AFL Player 4: Kyle Langford

[Beerfish]

Contract Status: Restricted Free Agent 2026
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 8, boncer34

 

[Shane Heard]

He’ll do well forward, but we’ll miss his marking ability on the wing. May be harder to transition out of defence to the forward line without him

Are you talking about last years form or this years ?

 

[Kyptastic]

Are you talking about last years form or this years ?

Both. He’s averaging more marks this year than last. He’s had a few more high profile errors this year, but he’s still been an important link in scoring chains from the back half. With Cox out as well, you’d go from having good marks on both wings to none.

 

[Stopher]

It's not a proper post-match review unless this is bumped.

(He was fine btw)

 

[Shane Heard]

Both. He’s averaging more marks this year than last. He’s had a few more high profile errors this year, but he’s still been an important link in scoring chains from the back half. With Cox out as well, you’d go from having good marks on both wings to none.

I don’t see that much linkage

Cox has had more link up disposals in 8 games than Kyle has had in 4 years

He needs to do more..go the next level etc

maybe he will, maybe he won’t ..who knows

 

[eth-dog]

I don’t see that much linkage

Cox has had more link up disposals in 8 games than Kyle has had in 4 years

He needs to do more..go the next level etc

maybe he will, maybe he won’t ..who knows

Tone down the hyperbole.

Langford last year finished 4th in the BnF largely due to his link up work between the arcs. He's been average this year so far but c'mon. You're not being even remotely accurate with that.

 

[Shane Heard]

Tone down the hyperbole.

Langford last year finished 4th in the BnF largely due to his link up work between the arcs. He's been average this year so far but c'mon. You're not being even remotely accurate with that.

mmmm...4th in best and fairest shouldn’t even be mentioned

it’s not hyper bole ..it’s an opinion

that’s what we all come here for ..to give and share opinions on our players

so calm your farm


you’re only as good as your next game

he simply needs to do more with that size and height he has.

 

[eth-dog]

mmmm...4th in best and fairest shouldn’t even be mentioned

it’s not hyper bole ..it’s an opinion

that’s what we all come here for ..to give and share opinions on our players

so calm your farm


you’re only as good as your next game

he simply needs to do more with that size and height he has.

Because it doesn't suit your argument.

"Cox has had more link up possession in 8 games than Langford has had in 4 years". That's not an opinion. That's the literal definition of hyperbole. Cox is averaging 13 disposals a game this season, promising as it may be.

He's having a down year, yes. But tone down the hyperbole.

 

[quotemokc]

When he is under pressure he is cool and collected and makes great decisions.

When he was ample time and space he takes too long and stuffs it up.

 

[JuniorWatch]

He didn't have a particularly good game against Freo but I think the 'Stringer' role suits his well. Plays into his 1 on 1 fwd, goalkicking and inside strengths. Langford on the wing having to hit a pass or it results in a rebound score still terrifies me. We're not set up for regular Klangers.

 

[eth-dog]

He didn't have a particularly good game against Freo but I think the 'Stringer' role suits his well. Plays into his 1 on 1 fwd, goalkicking and inside strengths. Langford on the wing having to hit a pass or it results in a rebound score still terrifies me. We're not set up for regular Klangers.

He's far more suited to a wing than inside. And he's one of our best kicks of the ball?

Strange comment, really

 

[boncer34]

He didn't have a particularly good game against Freo but I think the 'Stringer' role suits his well. Plays into his 1 on 1 fwd, goalkicking and inside strengths. Langford on the wing having to hit a pass or it results in a rebound score still terrifies me. We're not set up for regular Klangers.

He's a great field kick.

 

[JayJ20]

He's far more suited to a wing than inside. And he's one of our best kicks of the ball?

Strange comment, really

I think people collectively wiped last year from memory, which is fair enough.

 

[The Donners]

Because it doesn't suit your argument.

"Cox has had more link up possession in 8 games than Langford has had in 4 years". That's not an opinion. That's the literal definition of hyperbole. Cox is averaging 13 disposals a game this season, promising as it may be.

He's having a down year, yes. But tone down the hyperbole.

He’s 24, coming up to 100 games and there’s still question marks about whether he’ll make it.

4th B n F in a side that was bottom 1/3 of the table and only half the side played double digits, rest your hat on that if you like.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

He’s 24, coming up to 100 games and there’s still question marks about whether he’ll make it.

Only in the minds of fans

 

[Kyptastic]

We struggled to move the ball effectively. Look how much better we looked with Cox on the ground - those tall marking wings are important to our style of play. Hopefully Waterman comes in to play the Stringer role and Langford can move back up to the wing.

 

[yodellinhank]

Only in the minds of fans

His fans still have question marks. His critics...

 

[Hak94]

We struggled to move the ball effectively. Look how much better we looked with Cox on the ground - those tall marking wings are important to our style of play. Hopefully Waterman comes in to play the Stringer role and Langford can move back up to the wing.

I reckon Ambrose comes in instead.

 

[The Donners]

Only in the minds of fans

5000 plus days without a finals win tells me fans may know more than those in paid positions.

 

[Howard Moon]

At his best he plays the wing and pushes fwd as an option, his height and aerial ability gives an outlet up the wing...it seems cox has adapted to said role better already

 

[Megabattimus]

I reckon Ambrose comes in instead.

We'd be crazy not to bring Waterman in. We're gonna need a bigger body in the midfield against North and Waterman is 100% that.

 

[Milanista28]

Started on Fyfe at most CB and stopped him getting a single clearance, doing a bit more without the ball that can be easily missed on first view.

 

[boncer34]

Started on Fyfe at most CB and stopped him getting a single clearance, doing a bit more without the ball that can be easily missed on first view.

Dunno if you can hang your hat on CC in isolation. Fyfe still had more clearances than any Bomber not named Parish.

 

[Milanista28]

Dunno if you can hang your hat on CC in isolation. Fyfe still had more clearances than any Bomber not named Parish.

But none from the center, he only took him in the center, Langford pushed forward like Jake after the bounce. Fyfe had 4 center clearances last week vs Brisbane. Playing Kyle on him in the middle was a good coaching move from Truck.

Another point is looking at the stats sheet for Kyle, it won't show he stopped Fyfe in the middle, the off the ball stuff is just as important.

 

[boncer34]

But none from the center, he only took him in the center, Langford pushed forward like Jake after the bounce. Fyfe had 4 center clearances last week vs Brisbane. Playing Kyle on him in the middle was a good coaching move from Truck.

He was still around the ball with Fyfe a few times and watched Fyfe get a clearance. It's nice to say he stopped Fyfe in CC but as I said not sure looking at it in isolation is really that pragmatic.

 

[Milanista28]

He was still around the ball with Fyfe a few times and watched Fyfe get a clearance. It's nice to say he stopped Fyfe in CC but as I said not sure looking at it in isolation is really that pragmatic.

It's not the whole game by any means but the fact he was able to stop him at the CB has to be viewed as a positive, positive for Langford and a positive for the coaches, it's worth mentioning at the very least.