Well researchers now have another source.
Another chance.
After Essendon's loss to Port Adelaide in round four, I highlighted the stark contrast between the first quarter and the subsequent three quarters in terms of game style and performance, lamenting Essendon's inability to alter the game's trajectory after that initial period.
However, I'm pleased to report that this time, Essendon recognised the issues early on from the coaches' box, and the players had the capacity to steer the game in a manner more aligned with Essendon's preferences.
Observe and report.
In modern football, it's unrealistic to expect 80 minutes of play on your terms.
Momentum shifts during games, and a team's ability to adapt to these situations is crucial. Understanding what's happening and then regaining control of momentum is key to reaping deserved rewards. First halves of games often serve as prime examples.
The first quarter provides an opportunity to observe and assess opponents, gauging how your team's approach compares to theirs. Quarter time offers a chance to evaluate what's effective and what's not, but the real challenge lies in executing your strategy effectively.
This season, Essendon has faced this challenge, gaining valuable experience from it. As they become more seasoned, they grow in confidence, knowing how the game should unfold and how to achieve it.
The trailer.
In the first quarter, GWS posed numerous challenging questions to Essendon:
"Are you capable of matching us in ground ball contests?"
"Can you disrupt our ball movement?"
"Are you able to defend effectively without the ball?"
"Can your defence prevent our marks inside 50?"
"Do you have the ability to prevent us from scoring?"
"Is your work rate able to keep pace with us?"
These questions were all anticipated to arise early on, and initially, Essendon's responses fell short.
Essendon's difficulties began at contests between the arcs, particularly in winning ground level possessions.
Despite applying high pressure inside the contest through tackles, they trailed by five in contested possessions, allowing the Giants to capitalise on initial possessions and move the ball forward freely.
Out of the Giants' 26 possession chains for the quarter, 11 entered their forward 50, resulting in six marks inside 50 and eight shots at goal.
Only nine of the 26 chains began in Essendon's forward 50.
Starting the game -10 down in possessions and losing the tackle count was not the start Essendon hoped for, especially considering GWS's season average of +30 possessions per game a barometer to their success.
Despite the Bombers' advantage in centre clearance differential of +2.4 after eight games, and +5.7 when compared directly to the Giants, they were completely deserted in this aspect. All five centre bounces for the quarter went against them.
Furthermore, being ranked in the bottom four for opposition shots per inside 50 at over 50% to start the season had surged to over 70% in just 20 minutes of play.
Essendon fans had seen this movie before, and quite recently, with poor reviews. However, this time, the same production company had a different script in mind, and the following acts were much better to witness.
The sequel.
The last 60 minutes of play will give us supporters, and most importantly the players, the confidence that the current path they are following is demonstrating what success can look like when the planning is executed. Most importantly, it shows that this list is capable of executing what is required.
In the first quarter, once GWS were able to escape Essendon’s perimeter, the Bombers had their work cut out in getting the ball back.
The Giants' 95 possessions in that time could only be intercepted every 7.91 possessions—a recipe that was never going to succeed.
This changed immediately in the second quarter.
The perimeter around the immediate area tightened, making it difficult to get through, and the outer layer perimeters became impenetrable.
While quarter three showed on the scoreboard with five goals three to two goals one, the rewards came from what began in the second quarter.
This time, when GWS got their hands on the ball, Essendon intercepted it more than double the rate when compared to the first quarter.
Last year, the Bombers' season average for intercepting every 5.44 opposition possessions only ranked ahead of two teams. This season, it has improved to every 5.15, ranked 9th. However, in the second quarter, it was a phenomenal 3.65 possessions—a rate that the Bombers hadn’t reached under Scott’s regime.
Things were changing, even though the scoreboard may not have reflected the rewards yet.
The Giants had 650 metres gained by quarter one from 26 possession chains, but in quarter two, that turned into only 299 metres gained from 31 chains. Suddenly, their wheels were spinning.
In quarter three, the Bombers continued the work at the source, and the rewards for this work now started to show on the scoreboard. By the end of the third quarter, the game was completely on Essendon’s terms, and GWS was struggling to change its course.
Defeating the enemy.
Over the last 23 games, GWS has been the top-ranked team for ball movement. This includes turning a rebound from defensive 50 into an inside 50 entry, metres gained per possession chain, metres gained via handball, and scores from the defensive 50.
Suddenly, the best ball movement team had stalled.
In 2024, GWS is the number one ranked team in scores starting from their defensive half, averaging 43 points from intercepting or rebounding with their defenders of Whitfield, Perryman, and Buckley ranked in the top five for score launches in their line-up.
Meanwhile, Essendon was conceding over 35 points from that area, ranked below AFL average.
This was always going to be a battle that played a role in the result of the four points on offer. Well, I’ll happily report that it did play a major role in the result, as Essendon only allowed eight entries to start in its forward 50 and end in the defensive 50, all for a total of 14 points, a difference of over 67% from what GWS has been averaging.
In the first quarter, the Giants took 16 uncontested marks outside of their forward 50 to aid their ball movement, while in the last three quarters, they were only able to take another 37 as Essendon put the clamps on the "easy ball" and the success from their possession chains.
For the final three quarters, GWS could only turn 87 possession chains into four marks inside 50. Once it entered the Giants' forward 50, it was no longer dangerous.
In the first quarter, GWS was able to go inside 50 on 11 occasions and have eight shots at goal, three of those were within 20 metres of goal. For the last three quarters, they only entered that area another 29 times, for 12 shots with only five shots coming from within 40 metres of goal, and only two shots coming from within 30 metres.
The Villian
Quote taken from my preview of the game
“Whitfield stands out for his role in ball movement, with only Nick Daicos and Houston ranking above him for first possessions of a chain that lead to a score from all backmen up until last weekend.
Essendon's small to medium forwards need to be alert to curtail Whitfield's influence.
These players must quickly shift from attack to defence, track his positioning, and capitalise on scoring opportunities when they arise.
This could involve assigning a lockdown forward, perhaps Guelfi, who has had similar roles this season, providing it doesn’t disrupt team balance.”
Well it certainly didn’t disrupt the balance one bit.
This year, Guelfi has discovered his purpose: to line up against the opposition's number one asset in the back half, limit their impact, and hold them accountable for their decisions. It's a sacrificial role in some respects, something that Essendon has needed from more players in the past—sacrificing individual impact and accolades for the greater good to enhance the team's performance. Keep this up, and the rewards won't just be for the team; they'll come your way as well.
This week, he's tasked with the challenge of containing GWS' most influential player with the ball in hand, while also testing his defensive capabilities.
This year, Whitfield has been averaging 30 disposals, with over 66% of them earned uncontested. Out of his 18 kicks, over five are rebounds from the defensive 50, and he gains an average of over 472 metres in territory per game. Here, Guelfi demonstrates the impact of limiting Whitfield's influence on both GWS and Essendon's fortunes.
Guelfi keeps Whitfield to 18 disposals, his lowest since round one of 2023, with only 44% of his disposals earned uncontested and his 273 metres gained, the lowest since that round one game last year.
Whitfield can only aid his fellow defenders with two rebounds this week, and instead of taking over seven uncontested marks in the back half, he is only allowed to contribute one. This time, he has his own worries to be concerned about.
Typically, Whitfield faces very little questions about his tackling, with only 1.25 tackles per game this year. However, this week he needs to contribute a lot more with six tackles, the equal second most in his 218-game career. Guelfi not only halts Whitfield's creativity but also punishes him for his lack of respect.
While Guelfi's 10 disposals may not be enormous numbers, the efficiency is.
Five of those disposals are inside 50, with seven won at contests. His three goals from two marks inside 50 reap the rewards of his defensive work and test the fortitude of his opponent to match him up when they don’t have the ball.
His AFL Player Rating Points of 15.5 are the fourth highest of his 99-game career.
Fighting back.
In this review, I've focused on halting "the tsunami" that accompanies the way GWS attacks games. However, Essendon had its own phenomenon that would challenge the foundations of the structures GWS had built. This week, the Bombers gave the Giants a taste of their own medicine.
After eight games, GWS was only conceding nine marks inside its defensive third, ranking third best among all teams, with only a 19% mark rate per inside 50. However, Essendon was able to hit a target 15 times inside there, a rise of over 7% in success rate. This would now place GWS's ranking as the second worst, surpassing the Bombers' average of 11 for the season.
The decisive victory of +17 inside 50s and 57 for the game exceeded both GWS's opposition averages for 2024. This time, defending ball movement was the Giants' issue.
Eight inside 50s began from defensive half chains, and all eight hit the scoreboard for a return of 33 points, demonstrating much better efficiency for Essendon compared to previous weeks.
The ending
As the season progresses, pride grows in us supporters with every game, and after the effort in the last matchup against GWS, earning back respect firsthand in front of the players eyes was essential. Proudly, Essendon was able to accomplish just that.
The credits
Comments