YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
ASSOCIATED TAGS
center  central  decisions  expected  football  goalkeepers  hardest  midfield  midfielder  midfielders  modern  passes  physical  position  pressure  
LATEST POSTS

What's the Hardest Position in Football?

Defining “Hard”: What Are We Measuring?

Before we pick sides, we need to define what “hard” actually means on a football pitch. Is it physical strain? The average Premier League midfielder covers between 10 and 12 kilometers per match—more than any other position. Some, like Declan Rice or Rodri, regularly hit 13.5 km with bursts of high-intensity running every 90 seconds. That's grueling. But physical output alone doesn’t tell the whole story. A full-back today might run 11 km, but they’re also expected to defend one-on-one, overlap in attack, and deliver crosses under pressure. And that’s on top of tracking mobile wingers who change direction like they’re dodging traffic. The issue remains: stamina isn’t everything. A center-forward might only run 8.5 km, but their effectiveness lives in split-second decisions, spatial awareness, and psychological warfare with defenders.

Then there’s mental load. A quarterback in American football calls plays, but a central midfielder often improvises under pressure—processing defenders’ positioning, teammate movement, and transition risks in real time. One wrong pass and the counterattack begins. A split-second lapse and the scoreline changes. Because of this, the cognitive demand might be highest in midfield. Yet goalkeepers face something else: long stretches of inactivity followed by life-altering moments. They stand still for 85 minutes—then one jump, one reflex, decides whether they’re hailed as heroes or roasted on social media by morning.

Physical Output: Who Covers the Most Ground?

Data from Opta and GPS tracking over the past five seasons shows that central midfielders lead in total distance covered across Europe’s top leagues. Rodri, for example, averaged 12.4 km per game in Manchester City’s 2022–23 treble-winning season. And that’s not mindless running—he completed 92% of his passes while doing it. Compare that to Erling Haaland, who averages around 7.8 km per match. But reducing Haaland’s role to distance missed the point. His sprints are almost all high-intensity: 15–20 meters at top speed, often against elite center-backs. He’s like a sprinter in a marathon who only runs the final lap—but at full tilt. So while midfielders log more meters, strikers burn energy in explosive bursts that are harder to recover from.

Mental Load: Which Role Demands the Most Cognitive Skill?

Ask any neuroscientist studying elite athletes, and they’ll tell you: decision-making under fatigue is where the brain gets pushed to its limit. Midfielders make up to 150 decisions per match—when to press, when to drop, whether to switch play, how to angle a pass. And they do it while oxygen-starved and legs burning. But goalkeepers? Their decisions are fewer—maybe 20–30 per game—but each carries nuclear consequences. One misjudged high ball can end a title race. (Looking at you, Tim Howard in 2014.) That said, center-backs operate in a gray zone: they must anticipate attacks, organize the backline, and often initiate the build-up. Virgil van Dijk doesn’t just block shots—he reads patterns like a grandmaster.

The Goalkeeper Paradox: Low Activity, High Stakes

Let’s talk about the loneliest job on the pitch. A goalkeeper might touch the ball five times in 90 minutes—then, in one second, become the most scrutinized man on the planet. Penalty saves? They happen in about 20% of spot kicks across the Premier League. But the keeper’s brain processes the shooter’s body tilt, hip angle, and run-up in under 0.4 seconds. That changes everything. And because mistakes are so public—highlight reels love spilled saves and own goals—goalkeepers carry a psychological burden no other player faces. They’re expected to be flawless, yet human.

But here’s what people don’t think about enough: modern goalkeeping isn’t just shot-stopping. It’s about playing out from the back. Keepers like Alisson Becker and Manuel Neuer are now expected to be first midfielders, making precise 30-yard passes under pressure. In Bayern Munich’s system, Neuer often had more passes than their deepest midfielder. That’s a seismic shift. And that’s exactly where the role has evolved beyond reflexes into something more like tactical quarterbacking.

Central Midfield: The Unseen Engine Room

You want a position that demands everything? Look no further than central midfield. The box-to-box player—think N’Golo Kanté in his prime—averaged 14.2 km in the 2016 title run with Leicester. Fourteen point two. That’s not a typo. And he did it while making 4.8 tackles per game and completing 89% of his passes. This isn’t just fitness. It’s multitasking at the edge of human capability. You’re defending, you’re supporting transitions, you’re shielding the backline, and you’re expected to contribute offensively. And if you lose possession? The counterattack starts at your feet.

But because football romanticizes goalscorers, midfielders rarely get the credit. A striker scores and becomes a legend. A midfielder intercepts a pass that prevents a goal? That doesn’t make the highlight reel. Experts disagree on how to value these invisible contributions. Expected goals (xG) models struggle to quantify defensive midfield work. Data is still lacking. But anyone who’s played the game knows: a great midfielder makes the eleven function like a well-oiled machine.

The Modern No. 6: Defensive Shield or Playmaker?

The defensive midfielder today isn’t just a destroyer. The role has bifurcated. On one side, you have enforcers like Sergio Busquets—low tackle numbers, but exceptional positioning. He averaged only 1.3 tackles per game in 2010, yet Spain dominated possession. On the other, you have warriors like Kanté or Fabinho, who combine physicality with intelligence. The best modern hybrids? Rodri. He made 2.1 interceptions per game in 2023, completed 93% of his passes, and stayed injury-free across 57 appearances. That’s rare. Because staying fit at that intensity? Nearly impossible.

Full-Backs in the Age of Overloads: Forgotten Workhorses?

Full-backs today do more than defend. They’re expected to be wingers when attacking and center-backs when defending. In systems like Pep Guardiola’s or Jurgen Klopp’s, full-backs like Trent Alexander-Arnold or Joško Gvardiol log over 11 km per match while delivering 25–30 crosses a game. And that’s after tracking back to stop blistering counterattacks. The modern full-back is a hybrid athlete—part defender, part creator, part fitness freak. But their versatility is often overlooked. Because they don’t score 20 goals a season, they don’t win Ballon d’Ors. Suffice to say, if you took Trent out of Liverpool’s lineup, their entire attacking structure would collapse.

Center-Backs: The Calm in the Storm

Let’s be honest: center-backs don’t get enough credit. They’re required to win aerial duels (top defenders win 65–75% of their headers), tackle elite forwards, and maintain composure when pressed. And they do it with little margin for error. One misplaced step and a striker is through on goal. Van Dijk, for instance, reduced Liverpool’s expected goals against by 0.8 per game when he played in 2018–19. That’s massive. Yet, he’s judged more harshly than a midfielder who loses possession three times in midfield. Why? Because defenders’ mistakes are catastrophic. A missed tackle often leads directly to a goal. But a midfielder losing the ball? It’s recoverable. That’s not fair—but it’s reality.

Striker vs. Midfielder: Who Bears More Pressure?

On paper, strikers have it easy. Score goals, get praised. Miss, get criticized. But the psychological toll is underrated. A forward can go weeks without scoring despite creating chances. Karim Benzema had a 7-game drought in early 2022—yet kept performing. That takes mental strength. But compare that to a midfielder who must perform every single minute. You can’t hide in midfield. If you’re off, the whole team feels it. And because midfielders touch the ball 80–120 times per game, their consistency is under constant microscope. Which explains why the best—like Kevin De Bruyne—are so rare.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is goalkeeper the hardest position in football?

It depends. If you define “hard” by consequence of error, then yes. A single mistake can lose a game. But goalkeepers have fewer decisions per match and less continuous physical demand. Their challenge is psychological: enduring long waits for moments that define careers. So while the pressure is extreme, the workload is uneven. That said, modern keepers must also be skilled with their feet—adding a new layer of complexity.

Why is central midfield so demanding?

Because it’s a hybrid role. You defend, you attack, you control tempo, and you cover for others. Players like Xavi or Luka Modrić made it look effortless—but their decision speed, fitness, and technical precision were off the charts. The average top-level midfielder makes 60–80 passes per game with 85–90% accuracy while covering over 11 km. Try doing that after someone just kicked your shin.

Do full-backs have it harder now than in the past?

Absolutely. In the 1990s, full-backs stayed wide and defended. Today? They’re expected to be playmakers. Trent Alexander-Arnold had more assists than any Premier League player in 2019–20 except Kevin De Bruyne. But he also faced Raheem Sterling, Mohamed Salah, and opposition wingers daily. The physical and tactical load has skyrocketed. And yet, they’re rarely mentioned in MVP conversations.

The Bottom Line

I am convinced that central midfield is the hardest position—not because of glamour, but because of totality. It asks for more sustained effort, more decisions, and more adaptability than any other role. You can’t hide there. You can’t coast. And if you fail, the whole structure cracks. That’s not to diminish goalkeepers or center-backs—their stakes are higher in individual moments. But over 90 minutes, no one does more than the central midfielder. Take away a striker? You adapt. Take away a keeper? You lose. But take away your midfield engine? You stop moving. Honestly, it is unclear if we’ll ever have a definitive answer. Football evolves. Roles mutate. But for now, if you want the hardest job on the pitch, look at the player running 13 km, making 90% of his passes, winning tackles, and starting attacks—all without scoring a single goal. That’s the real grind.

💡 Key Takeaways

  • Is 6 a good height? - The average height of a human male is 5'10". So 6 foot is only slightly more than average by 2 inches. So 6 foot is above average, not tall.
  • Is 172 cm good for a man? - Yes it is. Average height of male in India is 166.3 cm (i.e. 5 ft 5.5 inches) while for female it is 152.6 cm (i.e. 5 ft) approximately.
  • How much height should a boy have to look attractive? - Well, fellas, worry no more, because a new study has revealed 5ft 8in is the ideal height for a man.
  • Is 165 cm normal for a 15 year old? - The predicted height for a female, based on your parents heights, is 155 to 165cm. Most 15 year old girls are nearly done growing. I was too.
  • Is 160 cm too tall for a 12 year old? - How Tall Should a 12 Year Old Be? We can only speak to national average heights here in North America, whereby, a 12 year old girl would be between 13

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

1. Is 6 a good height?

The average height of a human male is 5'10". So 6 foot is only slightly more than average by 2 inches. So 6 foot is above average, not tall.

2. Is 172 cm good for a man?

Yes it is. Average height of male in India is 166.3 cm (i.e. 5 ft 5.5 inches) while for female it is 152.6 cm (i.e. 5 ft) approximately. So, as far as your question is concerned, aforesaid height is above average in both cases.

3. How much height should a boy have to look attractive?

Well, fellas, worry no more, because a new study has revealed 5ft 8in is the ideal height for a man. Dating app Badoo has revealed the most right-swiped heights based on their users aged 18 to 30.

4. Is 165 cm normal for a 15 year old?

The predicted height for a female, based on your parents heights, is 155 to 165cm. Most 15 year old girls are nearly done growing. I was too. It's a very normal height for a girl.

5. Is 160 cm too tall for a 12 year old?

How Tall Should a 12 Year Old Be? We can only speak to national average heights here in North America, whereby, a 12 year old girl would be between 137 cm to 162 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/3 feet). A 12 year old boy should be between 137 cm to 160 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/4 feet).

6. How tall is a average 15 year old?

Average Height to Weight for Teenage Boys - 13 to 20 Years
Male Teens: 13 - 20 Years)
14 Years112.0 lb. (50.8 kg)64.5" (163.8 cm)
15 Years123.5 lb. (56.02 kg)67.0" (170.1 cm)
16 Years134.0 lb. (60.78 kg)68.3" (173.4 cm)
17 Years142.0 lb. (64.41 kg)69.0" (175.2 cm)

7. How to get taller at 18?

Staying physically active is even more essential from childhood to grow and improve overall health. But taking it up even in adulthood can help you add a few inches to your height. Strength-building exercises, yoga, jumping rope, and biking all can help to increase your flexibility and grow a few inches taller.

8. Is 5.7 a good height for a 15 year old boy?

Generally speaking, the average height for 15 year olds girls is 62.9 inches (or 159.7 cm). On the other hand, teen boys at the age of 15 have a much higher average height, which is 67.0 inches (or 170.1 cm).

9. Can you grow between 16 and 18?

Most girls stop growing taller by age 14 or 15. However, after their early teenage growth spurt, boys continue gaining height at a gradual pace until around 18. Note that some kids will stop growing earlier and others may keep growing a year or two more.

10. Can you grow 1 cm after 17?

Even with a healthy diet, most people's height won't increase after age 18 to 20. The graph below shows the rate of growth from birth to age 20. As you can see, the growth lines fall to zero between ages 18 and 20 ( 7 , 8 ). The reason why your height stops increasing is your bones, specifically your growth plates.