This is just a bizarre thing to predicate how someone would do in the PL, and it clearly outlines a hangup that is your own rather than grounded in the product we're witnessing every week, which barely features any aerial bombardment in open play.
You are right. But I see teams that will observe opponents and attempt to cash in on their weaknesses. I'd say that missing height and physicality could be seen as a weakness and so teams could potentially hurt us. Whether they succeed with that, I don't know. Whether our own game plan will be good enough to counter all that I don't know.
The league is about economy of movement and progressions. What you're suggesting is one of the most wasteful and risky ways to play due to the uncertainties around loose balls and potential counters off transitions on an easy loose ball collection.
You're presenting an argument where it's pretty much essential for a team to hit arbitrary height requirements, so it is more representative of what you're saying than you probably realise.
I feel like you are circling too much on me mentioning height as an issue. Again - I see Neves height as a problem WHEN he would be brought in to play next to Mainoo and between Martinez and Bruno. I DO NOT want to play aerial bombardment whatsoever. I am FULLY aware that there are other factors involved and a player certainly can counteract missing physical traits with other aspects.
I don't think we will reach common ground when you try to picture my position as some height extremist Stoke City fan, who wants to re-juvenate such football. I consider my position to be as differentiated as yours, I just seem to have different preferences and I value some aspects differently to you.
What you are saying is grounded in a logical, common sense approach of it's better to have than not, but it is simply not paramount to be the team you want to be, unless that team wants to cover for all eventualities in a 'just in case' kind of way.
You might have a point there. And I can see and understand somebody disagreeing with me but I don't see the "damage" done when trying to look for players of a certain profile to make sure the height aspect is part of the profile as well (an be that only something like "don't be smaller than 1,80m"). Not like those players aren't out there. Take Wieffers for example.
You might as well remove Rodri from the discussion as an obvious outlier whom even City couldn't replace like for like.
Gravenburch is a soft player who is of no real use once things go beyond his aggression remit. Szoboszlai is a non-factor in the discussion as we're talking about deep midfield. Fabinho is neither here nor there in this discussion given I made the very point of Liverpool doing perfectly fine in midfield with Endo and McCallister in the campaign just gone, challenging for the league until we dismantled their season. Height, specifically the lack of, played little to no factor in their capitulation and I bet they'd have given anything for an extra notch up in the football on and off the ball they could have played, but for the lack of actual quality in their midfield.
You're surely right. But just as much as you can say more technical quality might have helped them to win the title, I could say having more technical quality at the cost of defensive stability might have hurt them even earlier. But I get your point and I agree - height is NOT a huge factor all things considered.
Brighton have practically been the torchbearer for a kind of football most in the league wished they were capable of, until they sold off the players who made it that much more impressive than it is without them. In fact, the notion presented is of their previous style of play extrapolated upon by way of better (not taller) players doing the exact same thing.
I agree. But keep in mind that I am not advocating FOR a "height over technical ability" approach at all. Maybe the only difference between us is that I would probably look for a little longer to find a candidate that has everything that I(!!) consider as important.
What use is a taller player who is a lot worse at the fundamentals of midfield play? You shackle and oppress teans with your work along the deck, on and off the ball - the ball is not in the air frequently enough for it to make an overwhelming impression over the course of a season, unless you, as a team, are absolutely exceptional in aerial contests to the point opposing sides have to cater to what you're doing and alter their own style of play.
see above
Getting in a sloppier player who can't: pass as well through the lines; play quick one and two-touch football; dance through the press; act superfluously as a first receiver, but can handle all elements of aerial play is a massive net negative.
see above
Your wish, I suppose, is for these S and A tier DM's who can do all of the above on top of having height as a meaningful metric. Well good luck with those unicorns who have it all. In the meantime, we look at the market and assess the true pros and cons of the available players and weight them against what it means for a team as a collective, which is where a shorter player who is way above average in all aspects of play along the floor easily trumps those who might be physically imposing, but not in the same class as actual footballers, especially midfielders, where every touch and movement has such an impact on the way a whole team plays.
The problem here is that there's no such thing as old school im terms of uniformity of height in that position. In fact, you couldn't have picked a worse position if you tried given the enormous height discrepancies between true greats of the position throughout history.
I see your point. And yes, that is what I would do. I would dig deeper. But as you say - if there is one candidate that is superior in all metrics except height then be assured, I wouldn't stop it that player to be brought in. My position is based on the assumption that a perfect player is out there and we "only" have to find him.
On top of it, I can only repeat that my concerns aren't necessarily on a player basis - my concerns would be on a team basis. And given that many here see Martinez, Bruno and Mainoo (understandibly) as mainstays of the team, that will leave the height department dependent on the other midfielder and the CB who we have to bring in. I think that is a bit worrying because I think some "rules" still apply (obviously the extents change and have changed over time) and based on that, I'd add height to the search profile in this specific situation.
There was a massive furore about Martinez being short CB who teams would simply bomb out in the air when he came to the PL. The theory was tested a little by the first few sides, but was abandoned prettu sharpish given not only that he could hold his own, but also that it was a waste of possession that could have otherwise been better used. The same principle is seen in midfield and there's a reason tiny, little Makelele could come into a league much more aerially aggressive than the current iteration and eventually be left alone in terms of considered exploits in terms of aerial contests.
Tiny Makelele played with Terry, Cavalho and Ballack in a team, didn't he? And I would say the verdict on Martinez might be a little too soon. I mean, he hasn't played all the matches we had since he is here, nor are we at the level where team "would do everything" to get one over us. Also our defensive output is certainly not where we want it to be. Which obviously does not mean it is because height is the one missing piece.
But I agree to your overall point - Mertinez height might be not as much of a problem as many people thought. Especially when combined with the right partner. I would assume he wouldn't look too well next to Lindelof. Varane and Maguire are obvious very good in the air so that definitely helps.
I'd be more concerned with the unit being high up the pitch and ready to launch off a loose ball scramble than I would be about their collective height. Losing the aerial contests isn't important relative to winning the knockdowns and doing something with them, so what I would want to see is tonnes of aggression and desire to win the second ball, and then the quality to immediately do something with it, and I believe we'd have that in droves to the point teams simply stop eyeing that avenue up as an exploit.
I agree, which is another area we have to improve on. I called it intensity, aggressiveness and organisation but the way you described it is more precise.
(I intentionally left out a few paragraphs as I would have repeated myself)
