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. 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.