lf endurance isn't so important, then why do the coaches and fitness staff insist on building players' tanks?
CJ I didn’t say it was so important, I’m saying I hope it’s not at the forefront of the players minds in thinking that a large tank will get you a senior birth is all.
Quoted Postlf endurance isn't so important, then why do the coaches and fitness staff insist on building players' tanks?CJ I didn’t say it was so important, I’m saying I hope it’s not at the forefront of the players minds in thinking that a large tank will get you a senior birth is all.
l am sure players don’t think in those terms, it is a part, but only one part of the equation.
A reply to: @Damnation regarding QuoteLink
Quoted Postlf endurance isn't so important, then why do the coaches and fitness staff insist on building players' tanks?CJ I didn’t say it was so important, I’m saying I hope it’s not at the forefront of the players minds in thinking that a large tank will get you a senior birth is all.
It will ■■■■■■ go a long way to helping them.
You won’t become a regular in any AFL 22 if you are coughing up your lungs after a sprint or hell, even a quarter of AFL football.
Go ask Reimers or Neagle.
If you don’t have the fitness base you’ll never be a good player or a good team.
Dynamics and skills of the game can be taught and fine tuned, fitness cannot. It takes hard work and discipline and without it you are farked before you begin.
The others here aren’t disagreeing with you that contested work/ball skills etc aren’t important because they are.
But an AFL “tank” and fitness base is THE most important for any player as it is what a player needs more than anything else to not just make it but play consistent games.
There is a reason why AFL players are in the top 1% for fitness in the world and that is because the AFL game requires it.
^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population.
If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.
^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population. If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.
AFL players top 1% in professional sport?
Marathon runners?
Triathletes?
Ironman?
Rugby League?
Boxing?
I don’t think 1% far from it, there are many more than mentioned above.
I was asking BK.
you were doing ok until Rugby League.
Don’t confuse endurance on a running track, and endurance on a footy field. Many are claimed to have elite endurance but it doesn’t show on the field.
you were doing ok until Rugby League.
Don’t rate the fitness of league compared to AFL?
Suggest you try playing both before assessing, I know you haven’t otherwise you wouldn’t have made the comment.
LOL. Mate I’m a QLDer and grew up on league.
Different game, different body sizes and different skills. But I’d place the fitness of an AFL player a long long way ahead of the league boys.
LOL. Mate I'm a QLDer and grew up on league.Different game, different body sizes and different skills. But I’d place the fitness of an AFL player a long long way ahead of the league boys.
Ever played it?
Karmichael Hunt was pretty emphatic that the fitness (especially endurance) requirements of the AFL were higher than the NRL, and he seems to be pretty well placed to have an opinion.
In terms of the culture of going out and enjoying yourself after every game, that does not happen whereas in rugby league, because the physical demands are a lot lighter compared to AFL, you could find boys out enjoying themselves.
A reply to: @Damnation regarding QuoteLink
Quoted Post^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population. If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.AFL players top 1% in professional sport?
Marathon runners?
Triathletes?
Ironman?
Rugby League?
Boxing?I don’t think 1% far from it, there are many more than mentioned above.
AFL players are easily, by far, the fittest athletes in the world.
It is the only sport that demands sprinting, gut running and powerful collisions often in the same piece of play. Most AFL midfielders would run 12-14 km a game which is half a marathon.
Being strong enough to tackle, to stand up in a tackle, crash into a pack, be crashed into (I’d class all as part of the “collision” part of the game) is unique when combined with the sprint running and endurance running demands - there are no “timeouts” in quarters (e.g. basketball), there is no switching of forwards and defenders at stoppages (NFL), there is no off-side rule that means there is no demand on players to sprint forward to make position ahead of the ball (rugby, soccer) and the average AFL ground is much, much bigger than the rectangular playing areas used for all other footballing codes around the world.
A reply to: @Damnation regarding QuoteLinkQuoted Post^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population. If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.AFL players top 1% in professional sport?
Marathon runners?
Triathletes?
Ironman?
Rugby League?
Boxing?I don’t think 1% far from it, there are many more than mentioned above.
AFL players are easily, by far, the fittest athletes in the world.
It is the only sport that demands sprinting, gut running and powerful collisions often in the same piece of play. Most AFL midfielders would run 12-14 km a game which is half a marathon.
Being strong enough to tackle, to stand up in a tackle, crash into a pack, be crashed into (I’d class all as part of the “collision” part of the game) is unique when combined with the sprint running and endurance running demands - there are no “timeouts” in quarters (e.g. basketball), there is no switching of forwards and defenders at stoppages (NFL), there is no off-side rule that means there is no demand on players to sprint forward to make position ahead of the ball (rugby, soccer) and the average AFL ground is much, much bigger than the rectangular playing areas used for all other footballing codes around the world.
Sorry to break it too you but Boxers are the fittest
AFL players in total do 15km’s a game which consists of walking, jogging and running btw. I’m saying it isn’t up there but it’s not 1% which my original point was.
A reply to: @Damnation regarding QuoteLinkQuoted Post^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population. If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.AFL players top 1% in professional sport?
Marathon runners?
Triathletes?
Ironman?
Rugby League?
Boxing?I don’t think 1% far from it, there are many more than mentioned above.
AFL players are easily, by far, the fittest athletes in the world.
It is the only sport that demands sprinting, gut running and powerful collisions often in the same piece of play. Most AFL midfielders would run 12-14 km a game which is half a marathon.
Being strong enough to tackle, to stand up in a tackle, crash into a pack, be crashed into (I’d class all as part of the “collision” part of the game) is unique when combined with the sprint running and endurance running demands - there are no “timeouts” in quarters (e.g. basketball), there is no switching of forwards and defenders at stoppages (NFL), there is no off-side rule that means there is no demand on players to sprint forward to make position ahead of the ball (rugby, soccer) and the average AFL ground is much, much bigger than the rectangular playing areas used for all other footballing codes around the world.
cmon, a marathon is 42.2km, 14km isn’t a half marathon. Stuff like that hurts your argument.
Also fitness is a combination of factors, and while endurance is a factor, strength is also a factor, as is flexibility, reflexes and things like bone density, etc.
Who is the fittest out of someone who can bench twice their own body weight for 20 reps and someone who can run 100km in 8 hours?
My point is it’s sill to compare apples and oranges.
Sure, AFL players are fit, but if they were remarkably fitter than any other athletes they would be able to dominate those sports, which they aren’t.
Quoted PostA reply to: @Damnation regarding QuoteLinkQuoted Post^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population. If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.AFL players top 1% in professional sport?
Marathon runners?
Triathletes?
Ironman?
Rugby League?
Boxing?I don’t think 1% far from it, there are many more than mentioned above.
AFL players are easily, by far, the fittest athletes in the world.
It is the only sport that demands sprinting, gut running and powerful collisions often in the same piece of play. Most AFL midfielders would run 12-14 km a game which is half a marathon.
Being strong enough to tackle, to stand up in a tackle, crash into a pack, be crashed into (I’d class all as part of the “collision” part of the game) is unique when combined with the sprint running and endurance running demands - there are no “timeouts” in quarters (e.g. basketball), there is no switching of forwards and defenders at stoppages (NFL), there is no off-side rule that means there is no demand on players to sprint forward to make position ahead of the ball (rugby, soccer) and the average AFL ground is much, much bigger than the rectangular playing areas used for all other footballing codes around the world.
cmon, a marathon is 42.2km, 14km isn’t a half marathon. Stuff like that hurts your argument.
Also fitness is a combination of factors, and while endurance is a factor, strength is also a factor, as is flexibility, reflexes and things like bone density, etc.
Who is the fittest out of someone who can bench twice their own body weight for 20 reps and someone who can run 100km in 8 hours?
My point is it’s sill to compare apples and oranges.
Sure, AFL players are fit, but if they were remarkably fitter than any other athletes they would be able to dominate those sports, which they aren’t.
That would depend on who can get their heart rate back to resting level the soonest. A’la - fitness.
A reply to: @Deckham regarding QuoteLink
Quoted PostQuoted PostA reply to: @Damnation regarding QuoteLinkQuoted Post^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population. If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.AFL players top 1% in professional sport?
Marathon runners?
Triathletes?
Ironman?
Rugby League?
Boxing?I don’t think 1% far from it, there are many more than mentioned above.
AFL players are easily, by far, the fittest athletes in the world.
It is the only sport that demands sprinting, gut running and powerful collisions often in the same piece of play. Most AFL midfielders would run 12-14 km a game which is half a marathon.
Being strong enough to tackle, to stand up in a tackle, crash into a pack, be crashed into (I’d class all as part of the “collision” part of the game) is unique when combined with the sprint running and endurance running demands - there are no “timeouts” in quarters (e.g. basketball), there is no switching of forwards and defenders at stoppages (NFL), there is no off-side rule that means there is no demand on players to sprint forward to make position ahead of the ball (rugby, soccer) and the average AFL ground is much, much bigger than the rectangular playing areas used for all other footballing codes around the world.
cmon, a marathon is 42.2km, 14km isn’t a half marathon. Stuff like that hurts your argument.
Also fitness is a combination of factors, and while endurance is a factor, strength is also a factor, as is flexibility, reflexes and things like bone density, etc.
Who is the fittest out of someone who can bench twice their own body weight for 20 reps and someone who can run 100km in 8 hours?
My point is it’s sill to compare apples and oranges.
Sure, AFL players are fit, but if they were remarkably fitter than any other athletes they would be able to dominate those sports, which they aren’t.
That would depend on who can get their heart rate back to resting level the soonest. A’la - fitness.
Not sure if serious? Resting heart rate would differ and returning to it would be irrelevant.
If the aim is to save your child but you can’t run the 100km in time, then you aren’t fit enough, but the person who can is… Its all relative.
FWIW, I’d say the bench press guy would have his heart rate back to resting before the runner has even hit 20km! 
A reply to: @wannabe regarding QuoteLink
Quoted PostA reply to: @Damnation regarding QuoteLinkQuoted Post^Where did you got that stat from? I assume it means top 1% of professional athletes, because of course they would be in top 1% of the general population. If that was a genuine statistic, I would be interested to see how they determined it.AFL players top 1% in professional sport?
Marathon runners?
Triathletes?
Ironman?
Rugby League?
Boxing?I don’t think 1% far from it, there are many more than mentioned above.
AFL players are easily, by far, the fittest athletes in the world.
It is the only sport that demands sprinting, gut running and powerful collisions often in the same piece of play. Most AFL midfielders would run 12-14 km a game which is half a marathon.
Being strong enough to tackle, to stand up in a tackle, crash into a pack, be crashed into (I’d class all as part of the “collision” part of the game) is unique when combined with the sprint running and endurance running demands - there are no “timeouts” in quarters (e.g. basketball), there is no switching of forwards and defenders at stoppages (NFL), there is no off-side rule that means there is no demand on players to sprint forward to make position ahead of the ball (rugby, soccer) and the average AFL ground is much, much bigger than the rectangular playing areas used for all other footballing codes around the world.
cmon, a marathon is 42.2km, 14km isn’t a half marathon. Stuff like that hurts your argument.
Also fitness is a combination of factors, and while endurance is a factor, strength is also a factor, as is flexibility, reflexes and things like bone density, etc.
Who is the fittest out of someone who can bench twice their own body weight for 20 reps and someone who can run 100km in 8 hours?
My point is it’s sill to compare apples and oranges.
Sure, AFL players are fit, but if they were remarkably fitter than any other athletes they would be able to dominate those sports, which they aren’t.
That’s why I asked where he got his “facts” from and how did they test for this. I agree with BWAS - AFL has a broader range of physical demands than any other sport that has been listed so far.
This is a ridiculous argument now.
Cricketers are the fittest!
Mark Waugh explained this when Australia played in the Commonwealth games in 1998. He said that they were able to eat ice-creams without it affecting their performance, whereas none of the other athletes were game to do that.
My vote goes for Darts players. They can smoke and sink pots all day and still have no adverse effect of performance.