Review

What would we see?

After a much-improved showing across the final two and a half quarters against the Western Bulldogs (off a very, very, very low base), driven by what looked like a clear shift in attitude along with a meaningful change in method, all eyes were on how Essendon would start this game. More specifically, whether that confidence would carry over, and whether that shift in process would hold up against an opponent that, so far, has looked to take the game on with almost reckless abandonment.

I outlined in last week’s review Essendon’s high-handball game since early 2025, backed up by numbers in both attack and defence, before the near 180° shift that came midway through the second quarter, returning to a previous version of their game. That version, in my view, provides a better balance between kick-mark and handball and, more importantly, is better suited to the current list and weekly lineup. It didn’t take long for that to again become the baseline.

Quarter One.

Slow, safe and shifting best described Essendon’s approach with the ball, with the tempo dictated through control.

Melbourne came into this game averaging just over 53 points from opposition turnovers, the sixth most after four games, with only Port Adelaide higher among teams that finished outside the top 10 last year (their 89 points against Essendon in Round 2 inflating that figure). Their ability to punish mistakes has been obvious, along with their ball movement, ranked third for turning defensive 50 rebounds into scores behind only the Bulldogs and Suns.

Caution with ball movement was understandable, not just to protect defensive structure against a side that looks to take the game on with leg speed across the ground, but also to help regain territory lost from centre clearance.

The Bombers midfield was dismantled in the centre square, easily beaten at pre-clearance contested possession, something that wouldn’t surprise given the form coming into this game, as Max Gawn was able to connect with Jack Steele on the inside and Caleb Windsor and Tom Sparrow on the outside, immediately placing the onus on Essendon’s defenders.

The Bombers’ key defenders have gradually built into the season in one-on-one contests after being forced to stand up under a barrage in the early rounds, and in the first 20 minutes they were able to play their part, winning the ball back both in the air and at ground level, allowing territory to be rebuilt through uncontested marks.

In transition, Essendon took 36 uncontested marks on their way forward for the quarter, well up on their season average of 15.8 and their highest total in any quarter across the past two years.

This denied Melbourne opportunities to score from turnover and limited their ability to slingshot from the back half, as Essendon’s defensive press held its shape behind the ball while also setting up scoring opportunities from intercept.

The Bombers turned just over 28% of intercepts into shots, with seven of their eight scores coming from this source, including four from behind centre, their best return from any quarter this year.

While they couldn’t maximise those chances, kicking four behinds, the method allowed the press to advance further up the ground, leading to three goals from forward half intercept.

Essendon started over 80% of its possession chains from intercept, taking 12 intercept marks to relaunch attacks, with Ben McKay taking advantage of the plus behind the ball and Kyle Langford providing support with his safe hands.

Through that methodical build came defensive integrity, with Melbourne’s preferred overlap handball game from slow play (marks or free kicks) also restricted.

Quarter Two.

After going by foot over 64% of the time in the first 20 minutes, their highest rate of any quarter this year, and doing so effectively despite limited reward, it was puzzling to see Essendon revert to a different version in the second term.

Kicking dropped to just over 54%, making the game more contested and chaotic, and suiting Melbourne too much.

Gone were the uncontested marks in transition from the first quarter, with just nine this time around (they found an unpressured outlet every three disposals in the first quarter, but every 7.72 in the second).

Melbourne punished Essendon off turnover when rebounding, with four of their five goals for the quarter coming this way, three of them from the Bombers’ back half, while Essendon failed to generate a score from behind centre (one goal did come from a kick-in).

It was a shaky period until the final seven minutes, where Essendon clawed back two goals to close the half.

Quarter Three.

A readjustment was needed at the main break and it quickly showed through the third quarter and beyond, not just in how Essendon moved the ball, but also in how they won it at stoppage compared to the previous 18 quarters.

Essendon came into this game with a -53 clearance differential, the third worst recorded after four rounds, and after the first 40 minutes little had changed, losing the count by four in this key area.

But this time, the experienced midfield group that has stood up in past seasons returned to something closer to their best, dominating first possession and converting it into effective clearances while also limiting the same impact from their opponents.

Peter Wright stood up against the modern-day great with three clearances, while Darcy Parish and Andrew McGrath added three and two respectively, helping Essendon open up multiple avenues of scoring.

From 12 clearances, eight more than the Demons, the Bombers generated three shots on goal, two directly from centre bounce. But it wasn’t just stoppage work, with the midfield also influencing ball movement around the ground through improved tempo control, recreating elements of their earlier first-quarter success.

After a disappointing kick-to-handball ratio in the second quarter, Essendon returned to an infinitely better rate of over 68% in this 20-minute period. They matched their first-quarter level of uncontested marking in transition (36 in the first quarter, 35 here), showing a clear return to ball control. While in the first term they were only able to score four behinds from intercepts from the back half, this time they converted them into three goals, with over 63% of inside 50s resulting in scores.

The experienced midfielders weren’t just links in chains forward, bridging the back and forward halves together (something that had been sorely missed and, frankly, disappointing to this stage), but also made their possessions count.

Parish, Zach Merrett, McGrath, Xavier Duursma and Wright combined for 14 score involvements, supported behind by Archie Roberts and a returning Jordan Ridley who contributed 19 possessions for the quarter, and ahead by youngster Archer Day-Wicks, who added three contested possessions up the ground and two score involvements from them.

The ground ball battle, particularly at loose ball, was firmly in Essendon’s favour, winning the quarter by 11 (24–13), driven largely by improved work rate and willingness to support with extra numbers.

Quarter Four.

Essendon hadn’t sung the song since May 23rd 2025, so a 22-point margin at three-quarter time still left fans, and no doubt players, with some nerves about how the final term would begin. It didn’t take long for that to be answered.

While Essendon had been able to turn first possession into clearances in the third quarter, this time their work came through pressure and tackling, either forcing turnovers or stripping the ball from Melbourne’s hands completely, particularly at centre bounce. Just like the previous 20 minutes, it translated into maximum damage, with four goals generated from the centre square or forward of centre, quickly putting the result beyond doubt.

By game’s end, Essendon had 12 shots at goal from stoppage, their highest return since round one of 2025, while the 52 points generated from that source was their best since round 21, 2024 against Fremantle at the MCG.

In chaos, Essendon’s ground ball work held up, winning the final quarter by six (22–16), finishing +27 overall and almost doubling Melbourne at loose ball (77–39).

The team sheet.

The shift in game style across the first, third and fourth quarters compared to the second has already been outlined, along with the lift from the midfield group, but several role changes and positional adjustments were just as influential in shaping how the game was played

Elijah Tsatas was finally called up and, while he didn’t influence stoppages in the way many would have expected — which is still his best asset right now — he did show, for the first time, improvement in an area that has likely held him back from selection. Not his kicking, but his inability to get involved in the easy game and possession chains outside.

This week, no player had more handball receives (an uncontested possession resulting directly from a teammate’s handball) than Tsatas’ 15, with over 72% of his possessions uncontested, a level he had not previously reached in his limited senior exposure.

Quote taken from my preseason preview on a change of role for Sam Durham.

“All Bomber supporters appreciate his appetite to attack the man pre-clearance, but his polish on the outside within 70 metres of goal brings greater value.

His contest-winning ability in this zone brings teammates into the game more often, while his aerial strength demands a defender with genuine versatility. In a more open game, his 15 to 20 possessions in this area are far more damaging than 25 to 30 further up the ground.”

His inclusion allowed Sam Durham to shift into the role I’ve been calling for, moving away from the coalface to a position ahead of the ball, where he is more likely to get one-on-one opportunities. With his ball-winning abilities, he can take advantage of those both in the air and at ground level, and that was evident this week, finishing with five post-clearance contested possessions, the equal most of all 46 players.

Durham’s ground-ball winning ability shown here in one-on-one matchups favourable to him.

Vision: Fox Footy / AFL

The added midfield rotation also meant Caldwell and Merrett spent more time forward, increasing the number of players capable of contesting in the front third, with Merrett winning three forward 50 ground balls, the most of any player.

That flexibility was further required with Andrew McGrath given the difficult task of curbing Kysaiah Pickett (the 19th highest-rated player in the competition over a rolling two-year period), a matchup driven largely by Essendon’s lack of leg speed.

With a better balance between attacking and defensive mindset midfielders at the source, Parish was able to get back to what he does best.

His 35 possessions are the most since round 8, 2024 (admittedly across just 13 games in between). As outlined earlier, he was able to accumulate “easy ball” with 24 of those uncontested, but his ball-winning and impact were just as influential.

He won six pre-clearance contested possessions, the most of any player, and converted his first possessions into effective clearances 80% of the time, with three scoring chains generated from those.

All of this was no doubt underpinned by growing confidence in his body to stand up, reflected in his 64 minutes of game time, his highest since round 8, 2024.

Nate Caddy’s return, following Tom Edwards’ the week prior, also proved timely, with Peter Wright required to take on a more permanent ruck role to address Essendon’s clearance issues.

The improved balance in the forward half and midfield showed clear benefits.

At stoppage, Wright led the way with five centre clearances, with his 21.7% win rate per attendance the best of any player to win two or more, and highly influential after the first quarter.

His direct opponent for the majority of the game, Gawn, had taken 12 intercept marks this year and 65 last year (both the highest of any ruck in those periods), but was unable to take one in this game, while Wright himself took four, the equal most on the ground.

Peter Wright getting the deserved recognition after a mighty effort against Max Gawn.

Vision: Fox Footy/AFL

The flexibility in the front half was further strengthened by Kyle Langford’s move up the ground, effectively acting as a seventh defender behind the ball. His positioning was critical, winning three ground balls in defensive 50 (the equal most of any Essendon player) and leading all players with eight loose ball gets behind centre.

Archie Roberts’ return to a rebounding defensive role has also been significant after beginning the season as a midfield rotation. Across the past two weeks, he has become the youngest player to record back-to-back games of 35+ disposals, 10+ marks and 650+ metres gained.

While racking up possessions isn’t too difficult with a game style like this week’s, it’s his ability to win his own ball that stands out, with seven of his 10 ground balls coming contested, the equal most along with Kako, alongside three hard-ball to go with his four intercept marks.

Jordan Ridley’s return helped structure the defence and added some desperately needed layers behind the ball. His positioning as the last line allowed both Zach Reid and Ben McKay to focus solely on beating their direct matchups, rather than worrying about positioning within defensive layers or the rest of the unit.

That structure was supported further up the ground, particularly by Day Wicks and Kako, who helped first clog the space and limit the handball overlap Melbourne has used under Steven King, and then tested their defenders’ decision-making and work rate when Essendon won the ball back, or risked being punished “out the back” in open space, with no better example than Kako’s goal in the second quarter.

https://video.wixstatic.com/https://video.wixstatic.com/video/8b4dc1_e92f622336d745dba14486d1090b22e1/file

Kako’s work rate and speed allow him to leave the contest up the ground and get forward to kick a goal from the goal square."

Vision: Fox Footy / AFL

Well deserved but caution ahead.

Five of the last six quarters now provide a more accurate reflection of what Essendon is capable of, but that comes with a clear warning. This style, in its current form, has previously only taken Essendon so far, and there is little to suggest that ceiling changes without further refinement.

The high-possession, kick-mark approach needs to evolve to challenge the best teams, who won’t allow tempo control to dictate the game so easily.

While this method suits the current list and can be effective against certain opponents, there must be flexibility within games to shift gears, particularly off turnover, where faster, more direct ball movement is still required. That doesn’t mean abandoning the method, but adjusting it.

Hawthorn provides a strong example of what that balance can look like, combining a controlled kicking game with run, carry and overlap handball. Their use of the ball by foot creates space and changes the direction of attack, which in turn opens up more effective handball chains to take the game forward and rewards runners with room to move.

It’s only round five in what is both a long season and a longer road for Essendon, but each game must be treated as a step toward something sustainable, regardless of opponent, venue or result.

Go Bombers!