtue of breaking them. If you agree to play be the rules, you should stick to them. At least if they stay up they will have done so by accepting their punishment (although I think it will be halved to 2points which is hardly a disincentive). All that said, the rules do need changing though to something that truly levels the filed and protects clubs from certain owners... I think the Government sees some votes in there, hence the sudden speed that they are moving, This has been on the cards for years, but nothing done. Still, any move to a better place is welcome. Man City should be relegated out of the League structure and into oblivion, if those charges are proved. 115 violations is really extracting the urine. They should have every trophy they won during the period in question removed too. Failure to do so will destroy the integrity of the competition in the same way that Saracen's cheating ruined the Rugby Premiership, but Man City will be given a £100 fine and be allowed to carry on, they know it, we know it and so does everybody else. Newcastle will be watching closely and working out if they can flout the rules too.

I agree that the system needs to change otherwise the same 6 teams will swap places season on season. The thing is the top 7 or 8 teams don't care are and increasingly unlikely to get involved in relegations and therefore care even less. They are more worried about not being competitive in Europe, so will oppose anything that impacts that. This is where the new regulator may make a difference, however, from what I have seen today, it is unlikely. It seems one of their remits is to support the competitiveness of the PL. In rugby some teams chose not to go for promotion, I can see that happening in football unless the rules are changed. The PL in rugby has overseen the demise of 3 clubs this year, and quite probably more over the summer, I would hope football won't make the same mistake, but with such high stakes I can't see that happening. The advantage is that the EFL is a vibrant competition in itself, whereas the Championship in Rugby isn't, On our neighbours predicament; I have no sympathy at all. They knew the rules and broke them. If you were a Luton fan and they got relegated whilst sticking to the rules, you would be pretty hacked off. Getting promoted with loan players was always going to be a risk as replacing them was bound to lead to this situation. A better run club wouldn't have had those issues.

I think I would much prefer a late 1 - 0 win or an absolute hammering 3- 0 or 4-0. A clean sheet would do wonders for morale and a late winner would prove that they can paly for 90 minutes - I get the feeling that they struggle for more than an hour.

Soooooo... what do people think??? I think he will go more or less with the team that played against Crawley, although Chicksen went down with the same illness as Crowley had last Tuesday, so may not be available and Jatta may have a tweak (if I understood the post match interview). I think the best we can manage is: Slocombe Macari Cameron Chicksen (or Warner if ill) Robertson (wasn't his a 1 match ban? If not then Bostock) O'Brian Nemane Jones Crowley Jatta (if fit) or Austin Langstaff Subs: Bostock, Austin, Ashby-Hammond, Warner(?), Randall, Colkett, Rawlinson, (McGoldrick, Gill or Sanderson depending on who is ill / suspended) I would be tempted to give Langstaff a break and play Jatta on his own up front, but I don't think he will do that and I can see Jatta on the bench again if he has a slight knock (much to the dismay of many), We need to stop dropping off when we score, if we could get 2 or 3 up then I think we would see a different Notts towards the back end of games. We seem to become a bag of nerves in the second half as we try to hang on to a lead.

I think there are a lot of issues at play here. It is very rarely just one big thing that goes wrong in these situations. Injuries have left us without some of our best players, we have been unable to rotate when fatigue or loss of form sets in. The disruption of having LW leave, and SM come in. An inexperienced coaching team learning their trade, and some transfers not coming off as hoped. Also losing Jason Turner changed the culture at the club (I'm not saying for better or worse, but a change at the top always leads to a change in culture). The more I think about it, the more I think SM is the least of the issues. He must have shown something in the recruitment process - it wasn't a hurried process. So I think he will be given every opportunity to show what he can do. Sadly, given a large section of the fanbase have already decided he has to go (indeed many did before he even arrived), the pressure is already really high which can't help. Our current owners don't seem to be the panicking types, and Trew and Hardy show what happens when the owner flips and flops, so I don't think there will be changes there for a while. A couple of wins and a clean sheet will do wonders for fatigue and confidence, lets hope that starts tomorrow.