There was a discussion the other night on SEN about what position was the most important in an AFL team these days.

The consensus was that in previous generations it was the centre half forward, citing the likes of Laurie Nash, Darrell Baldock, Royce Hart, Dermott Brereton, Stephen Kernahan, James Hird and Wayne Carey. You could also mount an argument in more recent times for Jonathan Brown, Matthew Pavlich, Nick Riewoldt and of course "Buddy". I'm sure there are others I've missed and Melbourne had a couple of handy ones in Garry Lyon and David Schwarz.

But the feeling was that in today's football the centre position has taken over - it's the midfielders like Gary Ablett, Josh Kennedy (Swans), Sam Mitchell and Jobe Watson who hold the dominant position on the football field. You could go even further and argue for the entire midfield division but that may be another area for discussion altogether.

Just when I was leaning towards the view that your main midfielder is your most important player, I came across this -

Ablett v Lynch: Who is the Suns' most important player?

The most important position I guess means the one that is integral to the game and to winning. Many coaches hold the view to win a GF you need to have an excellent ruckman. So on the basis of the most 'important position' (rather than the 'best player' ala GA in Lynch's article...best players change over time) I go with ruckman.

Other coaches subscribe to the theory that a ruckman is far less important than he's ever been, almost to the point of being redundant. sam jacobs is probably the best ruckman in terms of putting the ball to adelaide's advantage more than any other ruckman, but the likes of dangerfield, sloane, thompson and the crouch bros. can't capitalise on his dominance because there's better midfielders than they on the opposition who're able to either stop them breaking away, getting it into space, or alternatively wrest the ball back from them.

I like wj's mentioning of 'the entire midfield division' - if you bat deep there (look at hawks, swans, et al) then you're in a good spot.

You could make an argument, thus, that perhaps the most important position is the 5th, 6th - the players who push up from half-forward to influence the midfield.

But i'll stick with the centreman / midfield combo theory.

The more the game changes, the more it stays the same.

Call him a bookend or a tall forward or a CHF or whatever, I would say it is the single most important (and difficult) position on the ground.

If we were talking about the most important area or line - it would be the midfield. But you need a platoon in there, one man cannot make a difference...

Is there an argument for the half back line? If you can not only spoil an attack by the opposition but regain possession and mount an attack there is a lot of weight for a marking CHB and a running rebounding half back.

Also a utility, a true utility. Thinking of Hird, Goodes Roughy and Hodge in their day you could play them wherever you were bleeding full forward full back on the ball, literally anywhere including ruck for Roughy and Goodes.

I'm finding myself agreeing with everyone thus far, which perhaps points to there not being one single most important position. Midfield as a collextive unit is clearly most important, but you only have to look at our side over the past few years to see how important a quality "quarterback" can be. In terms of single position, CHB and CHF are well up there.

Regarding the ruckman fading in importance, whilst true to an extent, the inclusion of Mumford to GWS had mamor ramifications for their young midfield. They looked a different side and suffered when he was out injured, A quality ruckman can still make a big difference. For all of Russian's shortcomings around the ground, he's the one I want in the middle at present because he at least gives our working class midfield first opportunity.

You can win a premiership without a good forward line. You cannot win a premiership without a good midfield. The midfield group shapes a team. We've had a poor midfield for years, and we've been poor as a result.

CHF was the most important position for decades. With the way the modern game is currently played with zones moving around and space being filled, the CHF is less important than it used to be. Goal kicking midfielders are the most important IMO. Look at the best midfielders in the game, Ablett, Kennedy, Selwood, Rockliff, Jobe, Pendlebury, Stevie J etc. They all go in, win their own ball for their team, and then hit the scoreboard also, often multiple times. They are the most important players in their team.

Rotations have killed the single position dominance

But a Tom Hawkins doesn't get shorter in the last quarter

Watch the 2nd half of the 2011 GF again

That said the midfield is the engine which is now a "Team" within the team.

Whiteboard Wednesday obliterated our midfield & we all witnessed the results

Well it was often CHF historically but I'm not sure there is one now. No position comes readily to mind ... maybe a gun midfielder sometimes and other times it's a dominant forward or even a backman (Scarlett)

The best player awards nearly always go to midfielders now but there's a stack of them in every team. Footy is more of a team game than it's ever been and the last 6 picked are more important than they've ever been (as well)

You can't have an average to poor ruckman either - the Tigers found that out when Maric was out for a time (Jamar & Gawn had a lot of influence in our win against them last season when Maric was out - clearances were 42-31 in our favour in that game)

Maybe the gun utility? Players like Roughy are very hard to match up on.

Edited January 24, 201510 yr by Macca

Most important position on the ground, easy answer is that there is no such thing.

Midfields are crucial, you can win flags without star forwards and backs but you must have a star midfield unit to succeed at the pointy end.

As RP has said, one good one is not enough.

I think it's the Brad Hill or Isaac Smith type, that stretches an opposition's defense by continually finding space and linking ball movement, preventing it from getting stagnant.

Personally, I think Brad Hill is more integral to Hawthorn's future success than any other player at this stage.

Opponents can't stay with him, and it means they can't stifle the Hawks' ball movement.

I think it's the Brad Hill or Isaac Smith type, that stretches an opposition's defense by continually finding space and linking ball movement, preventing it from getting stagnant.

Personally, I think Brad Hill is more integral to Hawthorn's future success than any other player at this stage.

Opponents can't stay with him, and it means they can't stifle the Hawks' ball movement.

Not saying it is easy but you stifle the ball movement to him. This is why Mitchell is so important in getting the ball out, hitting up targets.

Just when I was leaning towards the view that your main midfielder is your most important player, I came across this -Ablett v Lynch: Who is the Suns' most important player?

As a side issue, I have to note the following selections in the 2010 AFL National Draft:-

11. Thomas Lynch (Gold Coast)

12. Lucas Cook (Melbourne)

As often happens with young key position players, they take a while to develop. Both Lynch and Cook struggled early and when Cook snagged four goals at Casey against Collingwood VFL in the Queens Birthday round of 2011, I thought he might have forced his way ahead of Lynch at that point in time ... the rest is history and another example of either bad luck and/or poor judgement on the part of the club during that particular period in time.

Anyway, with hindsight, we should have taken a midfielder like Luke Parker who the Swans took with pick 40. Isaac Smith was taken in that draft in the teens.

I'm convinced that good ol Barry was convinced that we'd get one of either Prestia or Lynch, maybe even strike it lucky with Heppell (as GC were spooked by reports of dodgy groins, and Hird was making last minute visits, flying to see Atley the day before the draft) and with Cook as our backup to the backup plan.

Problem is, Cook was the worst backup plan you could conceive, mostly based on things like his being named as AA U/18 CHF (at Darling's expense after a sub-expectations top-age year) and not his psych profile.

But more than anything, we didnt have a culture conducive to these kids realising their potential, so it didn't matter much who we chose at that point. We may have a kids whose career was worth salvaging somewhat at this point, however.

On the subject of centre half forwards and key forwards generally, I found this quote interesting ~ Riewoldt a perfect role model for Saint Paddy

PADDY McCartin knows he could not find a better role model than Nick Riewoldt.

St Kilda snared McCartin with pick No.1 in last year's NAB AFL Draft, ultimately preferring the Geelong Falcons key forward to Eastern Ranges midfield bull Christian Petracca.

The Saints' decision was influenced, in part, by the need to groom a forward-line successor to Riewoldt.

So there you have it. Petracca was the consensus best player in the draft (I believe even Alan Richardson said so at one stage), but the argument to take McCartin was compelling for the Saints. They chose him partly on needs because they know Riewoldt's time is nearing an end and the Lance Franklin and Tom Boyd transfers demonstrated the inflationary market for key forwards. For them, better an outstanding young KPP than the best player available, even if that player could be of the elite of the new generation of players, a potential Michael Jordan.

Which brings to mind the story of the Portland Trail Blazers who drafted Sam Bowie (who?) over Jordan.

The lesson?

Even the most successful people make mistakes - heaven knows that the MFC have made far more than their share in recent times.

I've read all of your opinions and I still say reverse cowgirl.

I've read all of your opinions and I still say reverse cowgirl.

If you mean the Turkish wrestling position you're on the wrong thread.

Many think the role of a ruckman to be overrated, but I actually think it can be the most influential position on the ground. A good midfield can adapt to their ineffective ruckman by working off the opposition big man. Hawthorn have done this well in the past. But a very good ruckman such as Cox, Sandi or (dare I say it) Jolly in their prime years were often a litmus test for the team's form. A big man who can tap well, take important marks, kick well and run out a game are gold. We need Gawn or King to develop into this or trade for one. Jamar has only 1 or 2 yrs left and Spencer isn't it.

Many think the role of a ruckman to be overrated, but I actually think it can be the most influential position on the ground. A good midfield can adapt to their ineffective ruckman by working off the opposition big man. Hawthorn have done this well in the past. But a very good ruckman such as Cox, Sandi or (dare I say it) Jolly in their prime years were often a litmus test for the team's form. A big man who can tap well, take important marks, kick well and run out a game are gold. We need Gawn or King to develop into this or trade for one. Jamar has only 1 or 2 yrs left and Spencer isn't it.

...and Geelong have struggled to find a consistant replacement for Ottens. I think this is part of the reason they got Clark.

I think a case could be made for the HBF for several teams. Lots of sides now like to set up their play through their rebounding HBF who will distribute to the mids and half forwards to create their attacking moves.

...and Geelong have struggled to find a consistant replacement for Ottens. I think this is part of the reason they got Clark.

Macintosh is as fragile as Clark (physically).

Blicsavs has some real leap and a very good tank. Cats are in strife with Vardy being injured so much.

Excuse me for smiling a little...

On the subject of centre half forwards and key forwards generally, I found this quote interesting ~ Riewoldt a perfect role model for Saint PaddySo there you have it. Petracca was the consensus best player in the draft (I believe even Alan Richardson said so at one stage), but the argument to take McCartin was compelling for the Saints. They chose him partly on needs because they know Riewoldt's time is nearing an end and the Lance Franklin and Tom Boyd transfers demonstrated the inflationary market for key forwards. For them, better an outstanding young KPP than the best player available, even if that player could be of the elite of the new generation of players, a potential Michael Jordan.

Which brings to mind the story of the Portland Trail Blazers who drafted Sam Bowie (who?) over Jordan.

The lesson?

Even the most successful people make mistakes - heaven knows that the MFC have made far more than their share in recent times.

In fairness to the Blazers they already had Clyde Drexler at shooting guard, Kareem was ruling the league and Hakeem Olajuwon (pick 1) and Ralph Sampson were going to be the next

Big things of 7 ft terror. Bowie was a legitimate star college player who had a horrendous injury run.

No one had any idea Jordan was going to be what he became.

Good talking point: But really this is football not golf or tennis. I have notices those article popping up on the AFL website and always think its strange for the media of a team sport to look for individual heroes. Hubris and a little fan boy-ish for me. But my point I am trying to make is that great individuals in teams can pull teams across the line on occasions. But great teams who have individuals who all play their role when required to do so for the team win more often than not.. The commentators when they reminisce about the great teams of old will talk about a team full of stars. When in reality it was a team of individuals who worked really hard together to get the win.

So my vote is for all of the positions.

Edited January 25, 201510 yr by felixdacat

An attacking half back flanker.....what does that look like?