Review

Flick the switch.

After another August finish to Essendon’s season, and a long and arduous summer build not just for the players but also the fans, 2026 begins with no bigger anticipation for an opening game in recent memory, all because of the Merrett/Mitchell saga of the offseason.

Most would’ve predicted there’d be no need for fireworks to light up the MCG, with both sides expected to bring more than enough energy to ignite the contest themselves. Unfortunately, after a few early bright sparks, Essendon quickly ran out, leaving barely a snap, crackle or pop as the night wore on.

No doubt everyone associated went to bed disappointed after planning for so long.

In this review, I’ll cover what looked to form the basis of the show, whether it worked (we saw it didn’t), whether it was ever going to work (I’m extremely doubtful), and what can be taken from it to use in next week’s performance.

That Thursday feeling again.

I’ve changed the base format I’ll be using this year, concentrating more on reviews rather than previews. That said, it’s still worth outlining what I believe would have given Essendon its best opportunity for success in this matchup, based purely on exploiting a vulnerability that exists in Hawthorn’s lineup.

Zach Merrett’s pursuit last year was obvious for all to see, with Hawthorn’s midfield depth tested through the finals and set to be challenged again following the loss of James Worpel to free agency. That weakness was quickly exposed in their opening round clash against GWS.

Winning initial territory when the game restarts, whether in the centre square or around the ground, establishes field position and forces the opposition to prioritise winning the ball back before they can even think about scoring. Ideally that means their scoring chains begin much further from goal, placing greater emphasis on efficiency with ball in hand while allowing you to set your defensive structure closer to goal in narrower parts of the ground. From there, another major scoring source becomes available in the modern game — front-half intercepts.

The best way to start all of that is simple: get your hands on the ball first.

Last week only two Hawthorn players won first possession at pre-clearance six or more times — Mabior Chol and Connor Nash — with both converting those possessions into effective clearances 100% and 83% of the time respectively.

Outside those two, Connor Macdonald won it four times but converted only once, Dylan Moore once from three, while Jai Newcombe managed just three, turning each into an exit.

On the other side, the Giants had a range of options.

Clayton Oliver won nine, Kieren Briggs seven, while Finn Callaghan, Stephen Coniglio and Toby Greene had six each, with only Greene converting less than 66% of those into clearances.

That forced Hawthorn to rely heavily on winning contests post-clearance behind the ball and rebounding from there.

By the end of the game GWS had generated 12 shots at goal from stoppage, six of them from the centre square. Just as importantly, Hawthorn created only five shots from behind centre and scored from just under 7% of possession chains that started in their defensive 50 — a rate that would have ranked 18th last season.

A missing ingredient?…

Most readers know my thoughts on Elijah Tsatas, particularly the improvements he still needs to make to force consistent selection on Thursdays. One positive of his game in the past, and across the preseason, has been his ability to win the ball underneath the rucks and feed teammates by hand, taking the ball from inside to out. In this matchup, he would have come straight into the side for me, both for that ability and for the flow-on effects across multiple role changes.

Zach Merrett could then have shifted further outside to punish as a first receiver or spent more time in the front third.

Sam Durham and Darcy Parish both showed early how damaging they can be when front facing in space, rather than constantly battling for “dirty ball”.

All three could also have spent more time rotating forward in what was an unbalanced mix of talls and smalls, and experienced players alongside inexperienced ones.

Now don’t get me wrong, Essendon isn’t at the same level as GWS when it comes to defending ball movement, but I truly believe all of the above would have helped.

By half time, all 12 of Hawthorn’s centre clearances had gone inside 50, with six scoring shots coming from winning pre-clearance contest.

It wasn’t just in the centre square either, with another six scoring shots coming from stoppages around the ground as they went into the main break up by seven in total clearances.

By the end of the game Hawthorn had won pre-clearance contests by 12, Essendon’s biggest differential since Round 15 last year against Fremantle and their fifth largest in the last 24 games.

As a score source, the Hawks were far too efficient, converting 39.02% of clearances into scores, a rate almost 10% better than the highest ranked team from 2025, the Western Bulldogs.

The inevitable.

Not only did Essendon’s defenders have to absorb a huge volume of entries, they were also heavily relied upon to win the ball back and, if possible, launch rebound chains.

In the first 40 minutes of the game, 23 of Essendon’s 53 possession chains began in the defensive third.

Before the weight of entries eventually became too much, there was at least one encouraging sign.

Four of Essendon’s nine scoring shots to half time started behind centre, suggesting the summer focus on transitioning the ball from defence had produced some early promise.

Win the ball at the source and a score is a bonus, with the back-up option coming from front half intercepts if you can defend the ground.

From only 32 first half intercepts, Hawthorn was able to force 15 turnovers on Essendon when needing to rebound from the back half, with seven shots on goal the payoff, five of those coming in the second quarter alone.

Not again.

This will sound familiar to readers.

Show any weakness in this competition and you can bet opposition analysts have taken note. Once again, uncontested marks will be written in BOLD at the top of the report.

By Round 2 last year the Bombers had already allowed the Hawks and Crows 93 and 115 uncontested marks respectively. The blueprint was quickly followed by the Pies, Dogs, Lions and others throughout the season.

Allowing 150 this week raises immediate concerns that the problem hasn’t gone away.

When the game is in contest and the groundball is there to be won, Essendon can fight inside and scrap with the best of them, but once it’s outside, their ability to switch from hunting to relocating is abysmal.

Too easily, a quick change of direction opens up space for the opposition, and there aren’t many better at exploiting that than Hawthorn with their kicking skills

Once unpressured, Hawthorn was able to test Essendon’s mid-zone defence, with the lack of speed on the list made worse by poor work rate in the widest parts of the ground.

In the first quarter alone they took 35 uncontested marks in the back two-thirds to help transition the ball forward. With Essendon averaging an intercept every 9.9 Hawthorn possessions — the worst quarter rate I’ve recorded from any team in the last three seasons — the warning signs were already there.

And the following quarters confirmed it.

There was motivation to improve, as from just 10 intercepts in the opening 20 minutes, the Bombers were able to transfer 30% of them onto the scoreboard, almost 5% better than Geelong, who were number one last year.

But poor field position and a drop in effort as the game progressed meant the Bombers gave themselves no chance, converting just 9.09% of intercepts across the remaining three quarters.

If you want to improve scoring from turnovers, the equation is simple: force more of them.

A taste test.

After gathering as much information as possible across training sessions, match simulations, and practice matches, this was the first proper look at Essendon’s method with the ball. Measuring it for the first time against a preliminary finalist from last year isn’t ideal, but there were glimpses of promise, particularly in attitude and intent.

It was clear how quickly the ball was moved by foot, and the forward handball to generate run and overlap was just as evident.

Even though the scoreboard wasn’t in their favour as the game went on, the mindset to attack remained, with 135 handball receives helping move the ball from defensive 50 to forward 50 at just under 30% — a rate only exceeded twice last year, five times in 2024, and four times in 2023.

But there is clearly still more refinement required, with the balance between hand and foot at key moments often making the difference.

The wide expanses of the MCG — and most grounds, really — provide ample room for players to move into space and become uncontested marking options when starting with the ball far from goal.

More selfless running across different areas will force opposition matchups to stay alert, creating links in chains that drag defenders out and open up easier, less predictable changes of direction.

Too often, the obvious long target down the line remains the default, rather than the change up.

Unpressured possessions through marks in the back two-thirds allow teams to shift the tempo when the game flow needs to move from chaos back to control.

I’ve written frequently over recent seasons about the need for a “bridge” to better connect the two halves of the ground while protecting against turnovers, with lifts in movement between the arcs — primarily from midfielders, including wingers, half-backs, and half-forwards — enabling deeper entries from more dangerous launch zones.

Sunlight through the clouds.

On a tough night for most individuals, no one stood taller down back under siege than Ben McKay, intercepting 10 times, with six of those in the air helping him reset the field through all the chaos. His Player Rating of 14.7 was the 10th highest of his 105-game career.

He’s had an inconsistent start as a Bomber, with continuity through injury around him consistently testing his role within the back six, switching from the last-line defender to pushing higher as an important piece in the defensive wall. Hopefully, the confidence of getting through a whole preseason unscathed — rare for him over his career — combined with standing up to play his part with little help from teammates further up the ground, is the start to a resilient and impactful 2026.

Onto the next.

A bitterly disappointing performance to begin the year will have shaken confidence around the club, and certainly among the supporters. But reality checks can still have value, forcing honest assessment based on evidence rather than assumption.

With a nine-day break before the first interstate trip for this young group, there is an opportunity to respond after the early blow and prove — both to themselves and to the wider competition — that the direction they want to head in remains firmly in front of them.

Go Bombers!