In AFL circles 185 is not considered tall these days. I think they tend to see it as tall starting around the 194 mark.
I didnât come up with that at all,
185 cmâs is not considered tall In todayâs world of âBig bodied midsâ
thatâs just a fact not something that I decided.
Iâd say 188 and above would be considered âBig Bodiedâ but really most that are considered bigger are 190 and beyond.
anyway who cares its all mumbo jumbo
The discussion is about mids.
Yes I know, and that is what I am saying as well.
Average height of AFL players is about 188cm
So⌠yep.
Youâve got two or three guys above average in your top 10, and one guy who is actually tall.
Nah, fair enoughâŚ
Anyway.
I think we can all agree on one thing.
Darcy needs to get some heel lifts, and get onto the patended Jason Laycock sports pub parma diet pronto.
why is the discussion around clearances.
our undersized midfield has only dropped the stat once this year against freo who we beat.
clearances clearly not a problem for smaller midfield
Either is contested possession we are more than holding our own in that area too
Very good questions you raise.
Have you been doing something crazy like watching our games?
i mean unless small height correlates with our kicking efficiency im not seeing any problems
Perfect example of a great marking mid on that list with Parker. Does solitify a point that you donât need to be a tall mid to be a good mark.
Exactly.
Number two turnover team in the league.
Fix that and weâre 8-3.
Being able to take a contested mark Is huge. It completely kills the contest and puts the game on your terms. You can also rest them in the forward line so they are always on the ground. Itâs why Langford looked so good against Richmond and why every club wants midfielders who can do it.
Correct me if I am wrong but donât we usually play an extra number at the contest which helps us win contested posesion? And clearances?
Im a little bit on the fence about this argument. I think we do need some bigger bodyâs in the mix. If Clarke, Langford, and perhaps mynott come on. Do we have that area covered?
Add Stringer, and Hepp (great Marking mid) to the mix and we have a good mix.
Parish has one problem compared to the likes of our other smaller mids. And thatâs having as much impact on other parts of the ground.
I do think itâs important to have a mix of size in the middle. But itâs a long way from our weekest link.
Exactly, they are like gold and pretty rare. Langford is already a good afl level fwd IMHO. But not a good consistent inside mid yet. He only needs to get good not necessarily great in this area to be in our best team.
Early days but Clarke on the other hand looks exactly what we need inside. Adds some needed size and strength to the mix.
Not sure about that grouping. Nealeâs 177, Prestiaâs 175, the rest are 182+, so half the range youâve defined contains nobody. You could get to half of the top 20 with just 182-185.
182-190 (the same range as 177-185) accounts for 15 of the top 21. And 4 of the remaining 6 are taller.
Edit: Iâm not following this discussion at all, apologies if this is completely tangential.
Yeh I couldnât tell you , their are a lot more astute people on here than me to divulge in our structures and setup, but Cleary that would change week to week depending on opposition. I agree on the big body size is necessary for contested work but the fact is we are more than holding our own and with a lot of development left in our young lads I think the future mid stocks are good. If a Fyfe was available or a Bont, donât get me wrong Iâd be the first one to jump at it. But not quite yet sold on chasing guys like sier or Brodie who canât actually get a game with their respective clubs when we are doing ok
Marking through the midfield is important, and uncontested (quantity) >contested (quality).
Uncontested marking relies on an ability to find space either through IQ, gut running or athleticism; Darcy is elite in at least 1 of those things and more than capable in the other 2 areas
Is the club looking do anything about Darcyâs height or is this another problem theyâve thrown in the too hard basket?