ANZAC Day – Collingwood v Essendon 2024
29 Years after The Draw
It is 29 years since the game between Collingwood and Essendon that began this now traditional ANZAC Day rivalry. Back then, the game ended in a draw with Sav Rocca booting 9 goals, the last bringing the scores level with only a minute or so left. I have a vivid recollection of being on Level 2 at the Punt Road end behind the goals and seeing Nathan Buckley steaming out of the centre square and kicking to Rocca, rather than going for any score. Rocca was not able to mark and the siren sounded only a few seconds later.
A crowd just short of 95,000 were packed in with over 20,000 locked out. The game is largely remembered for the result and the second largest crowd for a home and away game. It is less recalled for the racial slur by Damian Monkhorst against Micheal Long which led to Monkhorst’s appearance before an AFL tribunal, following which he was forced to mediate with Michal Long. We recently saw a Port player, Jeremy Finlayson, receive a 3-week suspension for a homophobic slur towards an Essendon player. How times have changed.
The ANZAC Day game is reckoned to be second only to the Grand Final in its spectacle as well as tension for the players. It is one of my favorite game days, especially for the pre-game spectacle of tributes to members of the armed services, both past and present, for their contribution and sacrifice for the country both here and overseas. I am always moved by the behaviour of all in attendance as the pre-game ceremony commences. Almost everyone stands, bareheaded and silent, without being asked. As Linda has already noted, the day is all about Peace, Reflection and Honour. I am sure I not the only one who is moved to tears by the ceremony as well as the rendition of the National Anthems of New Zealand and Australia.
Almost inevitably, one of Jim or Dave, and often both, comment that the New Zealand anthem, especially in M?ori and English is much better than the Australian one(!!), though Dave always also reminds us that he voted for Waltzing Matilda back in 1977. We have a Welcome to Country on these occasions, so why not an Indigenous version in the language of the local indigenous people?
Now for the Games.
I looked back at the original 1995 game to see how things differed in terms of the stats and the ebb and flow of the game, finding there were marked differences which show how the game has changed over the past 29 years.
There were some similarities with the 1995 game in terms of the season so far. Collingwood came into that clash having lost the first three games of the season. We had also lost the first three games of 2024 but, due to the early start, had been able to win the next 3 on the trot before this fixture.
The two games differed quite markedly in terms of the quarter-by-quarter scores, disposals (both in total and individually), free kicks and goals/behinds ratio. The statistical analysis demonstrates the marked changes in the game over the past 29 years, with our modern game one of centimetres and tight contest compared to the long kick/marking game of yesteryear. How much we like the game today compared to the past is a matter of some argument/discussion.
In 1995, the goals/ behinds ratio was markedly different, between the teams and individually. The scores of each team finished at 111 points, some 26 more than this year; and there was a marked contrast between the teams with Collingwood’s made up from 17 goals 9 (26) to Essendon’s 16 goals 15 (31). In 1995, the quarter-by-quarter scores varied significantly from 2024 with Collingwood trailing by 3 at quarter time (37 to 40), and by 16 at half-time (45to 61), leading by 14 at tree quarter time and, of course, level at the final siren.
This year the final scores were exactly the same in terms of goals/ behinds but the quarter by quarter variance was markedly different in the first half only. Essendon shot out from the blocks with four goals to zero in the first eight minutes before the Collingwood team could get their hands on or even close to the ball in this initial period. By the end of the quarter they had been pegged back to a lead of 19 points, but with one less scoring shot, 6.1 (37) to 2.6 (18). By half-time Collingwood had come within 1 point by outscoring Essendon 4.5 to 1.5, with a half-time score of 47-48. The differential during each of the quarters in 1995 was much more varied than 2024 over the period of the whole game. After the first two quarters this year, the margin changed frequently but was little more than two goals at any point.
Total disposals count in 1995 was 321 for Essendon, made up of 211 kicks and 110 handballs, whereas Collingwood had 257 disposals made up of 170 kicks and 87 handballs. Essendon took 110 marks to Collingwood’s 57. The free kick count differential in 1995 was also wider with Collingwood being awarded 24 to Essendon’s 13.
This year saw the total disposal count also favour Essendon with 397 to Collingwood’s 317; a margin reflected by them having 225 to 187 kicks, 172 to 130 handballs and 102 to 79 Marks. The free kick count was 22-21 in Collingwood’s favour, which one never believed from the Ponsford Stand end??
The individual disposal count in this year’s game also showed a marked difference, reflecting the teams totals. Essendon had 8 players who racked up 20 or more disposals with three having 30 or more, Martin, Merrett and McGrath. Collingwood had four players racking up 20 or more but only Nick Daicos was close to the Essendon players who scored 30 or more with 28. It was also notable that only 3 players in the Essendon team had fewer than 10 disposals, whereas they more evident in the Collingwood side at 7, especially when Peter Wright only had 8 and Todd Goldstein 7. Both substitutes were in the 10 disposal and less camp.
In 1995, with a lower overall disposal count for both sides, only one player, Nathan Buckley racked up 30 disposals. 3 Collingwood players, Brown, McGuane and Graham Wright, totalled 21 disposals each while on the Essendon team 6 players had 20 or more with Misiti, O’Donnell and Olarenshaw having 29, 28 and 29 respectively. Marks were evenly spread across both sides in each game with the exceptions of Sav Rocca in 1995 who took 10 marks and kicked 9 goals from them, while D’Arcy Moore took 8 marks this year. For Essendon, Mercuri took 9 Marks in 1995 and Heppell took 10 this year.
The most notable difference in statistics in 2024 from 1995 is the number of tackles from both sides. In 1995 there were 24 tackles laid by Collingwood players with Gavin Brown laying 4, while Essendon had 22 tackles, with Denham scoring 4 also. In contrast, the 2024 version saw Collingwood players lay 68 tackles with Crisp scoring 8, while De Goey and McCreary scored 6. Essendon laid a total of 48, with Merrett on 8 and Parish 5, the highest in the side.
What does this statistical analysis tell us about a drawn game in 2024 in terms of where each side is in the premiership race and it’s future for this year and beyond? Collingwood came into this game off a five-day break having beaten Port quite handsomely, albeit after a first quarter much like his game. Essendon had one extra half-day to recover from a nailbiter in Adelaide, which they should have lost after an umpire bungled by not giving the Crows a free kick in the dying minute, a decision the AFL admitted was wrong. Both these sides came into this game with questions still hanging over their season. Collingwood started as though they had not recovered from the game against Port, being out marked in attack and defence, too slow to the contest and really just too out of sorts to even think about a place in the top eight, and no chance for a second premiership in a row. Essendon began like a top eight side and, dare I say it, even a top 4 place. However, both sides changed after two-thirds through the first quarter. Collingwood began put pressure on the Essendon mids as well as beginning to starve their forwards. After kicking straight in the first quarter, Essendon began to spray their attempts on goal. After Collingwood dominated the second quarter, the rest of the game was a shoot out or, may I suggest, an Essendon spray out. After the first quarter, Essendon scored 6.12 to the Pies’ 10.7, which did not include those out on the full; Mihocek’s efforts in the 4th quarter being quite pathetic for a goal-kicking forward. One of these would have won the game, even allowing for Langford kicking the one he missed when he would have scored 90% of the time.
Overall Collingwood had more passengers on the day than Essendon, and especially when you look at those at the bottom of the disposals, for instance Sidebottom, McCreary (despite his goal in the 4th), and Hoskin-Elliot. Crisp, who had 10 possessions and 8 tackles, was not his usual dependable self. There were some moments of brilliance, notably from Elliott and Hill, but they were few and far between and, for a team that prides itself on grinding out wins and keeping their noses in front, this was not a notable performance.
On the plus side, we did not lose but then neither did Essendon. I feel we do not have enough marking players in either defence or attack. Moore took 8 marks and had 23 possessions in one of his better performances this year. It is a dilemma that Moore is a wonderful intercept mark and attacking defender that to make him play as a defending or spoiling defender and put him on a tall attacker is to pay Peter (not his Dad) to rob Paul.
So, to the votes for 3,2,1 in the Horsborough.
There were few who were consistent over the four quarters, even leaving out the first 15 minutes or so the rest of the game. However, I have placed the top three possession getters as getting my 3,2,1.
3 Votes
Nick Daicos. Gets better as he matures and will be a bigger star than his Dad in a year or so. Has all the attributes of Peter as he just glides into space with his distribution usually being spot on. I have a sneaking suspicion he could well be Captain when Moore decides to hand over the reins.
2 Votes
Darcy Moore. His last 3 quarters and a half were quite special. Jim has been bagging him for his loose defending (although he apologised for his bagging during this game) but his role is to try to attack from defence, which will surely lead to his direct opponent getting more chances than he should. To put him on the most dangerous tall is not the best use of his talents.
1 Vote
Scott Pendlebury
Not just for his record breaking 10,000th possession but also for his encouragement and general-ship on the field. This is a great coach in the making, but let him go elsewhere before returning to us, please.
Apologies to De Goey, Noble, Mitchell, J Daicos and Howe.
To return to our Footy Almanac home page click HERE.
Our writers are independent contributors. The opinions expressed in their articles are their own. They are not the views, nor do they reflect the views, of Malarkey Publications.
Do you enjoy the Almanac concept?
And want to ensure it continues in its current form, and better? To help things keep ticking over please consider making your own contribution.
Become an Almanac (annual) member – click HERE.
Leave a Comment