Late review I know, but here it is. Thanks to @Heffsgirl for the reminder 
Went last night and sat high up the Olympic Stand so had a great view of team structure, player running patterns etc. @VanDerHaar went along as well and may post some additional views.
Why did we lose? Here are what I think are the contributing factors.
-
Main issue was we were ever-so-slightly off the pace of the game early given our Round 0 game was washed out and the Hawks got to play theirs. It was very evident in that, when we went to leave an opponent to go to a Hawk player nearby who was about to receive the ball, the Essendon player got there a fraction of a second late to stop the Hawk player receiving the ball and giving it off - often to the next Hawk player whom the Essendon player had rolled off to intercept. This created a Chinese checkers effect of Hawk players handballing over the top of an Essendon player caught between the Hawk player handballing and the Essendon playerās opponent now free to receive the handball under no pressure. And, so it went, resulting in a Hawk player able to then pass the ball by foot - again under no pressure - to whomever he liked. Hence why they had so many easy marks in F50. By early in the second quarter we had adjusted to the tempo.
-
What further exacerbated - if not started this problem - was us wanting an extra man at an around the ground stoppage despite Worpel not playing. Hawthorn, like Geelong often, will play the resultant spare 30m behind the stoppage to clean up the resultant, often ādirtyā Essendon clearance. This Hawk player could then quickly dispose of the ball to a free Hawk player made free by an Essendon player going up to challenge the spare. So, you get the Point 1 issue again. Wash, rinse, repeat. It took the coach until half time to change the structure as I didnāt notice this issue anywhere near as much after halftime.
-
Slipping over continually whilst Hawthorn players hardly ever did. It is a combination of, possibly footwear, but definitely player style. Our players - McGrath being the worst example - too often are heading in one direction then suddenly decide to change direction to go in another and either slipped over or put themselves or a teammate under immense pressure. No Hawthorn player did this that I can recall. Once they have the ball they move forward, at any angle, honouring whichever teammate is free - quite prepared to kick to a contest if not. McGrath had a 2 minute purple patch in Q2 when he twice came through half back and hit teammates with superb 30m passes because he ran on the line he was on and then kicked to a teammateās advantage as he was balanced. But then reverted to his usual, sudden-twisting style a short time later.
-
Foot skills - at QTR time the Disposal Efficiency % (DE) gap between the sides was staggering and something I had rarely seen before - Hawks were in the low 80s and we were in the high 60s. We had also had 7 more turnovers. Hence why the scoreboard read what it read. We did close both stats by the end of the game (DE% about 77-71, and we were only +5 on Turnovers) as we adjusted to the tempo, the coach stopped conceding a spare forward side of a stoppage so muchā¦and Hobbs and Tsatas got into the game after half time and Redman went back to HB with Ridley off injured.
Speaking of Redmanā¦what a stupid, brain-dead and arrogant decision to play him as a midfielder off only two training sessions after not playing a competitive game of football for a month when he has never trained as a midfielder - relegating young mids (Tsatas & Hobbs) to extended periods on the bench in H1, throwing team structure out to the point we had to make Gresham the sub (instead of Archie Roberts/Prior/Reid). Part of our improvement, after half time, was due to players spending time playing in the positions they know well and have trained for. Tsatas only had 57% time on ground but still got the ball 18 times with 5 clearances - equal 3rd clearances on the ground with Draper. His handball, at a forward stoppage, in Q2 that led to the great Merrett snap from the pocket was sublime.
Ben McKay continually let his man lead into space and not go with himā¦preferring to guard the corridor or long bomb, or maybe because he is lazy. It allowed Hardwicke and Newcombe to take easy marks. The ball only gets bombed long when the ball kicker is under pressure. But the Hawk ball kickers were not under pressure due to the game style problems I noticed earlier. Even late in the game, when they did kick high to a pack in their F50, they could count on Priorās opponent outmarking him. I canāt recall seeing a defender losing so many contests in a single game. He couldnāt even halve them. I hope itās just one off but fear it may not be and is exactly why he couldnāt get a regular game at the Lions.
At times, it seemed to me if Scott wanted a tall back line to take a lot of intercept marks then he needs a structure up the field that is more 1:1 so that the Hawk kicker is under pressure and has to bomb the ball. Instead, his structure at stoppages allows the opposition a free player to sweep the ball at the back and then send it to a free team mate that cascades all they way to a score. Itās almost like Scott, and his coaching staff, donāt understand doing something with structure/gameplan at stoppages actually directly impacts what happens to the team defensively having to cope with unpressured opposition kicks going into our D50.
Ultimately, taking a step back and looking at things at a higher level, their was decided difference in class, especially when it came to foot skills and team structure/game plan, between the two sides.
The former is caused by 20+ years of recruiting players for āupsideā where kicking skills were not valued whereas the Hawks recruiting clearly targets players who are really good kicks - Amon, DāAmbrosio (who was very quiet) for example.
The latter is caused by the Hawks having a tactically much more astute coach than Essendon has - Scott has brought great stability to our club and help rid the club of Dodoro. But his tactical nous leaves a lot to be desired.