A different review.
This has been the most challenging review of the year. You don’t need me to tell you how bad it was; the vision was terrible, and the numbers only confirm the poor performance. Honestly, there’s no point in reviewing anything outside the standout elements of the game, so I’ve decided to take a different approach this week. I wanted to capture the feelings of the fans on my social networks regarding all aspects, including this week's performance, the year so far, coaching, setup, and anything else they wanted to express. I'll delve deeper into these topics and then share my perspective.
“this lyric immediately came to mind when I read your post. It’s just that I think my heart and soul are kind of famished.”
-noname84859300
In the end, this is a very accurate description. I've never felt the need to "defend" this club in my reviews or previews; I’ve always aimed to simply present the facts on performance each week. There are good moments and bad, but reality is somewhere in between, and that's what I aim to comment on. However, after this week’s game, as the quote above describes, the ongoing lack of fulfillment, especially in recent weeks, has left me wanting something more meaningful to review.
“Our position on the ladder most of the season wasn't representative.”
-CMESK8n
I share a similar view. I'm not focused on the ladder position because I don't think that's where Essendon is at in their development. Wins and losses alone aren't enough to compare the team to others or measure their progress. The most important metrics are "winning the football," which includes clearance, contest, loose ball, and hard ball groundball wins. Then there's "with the football," involving ball movement efficiency and converting clearances and intercepts into scores. Lastly, "without the football" means defending ball movement and stopping the opposition's efficiency from stoppages and intercepts. In these areas, Essendon ranks mid to bottom against the competition. I don't believe Scott and the coaching staff were ever overly invested in the ladder position, and I certainly hope that's the case.
“Brad got ahead of himself. The early year success tempted him to fix our offence although defence was still a work in progress.”
-Twitter_Suks
Both aspects needed adjustments, and fixes were inevitable. The offensive and defensive halves are interconnected. Improving front-half effectiveness through better ball movement, entries, and target selection benefits the defensive half. Since the preseason of 2023, the priority has been shoring up the undersized back half by pushing numbers deep. However, this short-term solution wasn’t sustainable. This season, more effort was directed toward limiting opportunities going into the defensive third. To help this, quantity needed to be going the other way. The challenge was that not enough of the quantity translated into quality.
Was it too ambitious to address both parts simultaneously? The early-season clearance game introduced an option that had been absent for years, so getting the full rewards the players deserved regularly enough from field position was a good start.
It’s unlikely Scott was anticipating individuals performing below expectations. McKay's one-on-one work has been inconsistent; he averages 3.1 intercept marks per game, ranking him equal 7th among key defenders, but he loses almost 33% of his contests, placing him 65th of that group. Laverde is also struggling, losing over 33% of his one-on-one contests, a significant drop from his 21.4% last season.
Some of these issues are due to Scott's decisions. Using Ridley against the opposition's main targets instead of freeing him up to focus on becoming a +1 to assist in aerial contests is puzzling. In the last six games, Ridley has taken only seven intercept marks, compared to 17 in his first three games back from injury.
Support from the wings has been lacking recently. Duursma was being asked to do a lot of defending down back early in the season, and Cox has had some moments.
The idea of using Jones makes sense in theory, but this role requires the experience of at least a preseason to understand, a defence-first mindset, and a more agile player who can aid in ball movement and become multiple links with run and carry forward.
“Is the list capable of playing the way Scott wants and is he picking players that give them the best chance of executing that style?”
- Dami23
Great question. In my opinion, the team is evolving towards a territory-based game style. Ideally, this transition would have started last year, that’s certainly my view, but it’s good to see the change finally taking place now.
This style relies heavily on consistently winning contests, which is crucial for gaining territory. Without winning contests, there is no immediate territory gain. This is how finals football is played, and the 23 games of the regular season provide the opportunity to develop and refine this approach.
Comparing the last two finals series against the AFL average of 2023 and Essendon’s 2023 average, it’s clear that uncontested possessions drop by almost 20%, while contested possessions rise by over 6%, deviating from Essendon’s previous strategy. More stoppages occur because the ball is in contest frequently and doesn’t leave the area as easily, largely due to tackling, with an average of 126.6 tackles between the two teams. The uncontested game in the air drops over 18% as intercepts become even more crucial to performance.
The contest game is about players consistently winning the ball and moving it forward to teammates who can also win it consistently, or at the very least, not lose it ahead of the ground. This sets up the next phase, the forward press, which serves as a defensive mechanism if players ahead cannot win the contest and the ball comes back out. The forward press is then expected to win the ball back in the same way it was initially moved forward—through contest wins.
One of the main reasons I wanted this style implemented last year was to identify who on the list can win contests more often than they lose them. Finding players who can consistently perform in this manner has been the ultimate goal for me this year. Now that the coaching staff has observed this for 20 games, they can, need to, and I expect will make list decisions based on who can execute consistently. As for selecting the best players to execute this strategy, that decision hasn’t been made yet because we haven’t fully determined who can consistently perform under this style.
“Straight line kicking to the opposition, stupid entries, lack of composure, just pure dumb footy”
-OnoufriouP51159
“They're way too easy to play against.”
-sprint_quick
“Ground ball gets, contested possessions and lack of movement seemed missing.”
-RickYou17780537
I never wanted to be a "doomsayer" by predicting that this was going to happen, but in all truth, this performance has been looming all season. The disappointment comes from who it was against and how it unfolded. Unlike recent opponents who move the ball quickly and directly and are willing to kick to contests, St. Kilda has a very similar style to Essendon. Their priorities are to win territory, defend it, and if it cannot be gained initially or is lost, regain it by moving the ball up the ground slowly and methodically to protect the field behind.
This game should’ve been a perfect "apples versus apples" matchup, where both teams’ strategy would have canceled each other out, like it nearly did in round three.
The disappointment lies in not being able to handle what you know is coming and, just as importantly, not responding when needed.
After 19 games in 2024, St. Kilda averaged 24.3 marks per quarter, the 4th highest in the league, with Essendon third at 24.4. Red flags started flashing when the Saints took a mark every 1.85 kicks, significantly better than their season average of 2.28 and even better than the top-ranked Brisbane at 2.08. Allowing St. Kilda 35 marks, 34 of which were uncontested, was an early sign that ball control was going to be crucial for Essendon, as any field position gained from clearances (+3 in the first quarter) was given up too easily.
When Essendon had the ball, they couldn’t generate enough offence to offset what was happening on the other end. Only 16.66% of forward entries hit a marking target, over 6% lower than their season average per quarter, a rate already in the bottom half of all teams. While the Bombers struggled to find meaningful targets in dangerous positions, the Saints exceeded their season average per quarter, finding a marking target 58.33% of the time within 50 metres of the goal.
Although the second quarter was the best on the scoreboard, with Essendon scoring three goals and two behinds to St. Kilda's two goals and one behind, the problems persisted without the ball. The third quarter highlighted every issue Essendon has faced all season. Ball movement stalled, as no uncontested marks or possessions led to any meaningful gain, forcing kicks forward into contested battles, where Essendon didn’t win a single aerial contest while St. Kilda won six, well above their average of 2.45 per quarter. There was no support at ground level either; recording zero groundball wins for the quarter is almost unheard of. Inside 50 entries were ineffective, with zero marks inside the area, while St. Kilda rebounded nine of Essendon's 11 inside 50s for the quarter.
Without the ball, the struggles continued: losing clearances by two, contested possessions by 16, and allowing 72 uncontested possessions to St. Kilda. The Saints turned 27 possession chains into 13 inside 50s, with 48.8% of those chains ending in a shot at goal, over 28% better than their 2024 average. Defending entries from becoming scores has been a problem all season, but nothing like the 84.1% success rate St. Kilda had in this quarter. This all falls back on the inability to intercept the ball, doing so only once every 9.41 disposals, down from the season average of 5.16.
“Ridley, McGrath, Redman and Parish all on big contracts and have all been sub par this year.”
-sportingtragics
“Is anyone talking to Redman about his disgusting body language.”
- AlvenIstifo90
Based on the AFL Player Ratings, which evaluate a player's impact in each game, Mason Redman's career average rating is 8.81, excluding his first two years when he played only five games. His career peak came last year with a rating of 11.49, following 10.51 the previous year. This season, he has exceeded his career average rating in nine games only, whereas by the same point last year, he had done so 13 times.
Redman exemplifies the balance between impacting with and without the ball. He averages 20.5 disposals, 428 metres gained, and 2.5 inside 50 entries per game, which are all well above average for mid-sized defenders. However, he is losing over 45% of his one-on-one contests, his highest rate since 2019. His average of 8.2 pressure acts is the second lowest of any year, and his 1.7 tackles per game rank well below average for medium defenders, marking the lowest of his career. On six occasions, he failed to lay more than one tackle in a game.
Some may say his role has changed with Martin starting and spending time down back, and it has. However, this is meant he’s been asked for a more “defence first” role, and based on his current figures, it’s been a failure in what should be the most important aspect of his game.
“Need to see who wants to really play for this team…season gone now, play Tsatas, Hobbs, Davey boys, Bryan and Roberts.”
-Sdsclog
Scott seems to have placed a strong emphasis on enhancing versatility within the lineup, with the strategy involving assessing players’ capacity to adapt to different positions and roles, aiming to build depth and identify limitations, with players skills put to the test.
The goal is twofold: first, to determine who can seamlessly transition to different positions if required, and second, most importantly, to understand each player’s strengths and weaknesses.
This evaluation aids in the team’s long-term planning when it comes to list decisions.
Now, after 19 games. Scott faces a critical decision.
Has he seen enough from certain individuals to make those hard decisions at the end of the season?
The answer lies in the balance between potential and performance.
Comments