I admit this is a long post, perhaps more than an average performance deserves in my eyes.
If you prefer to jump to a specific section, use the table of contents below.
Table of contents
:Intercepts.
:Clearances.
:Hind.
Ridley.
:One on One defending.
:Selfish
:MCG
Intercepts.
I will continue to prioritise the process over the outcome, as I have committed to doing all year, but the final scoreboard is currently masking some issues.
Having 14 shots at goal from intercepts is a great start—this is the third time Essendon has achieved 14 shots from intercepts this season, with 18 being the most on two occasions. The 83 interceptions in this game are well above the season average of 68.8, and the highest under Scott’s regime; the next best was 81 in round six against Adelaide and round 10 of last season in this exact same matchup. Fantastic.
However, during the week, I posted a strike rate of every team’s ability to turn an intercept into a shot on goal.
Essendon’s season average of 17.66 up to round 10 ranks 13th best, with no current top-eight team ranked 11th or lower (Melbourne still has to play its round 11 game). The 16.86% strike rate in this game is another drop from that average. Additionally, as shown in the table, Richmond’s opponents have been striking at over 20%.
What cannot go unnoticed is Richmond’s shots from intercepts. The Tigers also had 14 shots at goal, but while the Bombers kicked 11 goals three behinds, the Tigers managed only three goals 11 behinds from their opportunities.
This season, four times the opposition has had more than 14 shots from intercepts against the Bombers, resulting in two losses, a draw, and a win in round one. Richmond’s strike rate from this score source was 19.17%, well above their season average and just below the AFL average, making this a disappointing figure from Essendon’s perspective.
If you want my reasoning as to why this issue wasn’t improved defensively and offensively, you will need to refer to the section covering clearances.
Clearance.
Gee, I want to get back to writing about Essendon’s clearance game and its proficiency, and what it’s doing to the whole system.
After round seven, the Bombers were +5.57 in clearance differential against their opponents, ranked equal third at that time. Unfortunately, that advantage hasn’t translated in the last two weeks. A loss of 14 last week followed by another loss of 10 this week is disappointing, especially against two teams who currently rank 13th and 18th in this metric.
While the clearance domination by the opposition hasn’t translated onto the scoreboard, it’s affecting Essendon’s starting position of possession chains, placing them too far from their own goal and making ball movement effectiveness and efficiency a priority.
Over 35% of possession chains began in the defensive 50, obviously too many and too far from goal.
Midfield rotations are on a downward trend, with only five players seeing centre bounce minutes this week. Merrett, Durham, and Stringer saw the most, while Caldwell and Perkins were the other two. This is the only excuse I will give for this week’s performance, but it’s a major one.
Setterfield, Parish, and Hobbs being absent left the coaches with limited options for change when things weren’t working, especially at centre bounce.
Perkins’ 64% time on ground and Caldwell’s 70% as two of the five midfield rotations raise questions that don’t have immediate answers. Outside of Perkins’ injury in round four and his return game in round eight, 64% time on ground is the lowest he’s ever played in his career, while Caldwell’s 70% is well down from his previous two seasons of 74% or more.
Suspecting something is up fitness-wise with the two, and with the lack of first-choice midfielders to take time around the contest, it was strange that Martin, Gresham, Tsatas, and maybe even Hind and Davey Junior didn’t get an opportunity inside, especially as the team’s main foot speed sits in this group.
In the immediate future, there isn’t much relief coming in this mix, with Setterfield, Parish, and Duursma weeks away, and Hobbs and Shiel the only two who may make an impact anytime soon.
From round two until round seven this year, Scott preferred two dedicated rucks with Goldstein and Draper almost a 50/50 split at contests. In this period, the team went +30 in clearances, only losing the head-to-head once against Port Adelaide by nine. Could we see a return to this setup with Bryan alongside Goldstein in the lead-up to the bye while Draper is out injured?
Hind.
Credit to Hind, one of the few players who was able to execute his role when it mattered most. His 25 disposals in this game rank as the 9th highest in his 89-game career, with his 68% time on ground in this match the lowest among those nine performances.
Among these nine games, only once did he have a greater score impact than the seven he registered here. Additionally, he surpassed 657 metres gained from his disposals in just one other game. His nine contested possessions were just one shy of his overall career best. Hind's two goals in seven minutes during the second quarter capitalised on a dominant period for Essendon, a feat that proved difficult to sustain throughout the game.
Hind's impact peaked when the game was on the line.
In the last 20 minutes, he collected 15 of his 25 disposals, five of which were contested. He also had two rebounds from the defensive 50 and delivered four inside-50 entries, including one direct goal assist.
His performance stood out for two main reasons: his consistency in maintaining width on the ground, aiding both offensive and defensive transitions, especially after Cox was injured, with 16 of his possessions gathered between the 50 metre arcs and outside the centre square, showcasing his role execution. The second reason was his leg speed, which helped cover the vast expanse of the M.C.G. and provided a critical advantage for a team that can sometimes be one-paced in both directions of play.
Ridley.
The change in methodology and setup around the immediate contest, combined with the defensive manpower added to the starting lineup, was always going to be my most anticipated part of Essendon's 2024 season. Unfortunately, we haven’t yet seen the full manpower together with this new approach, but as Ridley showed in this game, I'm sure you'll agree that when the two parts finally come together, it will be Essendon's best asset: defense.
Ridley exemplified this potential with his performance. In his first full game back since round 18 last year, he had 31 disposals, 10 contested possessions, 14 intercept possessions (including a career-high eight intercept marks), 760 metres gained, and even a goal. Nobody was more deserving of the Yiooken Trophy as best on ground. "Impassable" was the best way to describe him on the night.
One on One defending.
Get used to it, Essendon and Bombers fans. The opposition saw it early in the season against Port Adelaide, noted it, and are now exploiting it. It's time to get to work.
I've written several times about the choice between defending one-on-one versus the more modern zone defending.
Man-on-man defence prioritises individual matchups with tight marking and requires defenders to follow their assigned opponents in and out of designated areas. In contrast, zone defence emphasises collective defence and strategic positioning to cover the opposition players as they move within the protected zone.
Port Adelaide switched to zone defending after the first quarter in round four, and for the last two weeks, Essendon has faced this from the first bounce. This choice of defence challenges both teams' accountability.
For the defending team, it removes the worry of correct positioning on the field and tests the opposition's work rate when they don't have the ball. For the attacking team, it tests their ability to create space against direct matchups and work as a unit to help and assist teammates, as well as quickly locate their opponents when it's time to defend.
To be brutally honest, if Essendon had faced two better-equipped teams in the last two weeks, the final results would have been different purely because of this aspect.
The inability to regularly and selflessly work to create options for teammates when they had the ball was a worry. Additionally, the failure to consistently win or at least halve those contests is concerning.
The biggest problem, however, was not being able to apply the same defensive mode and achieve similar results against Richmond when needed.
Too often, Essendon was slow to react when the ball wasn’t in their possession, while Richmond was quick to go on the offensive. This allowed Richmond players to get "behind" their direct matchups, forcing the whole Essendon team to defend further from goal than expected.
Selfish.
To be frank, I could’ve used a softer description of this aspect of the game, but ultimately "selfish" is what it was.
On numerous occasions, Essendon players overlooked or missed opportunities to pass to teammates in better positions for the team's sake. Hind could have kicked three or four goals with his workrate and positioning from the wing, while Wright found better spots in the forward line than those targeted by the attacking players.
Additionally, easy link-up options that would have helped "build the field up" were often ignored in favor of more ambitious plays.
Yes, Stringer ended up kicking four goals from his opportunities, but that's not always going to be the case. I would have preferred to see teammates rewarded for finding space and brought into the game to ensure better and more reliable long term outcomes.
While this isn't purely a selfish matter, the consistent indecision further up the field, when Essendon forwards had one-on-one battles ahead, showed a lack of enthusiasm, decisiveness, and decision-making to give their teammates the best chance to score.
Thankfully, this issue was noted in an after-match interview with forward coach Dale Tapping.
To be frank once again, I don't believe this aspect is part of Essendon's core makeup, and I dearly hope it doesn’t continue throughout the year. I don't believe it will anyway.
M.C.G.
I'm eagerly anticipating this next period as it will pose important questions for Essendon's development. I'm hoping the team has the appropriate tools and answers for these challenges.
Five of the next seven, and six of the next ten games, are at the M.C.G. So far, the Bombers have played only three out of eleven games there.
What I’m most eager to see is how the team and the game plan adapt to the expanses of the M.C.G., particularly in terms of leg speed and transitions. While Marvel Stadium offers great spectacles, the M.C.G. is where finals football is played and where the team’s finals brand will need to stand up.
Work rate and spread are crucial, both in ball movement and when defending the opposition's ball movement. More exposure to these dimensions will benefit the team long-term, providing valuable insights into how the current list and game plan stand up in rehearsals for the big games at the pointy end of the season. It’s better to be finding out now rather than when it’s too late.
Comments