Essendon Players' Workrate

Being at the ground for the pies and cats games I noticed that we don’t get numbers back quick enough to help our defenders nor run hard to create options up forward.

Looking at the telstra tracker, our numbers back this up (providing that they are accurate).

Surely there has been a mistake like there was in round 1?

Look at these sprint effort numbers.

Not to mention the pies players ran 7kms more than us and Geelong 25kms


Same against the Dees. Only difference is the Dees didn’t defend either. Explains the big scores that day.

1 Like

Good thread - we have a massive work rate issue against the better teams.

The last two weeks prove it and the numbers don’t lie.

We also invariably have more turnovers than our opponents 68 turnovers to 65 for the Cats, 87 turnovers to only 78 or the Pies. This leaves us out of position with players already having spent energy to get into that position and thus unable to muster the energy to run quickly back the other way.

And many of those turnovers the last 2 weeks were under no pressure as we keep trying to play the corridor against the pressure the best teams bring versus, say, what a North Melbourne or Melbourne bring. We need to be more prepared to move the ball, still at speed, but “down the line”, outside the centre square than continuously try and square the ball up by foot with high risk short passes back into the centre square that the best teams pounce on. This really killed us against the Pies, in particular.

The best teams then run in numbers and as we are left deflated over “what might have been” and our players stop chasing the other way because they have no chance of catching the opposition.

In part, I feel, our turnover rate plays a big role in our apparent low work rate.


I mean they do have sport science people whose full time job it is to look at these numbers etc. but they’d want to do something about it otherwise we aren’t going anywhere any time soon.

It was plain and clear even for our coaching staff on the weekend. They had multiple outnumbers in their own forward line and obviously flooded our defence throughout the match


Correction; we work hard running forward.
Unfortunately against the best sides you have to go the other way.


Is it possible to break that data down into mids (only)? Cheers.

If they had eaten the rabbit terrine before the game they’d have notched up more sprint efforts, albeit they’d all be en route to the bathroom.


Unfortunately not.

Yep, we do work hard running forward - all teams do.

But if a turnover happens under no pressure - namely, unexpectedly - you are totally exposed if you’ve run forward hard. Because we seem to be the kings of the “unforced error” then the players who have run forward hard end up giving up because they can’t their opponents on the fly on the rebound. Hence why we get the total km numbers we get.

I don’t really remember us getting caught out the back often yesterday.

There was the one where Kelly walked in to an open goal. But from memory that was from a turnover.

I feel like we have been better at this in 2019 just by judging with my own eye.

I find it frustrating when we seemingly have enough numbers back but sides still manage to hit a target amongst the congestion.

We really have an opportunity to get much much better at this and push for Top 4.

Redman and Saad do it really well. McKenna does worry me a little.

nailed it. When we are going forward our mids are sprinting for the ball. When the majority of them have to go the other way- not so much

Lots of 2 v 1s out the back.

I suppose there was the botched Dangerfield one too. What other ones?


And sprinting can also be to man the mark. We continually let them take marks, casually walk past it and hit another uncontested player. No urgency to get over and hold them up.

1 Like

Dalhaus walked into goal with Redman standing there on his opponent

Sprint efforts don’t just effect your defensive transition from turnovers or lost clearances, but they are also super important when it comes to slow, safe and methodical movements forward.

You need your midfielders and forwards to put in repeated sprint efforts in order to create separation and provide an uncontested hit up target for the player with ball in hand, it’s what made Colyer so important when he was at his best for us.

I thought GPS data was debunked after round 1

No, the club just fudged it from ‘broken network’ or some ■■■■, then it magically matched GWS a few days later.

Defensive work rate is an issue, is goes missing far too often. Geelong gave us a clinic in consistent defensive work rate and setup.

The turnovers kill us. As does the inability to kick set shots. Do the latter and it would have been a very close game yesterday. We lack composure and basic skill.

But yeah, I don’t know how many times yesterday Geelong were able to walk away from contests. Set up in packs of 4 or 5. They are a pretty one way team as well, they just execute better.


Sometimes it can be chicken or the egg.

The winning team is probably going to work harder. But winning also allows you to work harder.

The classic example is a third quarter in the grand final. It becomes clear who’s winning and the team in front starts gliding over the ground where as the losers look like wearing concrete boots. There’s a huge physicolpgical boost from being in front that gives you the energy to push hard.