Review

Here we go again.

Another disappointing weekend for everyone associated with Essendon, with the game effectively over before the first break.

With every passing week, the reality of where the club currently stands becomes clearer. There is no quick fix, and there is unlikely to be much short-term relief on game day.

The final score will be what goes into the record books, but the numbers below tell the real story. These are the key performance indicators that fell short and ultimately decided the result.

Let’s start with the positives. After that… I can understand if you decide not to read any further.

The good.

• For the third time in the last four games, Sam Durham is Essendon’s highest-rated player on the ground based on AFL Player Ratings. On two of those three occasions, he has been the highest-rated player from both teams.

• Since Round 13, Durham’s average player rating of 17.2 sees him ranked 11th of all players to have played two or more games in that period. Of the 10 ranked above him, only three — Max Gawn, Charlie Curnow and Jordan Dawson — rate higher per possession than Sam.

• No player on the ground won more contested possessions than Durham, with his seven groundball wins between the arcs the most of any player.

• By quarter time, Essendon had won eight clearances, with Durham winning five of those himself. By game’s end, his 10 pre-clearance contested possessions at ground level was clearly the most of any midfielder, with two scoring shots starting from his clearances, once again the most of all Essendon players.

• At halftime, Sullivan Robey hadn’t spent any time as a starting midfielder. After the main break, he went on-ball and had six clearances, the most of any player in the second half, with five of those coming in the third quarter. From that point on, St Kilda only scored three points from stoppages, after scoring 37 in the first two quarters.

• Seven of Robey’s nine contested possessions came after half time, with no player winning more at pre-clearance stoppages in that period. From his six first possessions, once again the most on the ground in the second half, five were converted into effective clearances.

• At halftime, Essendon was -11 at clearances, generating only one shot at goal from this score source. In the second half, they won clearances by 10, with five of their nine scoring shots coming from those.

• Essendon won hardball (disputed ball at ground level under direct physical pressure) for the third time in the last five games, this time by six, their third biggest differential for the year behind the +10 against Carlton and the +9 against West Coast.

• Essendon’s 11 one-on-one contests in the front half were their most since round 14 against Fremantle.

The bad.

• Essendon is now ranked 18th since Round 12 for inside 50s, with another lowly 37 this week. The last five-game average of just over 41 is their worst in a five-game stretch over the last 10 years, excluding the shortened quarters of 2020.

• In the first 20 minutes, St Kilda’s midfield brigade of Nasiah Wanganeen-Milera, Brad Hill, Darcy Wilson and Max Hall had 36 uncontested possessions, while Essendon’s whole team had 37.

• This year, Essendon has averaged 12.26 marks on lead, just above the AFL average of 11.13. In the first half, they had none, finishing the game with seven all up, their equal lowest for the year.

• In the second term, Essendon only gained 993 metres from 91 possessions, their lowest metres gained in any quarter, as well as their lowest metres per disposal. They finished the 20 minutes with a differential of 693 metres, also their biggest differential in any quarter this year.

• 10 of St Kilda’s 14 shots at goal in the first half came from stoppages, with three from the centre square and six of the other seven from front-half stoppages. That is the most shots Essendon has conceded from this score source in this part of the ground in any two quarters over the their last 39 games.

The ugly.

• Essendon conceded 175 handball receives, their second-most for the season following last week’s 182, which is the most. For St Kilda, that was 49 above their season average.

• The Bombers’ rate of 7.94 opposition possessions per tackle was the second-worst to Round 16. Their rate at halftime here was 11.03, with the first quarter at 15.71, where they laid only seven effective tackles to St Kilda’s 110 possessions.

• Coming into this game, Essendon’s opposition this year was averaging 68.4% of possessions uncontested, the highest percentage conceded by any team in the last 12 years. Things got worse this week, with St Kilda at 73.37%.

• The AFL average for opposition possessions per intercept was 5.42. At the start of the game, Essendon was ranked 18th at 6.37. Up to halftime that rate ballooned to 11.55, including 13.75 in the first quarter. Not only was that Essendon’s worst first-quarter rate of the year, it was their worst quarter since the start of 2025.

• Last week, North Melbourne transitioned from defensive 50 to forward 50 on over 42% of possession chains — Essendon’s second-worst rate this year. In this game, St Kilda went just under 42%, Essendon’s third-worst rate.

• Up to this point, Essendon’s opponents were finding a marking target inside 50 on 28.6% of entries, the worst this year. In fact, only Brisbane’s opposition rate of 29.1% is worse over the last 10 years. This week, St Kilda went at 32.7%.

Asking for change.

In last week’s post-match press conference, Dean Solomon finally acknowledged Essendon’s poor tackling numbers, something I’ve been banging on about for years, but especially this season. This week his frustration centred around the Bombers’ inside 50 entries, specifically the inability to either carry the ball further up the ground or find uncontested marks before going inside 50. Both are essential if you’re going to play the game in your front half, while also making it harder for the opposition to rebound.

Click below to watch a short clip of Dean Solomon’s press conference on my X account, where he breaks down our inside-50 entries. (Video: AFL)

https://x.com/anthp_/status/2073710740591304744?s=46&t=L4mpm7shJJYGHL-jgpWWBw

If you’ve been a regular reader, you’ll know I’ve been highlighting these issues for some time now, whether it be the lack of work rate and impact from the midfielders and high half forwards as links between the arcs, or ultimately the system with ball in hand.

The last few reviews have also touched on the unrealistic expectations being placed on Essendon’s defenders. They’re not only expected to defend wave after wave of entries, but also win the ball back, rebound from defensive 50, carry it between the arcs and generate inside 50s, all with very little support from the midfield.

An onballer’s job isn’t just to win clearances, they must become part of transition once the game is in motion.

Stoppages are at an all-time low, making this phase of the game more important than ever.

Right now, the most experienced part of Essendon’s list isn’t influencing it enough.

When the defenders do win the ball back, they should be able to either link by hand to create overlap run with their midfield teammates or be provided with an uncontested marking option so they can hand the baton to the next line.

Instead, because of the lack of movement ahead of the ball, they’re often left with two choices, generate run themselves or, as most witnessed this week, simply kick long and straight because no other option has presented.

As mentioned earlier, Essendon didn’t take a single lead-up mark in the first half. There were virtually no short, sharp leads at 45 degrees to change the angle of attack, open the ground up or consistently hold St Kilda’s defenders to account. If it hasn’t been straight this season, it’s been sideways.

It’s very difficult, almost impossible, to change your defensive system during the season. That’s usually built over an entire pre-season, and whatever was put in place over summer was exposed very quickly once the year began.

What can improve at training is their attack. This has always been the reason people have wanted to play football from a young age.

The coaches must try and motivate them once again to get moving, add energy, and get themselves into position to receive the ball, virtually demanding it through the work they have put in.

Ultimately, there are limitations within this Essendon midfield that have existed for years. Last year’s draft was a step towards addressing that, but this year’s needs to go to another level again, not only to complement what was brought in, but to help bring this list into the modern game so it can consistently play the modern way.

Go Bombers!