12 down, six to go.
That’s the state of play going into the third-last weekend of season 2024; and it says something about this year that there’s still plenty of doubt not just over the two semi-finals set to take centre stage on Friday and Saturday night, but also for the grand final in a fortnight’s time.
Regardless of who makes it through, no doubt Sydney will be watching cautiously, because either a red-hot Hawthorn or a Port Adelaide outfit they haven’t beaten in eight years makes for a mighty tricky preliminary final opponent. Ditto Geelong, who were superb against a pathetic Power in the qualifying final, but who have enough structural limitations that either GWS or Brisbane, both with significantly more talented lists on paper, would give themselves a huge chance of storming the MCG if they get past this week.
Win a Ziggy BBQ for Grand Final day, thanks to Barbeques Galore! Enter Here.
The there are the positional battles: Lachie Neale versus the returning Toby Bedford, young defender Jai Serong against (maybe) Mitch Georgiades in his first career final; Port Adelaide’s fanbase versus Ken Hinkley, no matter what the result of Friday night’s match is.
One thing’s for sure: by the time this weekend is over, we’ll have seen plenty, discovered heaps, and know absolutely no more about where this season is headed than we did when it all started back in March.
Here are five burning questions ahead of the semi-finals.
Will Port make Jack Ginnivan regret it?
Will Jack Ginnivan’s ‘see you in two weeks’ Instagram comment have any impact on his own personal performance, or that of Hawthorn, in Friday night’s semi-final?
No – whether he’s best afield or has a stinker, it will have precisely nothing to do with a tongue-in-cheek social media sledge made six days earlier.
Will that comment inspire Port Adelaide to lift their game at the Adelaide Oval?
Again, no – if a five-word dig from an opposition player is necessary to light a fire beneath any AFL team in a do-or-die final with the coach’s livelihood quite possibly riding on the outcome, then that’s an indictment on everyone at the Power.
However, there is one thing that Instagram response, and the very public reaction to it from footy media, has done: it’s given Port a target.
If there’s one thing we know about Ken Hinkley as a coach, it’s that he’s very partial to putting opposition players in the firing line. In 2019, he revealed the Power’s plan to ‘terrorise’ Lachie Neale before a clash with Brisbane; while earlier this season, repeated scuffles with Izak Rankine in the Showdown ended with Dan Houston knocking him into next week and himself into next year.
Remember Ed Langdon’s ‘all duck no dinner’ comment about Collingwood in late 2022, and the very public, brutal response from Pies players, chiefly Brayden Maynard, within seconds of the first bounce when Melbourne played them just a day later? I’d be lying if I didn’t suspect something similar – though maybe more in the vein of Tom Papley’s jostling with Toby Greene and half the GWS players in last week’s qualifying final than anything more overt.
Really, the fallout here will say more about Port Adelaide than it will Ginnivan or the Hawks. Call Ginnivan’s comment what you like, and have whatever opinion on it you wish – harmless fun or an unnecessary inflammation of an opponent, which is the great Luke Hodge’s take on it – but if the Power want to be taken seriously, they can’t walk past it on Friday night.
If they react aggressively and lose the game, then they’ll probably look like idiots and be accused of taking their eyes off the ball. But if they don’t make any response and lose the game, then the criticism will be that they were soft and allowed themselves to be disrespected. It’s a no-win situation… but only if they end up on the wrong side of the result.
Given how horrendous they were against Geelong, both the semi-final itself and Ginnivan’s Instagram escapades give the Power the perfect opportunity to make a physical, even brutal, statement on Friday night.
The Hawks star has lit the fuse: we’re about to find out just what Port Adelaide have on the end of it. If anything.
Jack Ginnivan. (Photo by Darrian Traynor/Getty Images)
Should Port sack Hinkley if they lose?
I can’t remember there ever being a coach whose future has seemed more on the line going into a finals match – but for Ken Hinkley, a straight-sets September exit in 2024 would be the culmination of years upon years of disappointment on the biggest stage of all.
In many ways, the criticisms of Hinkley have been a touch over-the-top: it’s a bit silly that in footy more than really any other sport I can think of, his legacy is significantly impeded by losses by six points or less to the eventual premiers in the 2014 and 2020 preliminary finals than they would have had he won one or both, reached the grand final, and the Power had been splattered like in 2007.
The stat most brought up for Hinkley is that he’s the longest-serving coach in VFL/AFL history without a grand final. But it’s a stat devoid of context: it’s now harder than at any point in history to make one, with 17 other teams vying for just two spots; and that it has been 18 years since any coach was sacked after a finals berth (and that one, Grant Thomas, was axed not for on-field performance, but after falling out with St Kilda’s board).
All the same, despite his contract, and despite having a winning record across his tenure that stacks up with many of the game’s greatest ever coaches, a club with the motto ‘We exist to win premierships’ can only tolerate so many disappointments on the biggest stage. And if the rumblings around the footy world are true, then it seems Hinkley is also aware of just how thin the ice he’s skating on is.
If the Power do lose, especially if it’s by a considerable margin, then I suspect something will give: maybe in the form of Hinkley resigning from his post, handing the keys to Josh Carr, and instantly earning himself a fresh start at the heavily interested West Coast Eagles.
Without a doubt that’s the cleanest scenario for all parties, because there’s going to be a hell of a lot of anger from Port supporters if the Hawks knock them out in straight sets, anger at a level club hierarchies usually react desperately to try and mitigate.
But what if they go down by less than a goal, via a dodgy umpiring decision or score review howler? What if the Power and Hinkley get stitched up by a brutally unlucky injury run, or one of the Hawks players does a ‘Houston on Rankine’ and knocks out Zak Butters or Jason Horne-Francis?
That’s when we discover just how much slack Hinkley has left to cut at a club which has given him enough rope over a grand final-less 11 years that they could be forgiven for running out of slack.
It’s entirely possible, amid all that, that having backed in their man a little over 12 months ago, only something as drastic – or near to – as what happened against Geelong in the qualifying final will be enough to push them over the edge.
Ken Hinkley. (Photo by Michael Willson/AFL Photos via Getty Images)
Will Toby Bedford tag Lachie Neale… or someone else?
The Giants have confirmed tagger Toby Bedford’s fitness for the first time since Round 23 – and having been sliced by star midfielders in consecutive losses to the Western Bulldogs and Sydney without him, safe to say it’s a badly needed inclusion.
Logic dictates Lachie Neale, whom he sat on for large portions of the Giants’ clash with Brisbane at the Gabba a month ago, is the likeliest opponent. Control Neale, and the Lions’ ability to win clearances and thus dominate territory, both crucial elements to their gameplan, is substantially impeded.
All the same, Adam Kingsley would at least have to be tempted to send Bedford, a small forward for much of his career, to Dayne Zorko, whose run and kicking off half-back were so devastating against Carlton. Indeed, Kingsley thought so much of the All-Australian that he sent his own AA squad member, Lachie Whitfield, from half-back to half-forward in the final quarter of their last encounter to keep Zorko occupied.
It would, however, be a shock to see Bedford go to anyone’s side but Neale’s at the opening bounce, given his tagging job on him was relatively successful at the Gabba in Round 22.
Unless, of course, he’s not fully fit, in which case the Giants would clearly be better off backing Tom Green, Stephen Coniglio, Josh Kelly and co. to outperform the Lions around the ball, and give Bedford a more peripheral role preventing their opponents using Zorko in transition.
But if the task is given to the Giants’ crop of smalls to try and keep Zorko more occupied than the Blues were able to, well, you could hardly think of a group more capable of doing just that.
Do the Lions or Giants need this win more?
In most semi-finals, it’s the qualifying final loser, having earned the right to top four, with the most at stake going into a semi-final – especially if, in the Giants’ case, they were one straight kick and a final-term collapse away from a home prelim.
This, though, feels different: both Brisbane and GWS really, really need to win this game.
Part of it is the nature of this season – it’s as open a premiership race as we’ve ever seen, and you suspect both, despite being interstate teams, would back themselves to the hilt to overpower Geelong in a preliminary final at the MCG. And from there, well, whether it’s Sydney, Port Adelaide or Hawthorn, you’d be hard-pressed to give the Lions or Giants underdog status in a grand final.
There’s also the nature of their lists. Barring a slip-up in 2022 that brought with it the end of Leon Cameron’s tenure, the Giants have been vying for the pointy end of the ladder since 2016. In four of the last eight years, they’ve reached a preliminary final, and in two more a semi-final. It’s a similar tale for the Lions – 2024 is now the sixth consecutive season in which they’ve made it at least to the second week of September.
Both these teams are undoubtedly among the most successful of the last decade – yet they each have but one grand final and zero premierships to show for it. That’s a monkey decidedly on the backs of two of the league’s most talented lists, both with enough ageing superstars to suggest that at some point, probably soon, their window will slam shut. And just look at Richmond at the moment to see just how heavy the fall can be once that happens.
Dayne Zorko, Lachie Neale, Oscar McInerney and Joe Daniher are all on the wrong side of 30, as are Toby Greene, Stephen Coniglio and Lachie Whitfield, while Josh Kelly will join them before Round 1 of 2025.
Odds are one of these teams will have the talent underneath the ageing stars to continue competing for premierships for at least the next five years; but which one it will be probably depends on the luck of the footy gods, and whether injury or an unexpected hitting of the cliff – Greene in particular has had a concerningly underwhelming season – strikes one of those guns earlier or more suddenly than expected.
So whose has the most to lose? It will probably take a year or maybe even two to know for sure, but I suspect that if any team needs a flag out of this era to avoid wasting a period of great success, it’s Brisbane.
A shattered Lachie Neale reacts to Brisbane’s 2023 grand final defeat. (Photo by Daniel Pockett/AFL Photos/via Getty Images)
What is Bailey Smith worth?
12 teams being out of contention, and two more to follow in a few days, means we’re about to see trade talk amp up quite considerably over the next few weeks.
Already, the biggest name out of a drastically reduced available player pool is Bailey Smith, who is officially out of the Bulldogs and unofficially headed to Geelong.
You suspect this is a deal that has a number of moving parts: on one hand, Smith’s undoubted ability when at his best, importance to replenish the Cats’ midfield and his high-earning star power from a brand perspective; on the other, his being out of contract and coming straight off an injured knee; and on the other, Geelong’s reputation as being a scrupulously fair club to deal with.
The Dogs have already suggested Geelong’s first-round pick, likely to land somewhere beyond 20 depending on their preliminary final result and another looming swathe of father-son and Academy bids, isn’t going to be enough. And if I were the Cats, I’d baulk at offering two first-rounders for Smith, even two late first-rounders in the event they remain up the top on 2025, given he is both out of contract and wants to come to them, significantly weakening the Bulldogs’ bargaining position.
The truth is there’s really nothing the Cats can offer the Bulldogs for Smith in the way of draft picks that would make it an even-money trade, given how high up the ladder they are and look set to remain – even two picks in the 20s is a pretty slim sacrifice for a club that can and does turn rookies into superstars.
Yes, he’s got limitations in his kicking and decision-making, but he’s a pick 7 with a dominant finals series under his belt already, and that stuff doesn’t grow on trees.
More importantly, he’s too valuable an asset for the Cats to want to risk losing to another club in the pre-season or national draft; and unlike some others who have gone that route in recent times, such as Luke Ball and Jack Martin, you suspect Smith is good enough for someone to take a punt on him if that’s the route the Dogs go down.
Which is where Jack Macrae comes in. Another Bulldog seeking a fresh start elsewhere, Macrae, who has been linked to the Cats among other suitors, has a different set of complications to Smith.
On the one hand, he’s got three years to run on his contract, giving the Dogs extra leverage. On the other, he’s both been pushed to the periphery at the Kennel, is on too significant a chunk of money for him playing VFL to do them any good, and as a magnificent servant of the club over 249 games – including the single most important goal in Bulldogs history in the 2016 preliminary final – deserves the chance to have a crack at prolonging his career at a club that can use his talents more than the Dogs can.
My solution? Macrae AND Smith in a package deal to Geelong, in exchange for their 2024 and 2025 first-round draft picks. The clincher? The Cats take up Macrae’s entire deal, full salary and all, thereby compensating for paying unders for Smith.
The Cats get two new names to add to the midfield mix, reducing the reliance on Patrick Dangerfield; the Dogs, meanwhile, get two reasonable if not spectacular picks, remove a chunk of salary from their books, and give a club great the respect he deserves.
Of course, it’s unlikely to end up being that simple.