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.
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.
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'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.
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.
see above
see above
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.
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 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)
We agree on some elements, but height in and of itself is just too overstated when other factors have such precedence, especially in midfield.
Physicality just isn't one and the same with height, and that aggressive, shorter pitbull type who mightn't win the first ball but is practically a guarantee for the second, is what will win you more midfield battles, games and points over the course of a season, imo. Winning the second ball and then using it to the benefits of your own side is such a massive deterrent to aerial balls that it can be used as a conditioner to even prevent the ball being lofted high in the first place.
In this day and age territorial advatage and progressive carries as well as the platform to set transitions in motion are the greatest currency by far. I'd liken it to aerial balls being the puncher's chance and a comprehensive ground game being the route to a consummate hiding, being peppered with hits from every conceivable angle, which is why we just don't see it often anymore as even weak teams don't proverbially swing wildly anymore hoping to connect with their eyes closed.
Even in this tournament being played now, there hasn't been a team trying to go long into midfield, and there most likely won't be one.
I feel you use height as interchangeable with physicality, but it just not the case in midfield. Where you need both is at CB, or better to say, it's massively beneficial there because you have everything to gain (a literal goal) in aggressive aerial scrambles there with a lot less plays for attempted knockdowns/layoffs for others, but it just isn't the same contest in midfield, which is why DM has such a vast pool of tiny players being dominant right at the base of their respective team (with or without assistance).
Incidentally, similar goes for full-backs now or in the past. Height plus aggression obviously preferred, but at the very least you want a robust, disruptive shorter FB making the first ball really difficult to win, but onus being on winning the second ball or making it much easier for the CB on the inside to.
I'll reiterate that unless you're up against absolute colossus level aerial threat AM's, like a Ballack or a Bellingham (when throwing his weight about), it's just not a big concern. Even citing Bellingham is a bit redundant given 9/10, he wants the ball on the deck and has little desire for head tennis.
Anyway, I think the topic is exhausted, so this'll be my last extensive post on it.
