The Loss GWS Had to Have

Paul Keating infamously described the recession Australia went through in the early 90s as “the recession that Australia had to have.” After a decade of spending in the 80s, Keating told the nation that this recession was not only necessary but would be good for the overall health of the Australian economy moving forward.

 

In the end, despite significant downturn, Keating was ultimately proven right as Australia’s economy expanded rapidly after the recession.

 

Simply, it was a short-term pain long term gain situation.

 

Adam Kingsley should have a similar message for his troops after their loss to Hawthorn in Tasmania on Saturday afternoon.

 

While most of the stories coming out of that game will be, and should be, about the remarkably quick resurgence of Hawthorn under Sam Mitchell I am more interested in what the game says about GWS.

 

In my view, GWS finally unlocked something that had been missing all season long: the ability to play ugly.

 

Earlier this year I referred to GWS as the US Army of the AFL.

 

They had a way to win, and they stuck to it come hell or high water.

 

For the US Army, they went into every war using conventional tactics in unconventional places. Take Vietnam where the US just bombed empty jungles and tried to use trench warfare tactics in a place where there weren’t any trenches.

 

They took the view that it worked in WWII, it’ll work for us in the jungle.

 

Similarly, GWS have regularly failed to play to the conditions this season.

 

The ideal GWS game is a fast one with runners going in waves.

 

They want that orange tsunami rolling to get the ball out of defence with huge amounts of handballing and pinpoint kicking to targets inside 50.

 

That’s not to say that they’re a soft or low effort team as they do score heavily off pressure and turnover and are an excellent contested ball team, but the tsunami is their trademark.

 

Their destruction of Brisbane in round 7 was perhaps the best example of the best of GWS. They scored 72 points off turnover and basically split their scoring 50/50 between scores from the defensive half and scores from the forward half, all while dominating contested ball.

 

That game is pretty.

 

When it’s going, the way GWS play is the best advertisement for the product in the league. But this is football. It can’t always be beautiful.

 

The next game against Sydney in round 8, for instance, wasn’t beautiful. It was raining like they were in the jungles of Vietnam that afternoon and Charlie surfed, with Sydney playing the conditions like they were Viet Cong. They gained 600 more metres, had 25 more inside 50s, and had 20 more kicks.

 

GWS, meanwhile, comfortably won the handball count. They might as well have done a George Bush and rolled out the Mission Accomplished banner after a couple of weeks in Iraq.

 

GWS tried to play their overlap handball and run game, but the conditions didn’t allow it and GWS failed terribly to adapt. They had the same issues against Essendon and more dramatically against the Western Bulldogs in rounds 9 and 10.

 

If teams can effectively pressure their intricate handball game and ball movement in general, GWS have no plan B.

 

Even Charlize Theron can get ugly when she needs to, like she did in Monster. Glen Powell tried in Hit Man. 

 

GWS have shown no ability to do the same.

 

Until Saturday.

 

While GWS lost the game against Hawthorn, for the first time this season they played the swirling breeze of UTAS stadium and were clearly most effective when they got the ball forward hastily and bet on their talent rather than their system.

 

(As an aside, the only reason I know that the breeze was swirly at UTAS was because it almost always is at that ground. Fox Footy weren’t at the ground, which is a disgrace. Why would you pay $4.5bn for the rights to show the games then not even get your staff on a Rex flight so they can go from Melbourne to Tasmania. It’s like an hour flight. They wouldn’t even need a bag of peanuts.)

 

At points in the final three quarters, GWS seemed to acknowledge what was obvious to anyone watching the game: the Giants have better players than Hawthorn, particularly ground level players in the forward line.

 

They decided, then, that the wisest move would be just to hack the ball deep and bet on Brent Daniels and Xavier O’Halloran particularly to make goals.

 

That bet proved right quite often, as GWS took only 9 marks inside 50 for the game (normally they are second in the league for marks inside 50 with 14. North Melbourne, who are 18th, average 9.1) but still scored from 51% of their inside 50 entries, which is better than their season average. They also scored their most points since the Brisbane win in round 7, mostly from clean work off dirty entries.

 

Hawthorn won the game mostly when GWS was trying to play their tsunami game, as the Hawks regularly chopped off short handballs and kicks on their way to scoring a decisive 8.6 off GWS turnovers.

 

But when GWS played a dirty game and got the ball deep quickly and forced repeat stoppages and repeat entries, their good players were better than Hawthorn.

 

That’s the lesson.

 

GWS have, in my view, the best or second-best list in football.

 

They have the two best high half forwards, one of the best stoppage midfielders, a midfield that bats deep when everyone is fit, probably the All-Australian full forward, exceptional tall defenders, and good runners off half back.

 

When the ball movement is good, it’s irrepressible.

 

But sometimes football is about getting out of your own way.

 

If Adam Kingsley saw the success of GWS’ dirty entries on Saturday afternoon the way I did and is willing to go to an uglier style of play more readily, GWS will be held in good stead moving forward.

 

They lost, but it could be the loss they had to have.