Better without Mitrovic?

[Arthur]

None of those hopeful high balls into the box which (an often static) Mitrovic gets his head to maybe once or twice a game. Instead we fizzed a few low across the face of the goal or pulled it back from the goal line into the path of a player arriving in the box. Only one goal tonight, but the potential for us to score more was plain to see.

With Hector making such a difference at the back, we have the chance to put ourselves in the running for an automatic promotion spot - something that our up-and-down form has so far precluded. Can we play the way we have tonight with Mitrovic in the team? I'm not confident that we can. Will Parker have the courage to leave Mitrovic out of the team? I'm not confident that he will. But I am hoping to be wrong on one-or-other of the counts.

[Tabby]

Was more than one occasion where having a player that instinctively sticks in the middle for the low fizzes would have been good. Hoping Kamara and Mitro come back into the squad soon.

[RaySmith]

I thought we maybe did lack that cutting edge up front, someone who would get on the end of things, go in where it hurts.

[Statto]

Actually thought the opposite. Lots of possession in advanced wide areas and no outlet. Knockaert still prefers to shoot rather than playing "low fizzing crosses" and Cavaleiro was inconsistent. Onomah, among others, squandered the rare crosses we had (high and low) which Mitro would have put away. Reckon it would have been 4-0 tonight with Mitrovic.

[grandad]

We can never be better without Mitro. One day in the distant future but not now.

[Bassey the warrior]

Mitrovic gets us goals so there's no way he doesn't play if fit. What we need to do is mix it up more when he plays, he shouldn't always stay in the middle, we need to have more fluidity up there.

[bigalffc]

No, we need Mitro, not just for goals but also for his hold up play

[Woolly Mammoth]

What it shows that if he is not on the pitch, we can win in his absence for the second time in a month, and it shows that Scott has a plan B and another string to our bow.
But I would rather have Mitro playing than not, although it shows that we have a strong squad and other players that can do a job which a team has to have to be successful. 

[Andy S]

The reason we won tonight without Mitro was because of the element of surprise. We still need Mitro but every now and then other players are able to step up to the plate

[Jimsbeerbelly]

Give your head an absolute wobble, he's first on the team sheet every time he's fit and able. We just need to learn how to play another way when he gets isolated.

[Logicalman]

Actually thought the opposite. Lots of possession in advanced wide areas and no outlet. Knockaert still prefers to shoot rather than playing "low fizzing crosses" and Cavaleiro was inconsistent. Onomah, among others, squandered the rare crosses we had (high and low) which Mitro would have put away. Reckon it would have been 4-0 tonight with Mitrovic.

Exactly this.   :54:

[Arthur]

Actually thought the opposite. Lots of possession in advanced wide areas and no outlet. Knockaert still prefers to shoot rather than playing "low fizzing crosses" and Cavaleiro was inconsistent. Onomah, among others, squandered the rare crosses we had (high and low) which Mitro would have put away. Reckon it would have been 4-0 tonight with Mitrovic.

It's tempting to think so.

And yet in all Mitrovic's 45 games for us in the Championship, we've only scored 4 goals (never more) on two occasions - one of which we played against 10 men for 70 minutes. So the likelihood that we would have scored 4 with him in the team tonight does not seem that great to me. If for no other reason, had Mitrovic been on the pitch, someone else wouldn't have been. And yet, as I saw it, every role in the team was integral to the way we played tonight. Whilst Johansen can perform a similar role to Cairney, or Arter to Onomah, Mitrovic couldn't have taken the role of anyone. Had he played, I think it would have been a different performance: not as slick and with more aerial crosses. And while Onomah's header from the corner was poor, we can't assume that Mitrovic would have been afforded the same chance. Onomah wasn't being marked at set pieces by Boro's key defender; Mitrovic would have been.

[The Rock]

For a few games - but I think it's important that we have diversity. We shouldn't be sussed. We are not a one trick pony.

Even before tonight, we needed to prove we have a squad and different assets at our disposal. It's been ok. Scott has some excuses at his disposal and he deserves it.

[Arthur]

Give your head an absolute wobble, he's first on the team sheet every time he's fit and able. We just need to learn how to play another way when he gets isolated.

I take it that you mean you would like us to play so that Mitrovic doesn't become isolated. (And as the implication of your saying this is that it happens too often, I can only agree.) It's a problem that Parker has been unable to solve. Tonight, however, Scott put out a team in which Bobby Reid's contribution - while rather different to Mitrovic's - helped to ensure that neither he nor any other player became isolated. I wonder whether this is the solution.

[Spirit of 2000]

If Mitrovic had played we would have won by 3

[Woolly Mammoth]

The reason we won tonight without Mitro was because of the element of surprise. We still need Mitro but every now and then other players are able to step up to the plate

Yes and players did step up to the plate. It was good to see that the club have added Hector and Josh in the lineup as regulars as its improved our strength in the air which has been woefully lacking in the first half of the season. But it's a start and their height and strength and physicality has had a genuine impact.

[VancouverWhite]

I hope that we don't have to revisit this thread after 10 games without Mitro, but I don't think that this sentiment would age well at all.

[MrFFC]

No we missed Mitro for me

[General]

Actually thought the opposite. Lots of possession in advanced wide areas and no outlet. Knockaert still prefers to shoot rather than playing "low fizzing crosses" and Cavaleiro was inconsistent. Onomah, among others, squandered the rare crosses we had (high and low) which Mitro would have put away. Reckon it would have been 4-0 tonight with Mitrovic.

It's tempting to think so.

And yet in all Mitrovic's 45 games for us in the Championship, we've only scored 4 goals (never more) on two occasions - one of which we played against 10 men for 70 minutes. So the likelihood that we would have scored 4 with him in the team tonight does not seem that great to me. If for no other reason, had Mitrovic been on the pitch, someone else wouldn't have been. And yet, as I saw it, every role in the team was integral to the way we played tonight. Whilst Johansen can perform a similar role to Cairney, or Arter to Onomah, Mitrovic couldn't have taken the role of anyone. Had he played, I think it would have been a different performance: not as slick and with more aerial crosses. And while Onomah's header from the corner was poor, we can't assume that Mitrovic would have been afforded the same chance. Onomah wasn't being marked at set pieces by Boro's key defender; Mitrovic would have been.

you're just looking at stats to make your point valid, not the fact of whether nitro is better for us. 7 of our games this season have seen us score 3 or more goals or win by a clear two goal margin.

Our weakest area has been defence which has been clear for everyone to see so much that the club have brought in two in January and most other teams message boards highlighted Hector to some degree after last night's game. That's had an obvious knock on effect to our results and the way we've played in terms of goals scored more than nitro not fitting our style of play. He's red 18 goals don't forget.

[MJG]

No