Bombers vs Suns Review

Intro.

Essendon's 2024 season has been a rollercoaster, much like this game. There were moments of brilliance, but the inconsistency was their downfall. The team's reliance on what they do with the football overshadowed the other critical aspect of the game—without the ball, which remains a significant issue. The last quarter had a huge impact on the outcome, but the persistent problem of being unable to defend for extended periods, or even adequately long periods, continues to haunt them.

The 1st 20 minutes.

It's easy to point to the one goal and nine behinds in the final 20 minutes, but the preceding 60 minutes had their own issues that need addressing.

In the first quarter, the team and their set up did a lot right to start the game, converting 15 inside 50 entries into a shot at goal 53.3% of the time—well above their season average of 44.4%. The pressure in the front third was evident with 10 tackles inside the area. Winning or halving contests in attack is a great way to begin the game.

However, the defensive end was a different story. Gold Coast turned 69% of their 13 forward 50 entries into a shot at goal, over 25% better than their season average.

While Essendon applied 10 tackles inside 50 in the first quarter, they only managed 11 tackles across the middle and back thirds of the ground, showing there is a hunger that drives the team when the opportunity to score is available, but that same hunger isn’t apparent when the opportunity to score isn’t present.

The 2nd 20 minutes.

The second quarter looked different in one aspect, and should’ve looked different in another.The method of defending improved, with 22 intercept possessions, up from 18 in the first quarter, the season average.

It wasn’t just the quantity, but the frequency—every 4.4 Gold Coast possessions—which led to more possession chains. Unfortunately, the familiar ability to ‘cash in’ and maximise value took too long to materialise. Despite two early goals, it took another 13 minutes before the well-deserved run of three goals in six minutes.

The third 20 minutes.

This one disappointed me the most. Yes, frustration was to come, but looking back at this quarter, the disappointment stemmed from issues that were rectified in the last quarter.

Winning center clearance and the Suns’ inaccuracy were the only avenues to getting the ball in hand. There were only nine intercepts for the quarter from 91 Suns possessions, and when they did win it, there was no flow in transition to move the ball forward, with only 18 uncontested marks as any aid.

The game turned into a contested battle, and Essendon failed both in the air and at ground level, losing contested marks 6-2 and possessions 40-26. This highlighted the team's ongoing inability to keep the ball in the front half and prevent opposition entries from becoming scoring opportunities.

Gold Coast ended 36% of their 25 possession chains with a shot at goal, and if it weren't for their inefficiency—turning nine shots from 14 entries into just two goals and four behinds—the situation could have been much worse.

The disappointment comes in how the next 20 minutes went in comparison to this.

The 4th 20 minutes.

Essendon went from losing contests by 14 in the third quarter to winning the last quarter by nine, and from taking two contested marks to eight. Their intercept rate improved drastically, from one every 10.11 Gold Coast possessions to one every 2.77. This played a crucial role in setting up 19 inside 50 entries and nine shots at goal in the final quarter. You don’t need me to go any further as we all know how it ends. The shift in mentality is remarkable. The drive and determination are present, and most of the players have the ability to rise to the occasion—but it happens too infrequently.

Contested defensive one on one.

This year has seen a long-awaited change in method and system, providing the opportunity to assess each player's ability to perform at a finals level. Finals football is all about winning contests, and the numbers reflect this: contested possessions rise by 11% in finals compared to the regular season, while uncontested possessions drop by the same margin. More of the game is spent at stoppages, with an 8% decrease in disposals between them.

Identifying players who can rise to this level is crucial during the home-and-away season, as it guides list decisions for Essendon.

Throughout the season, one constant has been the defenders' inability to avoid losing defensive contests. They don't necessarily need to win them, but they must not lose them regularly against their direct opponents.

After 22 games, Essendon has four players among the worst 25 in the league for losing defensive one-on-one contests: Redman (second-worst in the whole competition, losing 50% of his contests), Kelly (40%), McKay, and Laverde (both 34%). If we include Cox, who has a 29% loss rate, that makes five players in the worst 50 in the competition. Plain and simple, this combination in the backline has been a failure and needs urgent attention.

The way this defensive group chooses—I can’t imagine is instructed—to defend is completely unbalanced. The key defenders need to focus on being lockdown defenders, within arms reach of their opponent.

McKay has shown he can perform at a high level in this role in the past, but Laverde's consistency is a concern. Too often, these two are prioritising intercept marking and play too loose on their direct matchups.

Too many players are focused on winning the ball back to start forward chains rather than ensuring they don't lose contests against their direct opponents. This mindset leaves the defensive half vulnerable to scoring opportunities.

The AFL average for shots per inside 50 this season is 47.9%. Essendon has held the opposition to below this average in only 10 games and has held the opposition to below their season average in only 10 games. Have the coaches seen enough of Redman as a defender? Can Cox really make it down back? Is this combination capable of allowing Ridley to play as an intercept defender? Is it making it too difficult for McGrath to play as an aggressive rebounding defender? This was not the only issue with this week’s performance

Defensive 50 groundball.

Quote taken from preview.

“McGrath, Kelly, and Redman need to lock down on a mix of opponents who are strong over the ball and possess dangerous pace when given any leeway.

Long is averaging 2.6 marks inside 50 in his last five games, ranking 15th among all players, and has kicked eight goals during that time, the most of any Suns player. This mix, combined with pace options that Hardwick can select from, including Rosas, Rogers, Johnston, Holman, Berry, and Humphrey, means Essendon must be on high alert for all ground balls in the back third.”

The Suns went inside 50 on 51 occasions and took eight marks inside the area. Of the other 43 entries, they won 23 groundballs, with 21 of them coming in the first 52 minutes of game time. As a comparison, Essendon managed only 13 for the entire game.

The signs weren't good early. In the first quarter, the Suns had 22 possessions in their front third, while Essendon had only 18 in that same zone, an area where they should not be losing by any amount.

Scores from stoppages were also a problem, with four of Gold Coast's stoppage goals coming in Essendon's defensive 50. Of the Suns' 26 shots at goal, 18 were from general play, with 11 coming within 30 metres of goal.

In my opinion, this isn't something that can be solved primarily through system changes, it's a matter of player capabilities, and it needs to be addressed through list management, either via trades or the draft.

Explanation by Champion Data.

Groundball Gets.

Contested possessions one at ground level.

Excluding free kicks.

Groundball gets can either be hardball gets or loose ball gets

Hard Gets.

A disputed ball at ground level under direct physical pressure or out of a ruck contest, resulting in an opportunity to effect a legal disposal.

Loose Gets.

A disputed ball at ground level not under direct physical pressure that results in an opportunity to record a legal disposal.

Everyone has been impressed by the improvement Caldwell and Durham have shown this season, with both of them having their most impactful season of their short careers to date, and with more to come by the looks.

They've displayed a hunger for the contest, lessening the load on Merrett and covering for Parish during his injury. However, I'm not convinced they solve Essendon's issues inside the contest—specifically in terms of hardball gets, which I consider the true measure of contested possession. This is about winning the battle in the thick of the action and moving the ball outside the congestion, either to gain territory or find a teammate in space.

There was no better example of this explanation that what Rowell was able to do in this game.

Only one Essendon player is ranked in the top 20 for average hardball gets this season, and it’s Setterfield, who has played four games in total and is without a contract for 2025. Outside of him, only Durham is in the top 40, a list that includes from the top, Yeo, Cripps, Liberatore, Dangerfield, Tom Green, Rowell, Neale, Oliver, and Wines.

Melbourne has two players in the top 20, Gold Coast has two, and West Coast has three. This role feeds the players on the outside, such as Treloar from Liberatore, Walsh from Cripps, Anderson from Rowell, and Butters from Wines, all of whom are ranked in the top 20 for loose ball gets.

Parish and Merrett are both in the top 25 in this category, which is impressive, but imagine if there was an inside extractor who could feed them even more regularly. While Caldwell and Durham have only had the chance to prove themselves this season, and I hope they continue to get opportunities, but it’s a watch for me if they will be able to step into that demanding role.

Conclusion.

With 21 games played in the 2024 season, Scott has now observed the majority of the experienced players over his last two seasons of 44 games. I'm not too concerned about the younger players; they still have time to prove whether they can play the type of football needed to succeed in finals. The others, however, have shown what they are capable of in my view.

Essendon has only two draft picks in the national draft, with a minimum of three list changes required, with a rookie elevation as an option. But how can the list improve with only two possible additions? Beyond the free agent market, the club will need to explore trades—either for players or for draft picks to bring in young talent. Perhaps this is why certain players have been signed to contracts, to add value in the trade market?

Essendon might even consider paying part of a former player's contract, given their supposedly ample salary cap space.

In any case, I expect significant changes to the list at the end of the season.