#3 Darcy "Darcy Parish" Parish


Apparently he had a great pre-season and coaches were “raving about his clearance work”. So was his form drop just a mirror of almost every other player on the team ? The problem is, that he does not have a suitable alternate position, other than the bench, when he is not playing on the ball. He just has not become a dangerous small forward, which is the ideal spot for a resting on baller. We like to rotate lots of players through the midfield, so where does he play when not on the ball? Same problem with Clarke.


alternative positions are the biggest load of rubbish if you ask me, especially for a midfielder. its great if you are a dusty/ dangerfield/ fyfe and legitimately play a different position, but for everyone else building an elite fitness base and actually being able to play in your required and best position is perfectly acceptable.


Would still hold good value so I would shop him around a bit.


Not every mid has to have the ability to rest forward.

Is Tom Mitchell a dangerous threat when he is resting forward? Not really.


could say the same about langford :slight_smile:


This. We need to play defence too, we can’t expect every mid to rest forward and kick a goal every game.


Langford will be a very good player.

I don’t believe Parish will be anything other than a role player.

Nothing wrong with being a role player but his trade value will be reasonably high still and we may be able to get something more suitable to our squad.


I encourage you to show the same amount of patience with Parish as you have with Langford.

2nd year blues is very regular and he only got 8 games in a 2-6 side in his 3rd year.

Will be an absolute ripper!


It wasn’t patience on my behalf with Langford. I liked what I saw with him and was very confident he could become a very unique player for us.

Parish I just don’t see it with him.

I’m happy to be proven wrong but I believe for us to become a genuinely good side we need another elite mid or two.

As pointed out above it is critical for periphery midfielders to be able to have an impact in more than one position.

Myers is a great example of what not to look for in a midfielder. If your only trick is to impact around contested situations then you better be very good at it or otherwise you can become a liability.


Parish will be great. Put him on the ball and watch him go.

Rotation one: Smith, Zerrett, Langford
Rotation two: Parish, Stringer, McGrath
Rotation three: Heppell, Fantasia, Zaharakis


yeah nah not a good comparison, and i suspect you know that

you were arguing that parish needs to make an impact in more than one position because he is a periphery mid, but then compare him to a player that legitimately has one of the poorest skillsets on our list (IMO)

He is limited because he is

  • glacially slow
  • poor hands in close
  • comically one sided
  • resulting in his game being basically see ball, hoof ball out of pack

Thats why you wouldn’t look to draft him, not because he can only play as a midfielder.

I counter that comparison with Stanton, Hocking, Howlett (he hardly rested forward despite having a couple of games up there). All basically played midfield only, all had pretty good careers. If Parish can turn out like any of those three then I’d be reasonably satisfied. The draft is a complete lottery, where you took a player means sfa, all that matters is what you can get them to do in the senior team, as required by the coaches. I feel you constantly let Parish’s position in the draft pretty much completely skew your perception of him as a player.

i kinda feel like im beating my head up against a wall everytime you post re langford/ parish, but your arguments just seem so childish to be honest


I’d be interested to get Killer Mike’s thoughts on Darcy Parish.


Yeah, it’s hard to measure Parish’s value to the team at the moment given the quality coming through. 2016, pretty much thrown to the wolves and did remarkably well as a midfielder. 2017, with all the returning players, was plonked half forward for “further education/development. His form seemed to suffer (although his possession numbers were good given where he was playing) as a result BUT supporters were given a reminder of his true value as a footballer in the elimination final against Sydney. 2018, his form basically mirrored what the team were producing. Shame he’s injured. Would’ve loved to see his output while the team are flying.


I’m not comparing skillsets but rather the role they will/are playing.

I don’t see Parish being the dominate inside mid that we require as he is too small and has at this early stage shown a propensity to read the ball off hands rather than physically dominate a contest like the big inside mids can.

If you are going to be a balanced mid which I think should be his aim then you have to be damaging on the outside. Merrett, Langford, Zacha and Heppell are all good examples of this.

Parish for mine lacks class and any damaging weapons.

That puts him in the Myers category.


Heppell is a liability as soon as he starts to play ‘on the outside’, and i’m not entirely sure that langford plays that much on the outside? hes damaging on the odd opportunity he gets space, but any semi decent player should be, and id argue that parish has shown that ability too. Zaharakis is not a balanced midfielder, he is predominately an outside midfielder who isnt too great at the contest at all, if we were relying on him to extract the ball for us then we would be in a bad spot.

zach is an absolute freak because he is great on the inside and great on the outside. I see no reason why parish cannot match Zachs output as an inside midfielder, however, legit none. His hands are as good, strength is as good, tenacity basically as good. I think compensates for not having a ‘standout weapon’… whats hepps? stringers? zaharakis? I dont agree that players need to have a single damaging weapon in order for them to play a role in a team.

Ill stop because i dont see the point anymore haha. well just have to hope for the best with parish.


Gee you’ve ramped it up today KM, suggesting we trade him.

I don’t think we’ve got enough quality in our midfield yet to go trading him.
I think he’ll still be a very solid player. I just think he needs to build his fitness and strength further.
But even with that, i’m not 100% sure where he fits. Zaka has to come back into this midfield. Logically he’d replace Guelfi I reckon. If Parish replaces Myers we might be a bit small. I’d prefer a guy of Clarke’s size replacing Myers long term.


I agree with this.


I think we could still potentially get a top 15 pick for him and pick up a different type of player.

We need mids no doubt but we don’t need depth we need top end talent.


Ok. Do you guys are now both using bad examples.

Parish is not like Myers @Killer_Mike . At all.

Also if you want to talk about player flexibility Myers was drafted as a half back.

Parish moves through congestion and takes the football away from stoppages. That is a very unique skillset.

Zakka. Holy balls @alex.f.94
I feel like so many arguments about zakka are from 5 years ago lol.

Zakka plays ■■■■ when playing as an outside midfielder, he gets lost and does fark all. It doesn’t make sense when you look at his skillset I know but it’s real. Zakka plays well when he is asked to play in the contest and on the ball. Always has, always will. He is an onballer.

This argument is driving me crazy.

Parish is a very good young promising midfielder who has excellent stoppage craft but needs to work on his kicking. Simples.


Kids a gun who was grinding it out when the whole team was ■■■■.

This talk is pathetic. Wait til he comes back in to a system that is working and then see how he goes.