Training - Monday 18th January, 2016

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

On the height thing:

Allen Jakovich was 187cm.

Ablett Senior was 185cm.

Jason Dunstall was 188cm

Matthew Lloyd was 192cm

Garry Lyon was 193cm

I am often amazed at how the game has changed in so little time.  Imagine if these guys were playing today.  We never would have seen the genius of Ablett or Jakovich as forwards because they would have been pushed into midfield roles and told to get fitter.  Lloyd and Lyon would both be considered borderline as key forwards, probably more of the high half-forward link-up player.  I doubt Dunstall would be given a chance at all with his build.  He clearly couldn't play as a mid, but there's no way they'd let him be a lead-up full forward at his height. 

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

9 hours ago, The Great Pretender said:

I don't think he was comparing their physiques but rather stating the fact that Lockett's about the same height as those two.

Nobody really doubts Lockett's attributes. After all, he and Jason Dunstall won Brownlow Medals and kicked plenty of tons.

The way the game's changed, key forwards these days need to be taller than Lockett's 191cm but Plugger would still be a great footballer today because of his strength and skills.

if plugger was playing today id chuck him in the middle at ball ups  as a pinch hitting clearance machine!

Edited January 23, 2016 by Munga

[daisycutter 28,641]

7 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

On the height thing:

Allen Jakovich was 187cm.

Ablett Senior was 185cm.

Jason Dunstall was 188cm

Matthew Lloyd was 192cm

Garry Lyon was 193cm

I am often amazed at how the game has changed in so little time.  Imagine if these guys were playing today.  We never would have seen the genius of Ablett or Jakovich as forwards because they would have been pushed into midfield roles and told to get fitter.  Lloyd and Lyon would both be considered borderline as key forwards, probably more of the high half-forward link-up player.  I doubt Dunstall would be given a chance at all with his build.  He clearly couldn't play as a mid, but there's no way they'd let him be a lead-up full forward at his height. 

The great John Coleman was 185cm 80kg 

and Royce Hart was 185cm 86kg 

[autocol 448]

13 hours ago, ProDee said:

Haha.  Wrong simpleton.

The guy noted that Plugger was the same height as Garland and Darling.

He was right.

Who's the simpleton?

[Gator 16,911]

34 minutes ago, autocol said:

The guy noted that Plugger was the same height as Garland and Darling.

He was right.

Who's the simpleton?

I'm mortally wounded and bow to my conqueror.

[Whispering_Jack 28,025]

8 hours ago, daisycutter said:

The great John Coleman was 185cm 80kg 

and Royce Hart was 185cm 86kg 

And while we're at it, Darrel Baldock who was St Kilda's captain in its only premiership in 1966 played mainly at CHF and was 179cm 84kg but he was an absolute freak.

I commented recently about the fact that the current generation of players are generally taller and faster than those of the past, an evolution due to a number of factors relating probably to modern diet, fitness and even psychological factors. I wonder if there are any experts out there who can precisely explain the phenomenon?

Sam Weideman is 196cm 90kg (even if he's stopped growing, he'll probably get to at least 100kg after a couple of seasons in the game). The pundits compare him with Matty Pavlich but the Pav is 192cm 99kg - a fair difference there. Yet, I can remember Sam's grandfather playing at CHF and CHB for Collingwood. He was strong, a great mark and seemed like a giant on the field. His biography gives his stats as 187cm 96kg.

[daisycutter 28,641]

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

And while we're at it, Darrel Baldock who was St Kilda's captain in its only premiership in 1966 played mainly at CHF and was 179cm 84kg but he was an absolute freak.

I commented recently about the fact that the current generation of players are generally taller and faster than those of the past, an evolution due to a number of factors relating probably to modern diet, fitness and even psychological factors. I wonder if there are any experts out there who can precisely explain the phenomenon?

Sam Weideman is 196cm 90kg (even if he's stopped growing, he'll probably get to at least 100kg after a couple of seasons in the game). The pundits compare him with Matty Pavlich but the Pav is 192cm 99kg - a fair difference there. Yet, I can remember Sam's grandfather playing at CHF and CHB for Collingwood. He was strong, a great mark and seemed like a giant on the field. His biography gives his stats as 187cm 96kg.

that's true about baldock, jack., but even during his playing time he was considered a very unusual height for chf

and yes murray weideman was considered a brute in his day, despite being just under 6'2". still 96kg is not to be scoffed at even today

[dazzledavey36 49,044]

Hopefully Sam picks up his Pa's genes and stacks on some serious muscle sooner then later.

[Red and Bluebeard 2,044]

4 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

And while we're at it, Darrel Baldock who was St Kilda's captain in its only premiership in 1966 played mainly at CHF and was 179cm 84kg but he was an absolute freak.

I commented recently about the fact that the current generation of players are generally taller and faster than those of the past, an evolution due to a number of factors relating probably to modern diet, fitness and even psychological factors. I wonder if there are any experts out there who can precisely explain the phenomenon?

Sam Weideman is 196cm 90kg (even if he's stopped growing, he'll probably get to at least 100kg after a couple of seasons in the game). The pundits compare him with Matty Pavlich but the Pav is 192cm 99kg - a fair difference there. Yet, I can remember Sam's grandfather playing at CHF and CHB for Collingwood. He was strong, a great mark and seemed like a giant on the field. His biography gives his stats as 187cm 96kg.

I am no medico, but one semi-plausible idea I have heard is that immunising kids means that they no longer get measles, German measles, chicken pox etc. Back in my day, it was a rite of passage to have all these and more as a young kid. Immunising means this no longer happens, so kids spend more time healthy and growing. There is presumably no way to verify this, but it is as plausible as anything I have heard. 

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

3 minutes ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

I am no medico, but one semi-plausible idea I have heard is that immunising kids means that they no longer get measles, German measles, chicken pox etc. Back in my day, it was a rite of passage to have all these and more as a young kid. Immunising means this no longer happens, so kids spend more time healthy and growing. There is presumably no way to verify this, but it is as plausible as anything I have heard. 

I reckon it's also simple maths - there is a much larger population these days, therefore a lot more blokes who are in the big/tall category, and these are the ones with an advantage on the field so these are the ones that make it to the AFL (although there are more teams now too so that cancels it out somewhat)

[Satyriconhome 9,993]

4 minutes ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

I am no medico, but one semi-plausible idea I have heard is that immunising kids means that they no longer get measles, German measles, chicken pox etc. Back in my day, it was a rite of passage to have all these and more as a young kid. Immunising means this no longer happens, so kids spend more time healthy and growing. There is presumably no way to verify this, but it is as plausible as anything I have heard. 

I thought it was because most of them stay at home now until they are 35 and live off the parents, not surviving on cornflakes, Newcastle brown ale and Woodbines, or was that just me...typed as I adjust my broken spindly frame in my seat

[old dee 22,952]

48 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

I thought it was because most of them stay at home now until they are 35 and live off the parents, not surviving on cornflakes, Newcastle brown ale and Woodbines, or was that just me...typed as I adjust my broken spindly frame in my seat

Could also be the genes your parents blessed you with Saty.

[daisycutter 28,641]

probably all the growth hormone that macdonalds feed their cows

[stuie 7,374]

1 hour ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

I am no medico, but one semi-plausible idea I have heard is that immunising kids means that they no longer get measles, German measles, chicken pox etc. Back in my day, it was a rite of passage to have all these and more as a young kid. Immunising means this no longer happens, so kids spend more time healthy and growing. There is presumably no way to verify this, but it is as plausible as anything I have heard. 

 

1 hour ago, Curry & Beer said:

I reckon it's also simple maths - there is a much larger population these days, therefore a lot more blokes who are in the big/tall category, and these are the ones with an advantage on the field so these are the ones that make it to the AFL (although there are more teams now too so that cancels it out somewhat)

 

1 hour ago, Satyriconhome said:

I thought it was because most of them stay at home now until they are 35 and live off the parents, not surviving on cornflakes, Newcastle brown ale and Woodbines, or was that just me...typed as I adjust my broken spindly frame in my seat

 

It's called evolution.

The average height of the human male has gone up by 25cm over the last 2,000 years.

 

[Satyriconhome 9,993]

8 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

 

 

It's called evolution.

The average height of the human male has gone up by 25cm over the last 2,000 years.

 

and some still manage to drag their knuckles on the ground

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

24 minutes ago, stuie said:

It's called evolution.

The average height of the human male has gone up by 25cm over the last 2,000 years.

 

At the risk of being nerdy:

2000 years is just a blink on the scale of evolution.  I put it down to nutrition.  Walk around Footscray and you'l see that the Vietnamese kids born here are noticeably taller and bulkier than their parents.

I'm not sure that accounts for the increasing height of footballers, however, but it ain't evolution, even if Bobby Skilton was a chimp.

[stuie 7,374]

1 minute ago, Elusive Tunbridge said:

At the risk of being nerdy:

2000 years is just a blink on the scale of evolution.  I put it down to nutrition.  Walk around Footscray and you'l see that the Vietnamese kids born here are noticeably taller and bulkier than their parents.

I'm not sure that accounts for the increasing height of footballers, however, but it ain't evolution, even if Bobby Skilton was a chimp.

Nutrition, health, knowledge, these are all part of our evolution as a species.

The other fact is, we are much much fatter as a species also, so not sure you can put it down to just "nutrition".

 

[The Song Formerly Known As 6,479]

38 minutes ago, stuie said:

 

 

 

It's called evolution.

The average height of the human male has gone up by 25cm over the last 2,000 years.

 

 

how did i miss this boat? Im standing at 174cm.
#wishiwasalittlebittaller #wishiwasaballer

[Red and Bluebeard 2,044]

2 hours ago, stuie said:

 

 

 

It's called evolution.

The average height of the human male has gone up by 25cm over the last 2,000 years.

 

Local variations can happen much faster. The children of the first British settlers to this country were significantly taller and stronger than their parents, due to having a half-decent diet and avoiding the awful living conditions in Britain at the time. The footballer difference we are talking about has happened over one or two generations. 

[Red and Bluebeard 2,044]

4 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

I thought it was because most of them stay at home now until they are 35 and live off the parents, not surviving on cornflakes, Newcastle brown ale and Woodbines, or was that just me...typed as I adjust my broken spindly frame in my seat

Not having to live through the depression and a world war and its consequences will help as well, I think. 

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

9 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

And while we're at it, Darrel Baldock who was St Kilda's captain in its only premiership in 1966 played mainly at CHF and was 179cm 84kg but he was an absolute freak.

I commented recently about the fact that the current generation of players are generally taller and faster than those of the past, an evolution due to a number of factors relating probably to modern diet, fitness and even psychological factors. I wonder if there are any experts out there who can precisely explain the phenomenon?

Sam Weideman is 196cm 90kg (even if he's stopped growing, he'll probably get to at least 100kg after a couple of seasons in the game). The pundits compare him with Matty Pavlich but the Pav is 192cm 99kg - a fair difference there. Yet, I can remember Sam's grandfather playing at CHF and CHB for Collingwood. He was strong, a great mark and seemed like a giant on the field. His biography gives his stats as 187cm 96kg.

Look at Martin Pyke as a bit of a case study.  At the start of his career he was a giant key defender who was brought in to the Melbourne side to tame gorillas.  If you look at him playing in the early 90's he looked huge.  Fast forward to his time at Brisbane and he's a HBF who is towered over by the key forwards.  He slimmed down a lot over the years, but his height didn't change.  It was just that the people around him started getting taller. 

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

10 hours ago, stuie said:

 

 

 

It's called evolution.

The average height of the human male has gone up by 25cm over the last 2,000 years.

 

well we are discussing a time period of about 20 years so that's about 0.25 mm difference according to you

so no it's not evolution

[jnrmac 19,221]

Carlton's ruckman of the century, John Nicholls, was only 189cm or 6'2" .....

[Bitter but optimistic 21,412]

18 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Carlton's ruckman of the century, John Nicholls, was only 189cm or 6'2" .....

With thighs like tree trunks! It would have been like trying to move a boulder . What an influential player he was

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,505]

I suspect anyone under the age of 40 (or even 50) may not have heard of the term "Collingwood six footer".

Saying "Collingwood 183 centimetre-er" doesn't have the same ring to it, either.