# Essendon v Collingwood — AFL Round 7 2026 AI Prediction by Alphr

## Full Time: Essendon 60 – 137 Collingwood

_Collingwood demolish Essendon._

Half time: 22 – 36 · Alphr AI pre-game win probability: Essendon 46% / Collingwood 54% · MCG · Sat, 25 Apr, 03:20 pm AEST

**Goal Kickers** — Essendon: Archer Day-Wicks (20' ×2), Sam Durham (34'), Nate Caddy (58' ×3 Tipped ⚡), Isaac Kako (71'), Kyle Langford (69' ×2) · Collingwood: Lachie Schultz (8' 1st Tipped ⚡), Jordan de Goey (22' ×3 Tipped ⚡), Will Hayes (23'), Beau McCreery (37' ×2), Scott Pendlebury (61' ×2), Angus Anderson (63' ×2), Roan Steele (66'), Daniel McStay (70' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Jamie Elliott (76' ×2 Tipped ⚡), Patrick Lipinski (72'), Jack Crisp (75'), Steele Sidebottom (80')

### Match Winner — AI Prediction Market (resolved)

| Team | Pre-game AI win probability | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Collingwood | 54% | Won |
| Essendon | 46% | Lost |

Model call: **Correct** · Margin: 5.2 predicted → 77 actual · Markets hit: 1/4

_AI win probability priced pre-game · Markets hit = core betting markets._

### Full-Time Report

**Essendon Bombers vs Collingwood Magpies Prediction & Tips | AFL Round 7 2026**

_By Ben Dunlop · Published: 24 Apr 2026, 08:14 am · Last updated: 25 Apr 2026, 10:03 pm_

Essendon 60–137 Collingwood in AFL Round 7 at MCG. Here's how the result stacked up against the model's call, with the win-probability story and where the value landed.

Essendon actually won the tackle count, 42 to 38, and their disposal efficiency at 79.2 per cent was better than Collingwood's 77.3. On another day those are the sort of numbers that keep a side in a contest. Instead Essendon ended up on the wrong end of a 137–60 scoreline at the MCG, so whatever they were doing right clearly wasn't enough of it.

The problem was volume, not polish. Essendon finished with 365 disposals to Collingwood's 458, and once Collingwood started winning the footy at that clip, tackling efficiently and using it well stopped mattering as much. You can't tackle what you don't have the ball to contest, and Essendon lost the hit-out count 19 to 29, which handed Collingwood first use again and again.

That ruck deficit fed everything else. Collingwood won contested possession 141 to 108 and turned that into 62 inside 50s against Essendon's 34. Once it got forward, Collingwood was clean, 18 marks inside 50 to Essendon's 10, and at the other end their defenders read the ball in flight well enough to rack up 69 intercepts to Essendon's 55. Essendon's own defence rating of 989 wasn't far off Collingwood's 1015 coming in, but the gap showed up exactly where you'd expect, in repeat forward entries Essendon simply couldn't stem.

The scoreboard tells the same story in stages. Essendon were within nine points at quarter time, 24–15, competitive enough. By half time it had stretched to 36–22. Then the third quarter broke it open, Collingwood piling on 43 points to Essendon's 14 to lead 79–36 at the last change, and the final term was just an extension of that, Collingwood adding 58 more to close it out at 137–60.

Essendon came in with the higher midfield rating, 1011 to 964, and the clearance count backs that up, 28 to 29, near enough a wash. But Collingwood held real edges everywhere else that was rated, forwards 1056 to 960, ruck 1064 to 986, defence 1015 to 989, and on this evidence those are the numbers that decided it, not the midfield.

Form lines pointed to a tighter affair than what turned up. Essendon were averaging 99.5 points a game over their last five and conceding 78.9, decent numbers that didn't survive contact here. Collingwood, despite a modest scoring average of 72.3 across that same stretch, had banked more wins, 3.1 to 1.1, and an average winning margin of 25.5 points. They didn't just match that trend, they blew past it.

Alphr's model backed Collingwood at 54 per cent and got the winner right. The margin was the miss: picked at 5.2 points, it landed at 77. The total ran hot too, 197 points played out against a predicted 165. One from four on the line items for this one, a reminder that picking the right team and picking the right game are two different jobs.

**Scoring by Quarter**

| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essendon | 15 | 7 | 14 | 24 | 60 |
| Collingwood | 24 | 12 | 43 | 58 | 137 |

**Key Match Stats**

| Essendon | Stat | Collingwood |
|---|---|---|
| 365 | Disposals | **458** |
| 108 | Contested poss. | **141** |
| 28 | Clearances | **29** |
| 34 | Inside 50s | **62** |
| 89 | Marks | **134** |
| 10 | Marks inside 50 | **18** |
| **42** | Tackles | 38 |
| 19 | Hit-outs | **29** |
| 55 | Intercepts | **69** |
| **79.2%** | Disposal eff. | 77.3% |

**Model Report Card**

Our model correctly predicted Collingwood to win at 54% probability. The margin model missed here, predicting 5.2 but the actual margin was 77 points. The game's 197 points came in 32 points higher than the predicted 165. Collingwood led 22–36 at the break and pulled away in the second half to win by 77. The model went 1/4 on this match.

_Official AFL match stats · Generated by Alphr's model_

### Edge Analysis — the model's pre-game markets

- **Head to Head:** Collingwood to win @ $1.41 (edge -17.3%) — model probability 53.6% — result: WON
- **Line / Spread:** Essendon +16.5 @ $1.90 (edge +21.7%) — result: LOST
- **Margin Band:** Essendon 1-39 @ $3.30 (edge +0.0%) — result: LOST
- **Total (Over/Under):** Under 179.5 @ $1.90 (edge +2.4%) — result: LOST
- Predicted margin: Essendon by 5 · Predicted total: 165

### H2H History (Last 5) — Collingwood lead 3-1

| Season | Round | Home | Score | Away |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | R7 | Collingwood | 107 – 66 | Essendon |
| 2024 | R17 | Collingwood | 80 – 92 | Essendon |
| 2024 | R7 | Essendon | 85 – 85 | Collingwood |
| 2023 | R24 | Essendon | 31 – 101 | Collingwood |
| 2023 | R6 | Collingwood | 90 – 77 | Essendon |

### Positional Matchup

_Season-to-date production per game with league-wide attack/defence tiers (18 teams)._

**Forwards** (Key Forwards · Med/Mid Forwards)

|  | Essendon | Collingwood |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 16th (weak) | 13th (weak) |
| Defence rank | 16th (weak) | 9th |
| Goals scored · conceded | 41 · 64 | 47 · 52 |
| Goal Assists | 2.7/g | 4.5/g |
| Disposals | 66/g | 116/g |
| Inside 50s | 12.3/g | 21.8/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 6/g | 7.7/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 65.7% | 68.6% |

**Midfield & Ruck** (Midfielders · Rucks)

|  | Essendon | Collingwood |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 3rd (strong) | 11th |
| Defence rank | 13th (weak) | 1st (strong) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 28 · 22 | 15 · 11 |
| Goal Assists | 4.2/g | 3.2/g |
| Disposals | 137/g | 124/g |
| Inside 50s | 20.2/g | 17.5/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 3/g | 1.7/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 75.3% | 73.8% |

**Defenders** (Key & Medium Defenders)

|  | Essendon | Collingwood |
|---|---|---|
| Attack rank | 8th | 16th (weak) |
| Defence rank | 12th | 3rd (strong) |
| Goals scored · conceded | 6 · 7 | 1 · 2 |
| Goal Assists | 2.3/g | 1/g |
| Disposals | 155/g | 135/g |
| Inside 50s | 14.2/g | 12.8/g |
| Marks Inside 50 | 1/g | 0.7/g |
| Disposal Efficiency | 79.6% | 80.7% |

**Who scores on Collingwood** — Rucks 0.56/g (lg 0.48) +17% · Defenders 1.17/g (lg 1.17) +0% · Midfielders 2.31/g (lg 2.5) -8%
**Who scores on Essendon** — Forwards 5.17/g (lg 4.41) +17% · Defenders 1.33/g (lg 1.17) +14% · Key Forwards 4.17/g (lg 3.79) +10%

_Goals conceded by position, last 3 seasons; positive = concedes above league average to that position._

### Goal Scorer History — Who Kicks The Goals

_Last 10 games, career record vs the opponent and at MCG. ⚡ = our AI backs them to score; 🎯 = our AI's first-goal pick. 🏉 = scored in this game. Goal % = share of games with a goal, last 10 weighted double vs the 30 prior — historical frequency, not a market price._

**Essendon** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Nate Caddy | KF | 9 in 5g | 15/10g (0·1·3·1·1·1·4·1·2·1) | 3/2g | 7/12g | 71% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.15 AI 70% ✓ Scored | 🏉 58' 64' 89' |
| – | Archer May | KF | 6 in 5g | 11/10g (3·1·0·1·0·0·0·2·2·2) | 0/0g | 1/3g | 59% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.30 AI 65% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Isaac Kako | FWD | 6 in 5g | 10/10g (1·0·0·2·1·1·1·0·2·2) | 1/1g | 7/8g | 63% | — | 🏉 71' |
| – | Peter Wright | RUC | 6 in 6g | 10/10g (1·1·2·0·1·0·2·1·1·1) | 20/11g | 54/34g | 72% | — | — |
| – | Thomas Edwards | FWD | 6 in 3g | 9/5g (3·0·2·2·2) | 0/0g | 3/1g | 80% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.29 AI 63% ✗ No goal | — |
| – | Xavier Duursma | MID | 6 in 6g | 8/10g (1·0·0·1·2·0·0·0·2·2) | 3/9g | 11/19g | 46% | — | — |
| – | Jye Caldwell | MID | 5 in 6g | 7/10g (1·0·0·1·1·1·1·1·0·1) | 1/5g | 15/28g | 50% | — | — |
| – | Sam Durham | MID | 4 in 6g | 5/10g (0·0·0·1·2·1·0·0·1·0) | 2/8g | 13/32g | 42% | — | 🏉 34' |
| – | Zach Merrett | MID | 4 in 6g | 5/10g (0·1·0·0·1·0·1·0·1·1) | 7/18g | 35/80g | 38% | — | — |
| – | Dyson Sharp | FWD | 2 in 2g | 2/2g (2·0) | 0/0g | 2/1g | 50% | — | — |
| – | Saad El-Hawli | DEF | 2 in 3g | 3/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·1·0·1) | 0/0g | 0/1g | 27% | — | — |
| – | Sullivan Robey | FWD | 2 in 2g | 2/2g (0·2) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 50% | — | — |
| – | Andrew McGrath | DEF | 1 in 6g | 2/10g (1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 1/16g | 6/56g | 8% | — | — |
| – | Archer Day-Wicks | FWD | 1 in 4g | 2/9g (1·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 0/0g | 0/2g | 22% | — | 🏉 20' 25' |
| – | Archie Roberts | DEF | 1 in 6g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0) | 0/1g | 1/10g | 12% | — | — |
| – | Elijah Tsatas | MID | 1 in 2g | 2/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·1·1·0) | 0/1g | 1/7g | 21% | — | — |
| – | Kyle Langford | DEF | 1 in 6g | 5/10g (0·2·1·1·0·1·0·0·0·0) | 15/12g | 49/50g | 62% | — | 🏉 69' 82' |
| – | Lachlan Blakiston | DEF | 1 in 6g | 1/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·1·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/4g | 11% | — | — |
| – | Ben McKay | DEF | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/7g | 0/19g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Darcy Parish | MID | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 4/13g | 21/52g | 12% | — | — |
| – | Jacob Farrow | DEF | 0 in 4g | 0/4g (0·0·0·0) | 0/0g | 0/0g | 0% | — | — |
| – | Jaxon Prior | DEF | 0 in 5g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/4g | 0/10g | 2% | — | — |
| – | Zach Reid | DEF | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 0/1g | 0/9g | 0% | — | — |

**Collingwood** (team sheet)

| # | Player | Pos | 2026 | Last 10 | vs opp | Venue | Goal % | Alphr play | This game |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| – | Daniel McStay | KF | 10 in 6g | 12/10g (1·0·0·1·1·0·2·4·1·2) | 6/9g | 46/42g | 72% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.10 AI 74% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $10.00 AI 5% ✗ Not first | 🏉 70' 76' |
| – | Tim Membrey | KF | 9 in 6g | 13/10g (2·0·0·2·0·1·4·1·1·2) | 19/13g | 60/33g | 80% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.19 AI 81% ✗ No goal; 🎯 First Goal $12.00 AI 7% ✗ Not first | — |
| – | Jamie Elliott | FWD | 8 in 6g | 20/10g (2·2·4·4·1·2·1·1·0·3) | 32/16g | 224/137g | 90% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.04 AI 89% ✓ Scored; 🎯 First Goal $9.00 AI 9% ✗ Not first | 🏉 76' 78' |
| – | Lachie Schultz | FWD | 6 in 6g | 9/10g (0·2·0·1·2·2·1·1·0·0) | 3/6g | 40/34g | 66% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.30 AI 68% ✓ Scored | 🏉 8' |
| – | Nick Daicos | MID | 5 in 5g | 7/10g (0·1·0·1·0·0·2·2·0·1) | 4/6g | 36/62g | 58% | — | — |
| – | Beau McCreery | FWD | 4 in 6g | 4/10g (0·0·0·0·2·1·0·0·0·1) | 6/7g | 44/60g | 34% | — | 🏉 37' 62' |
| – | Jordan De Goey | FWD | 4 in 5g | 7/10g (1·0·1·1·0·3·0·0·1·0) | 13/14g | 124/116g | 54% | ⚡ Anytime Goal $1.37 AI 63% ✓ Scored | 🏉 22' 57' 59' |
| – | Roan Steele | MID | 4 in 6g | 4/10g (0·0·0·0·1·2·0·1·0·0) | 0/0g | 3/6g | 29% | — | 🏉 66' |
| – | Oscar Steene | RUC | 3 in 4g | 3/4g (1·0·0·2) | 0/0g | 2/1g | 50% | — | — |
| – | Jack Crisp | MID | 2 in 6g | 4/10g (1·1·0·0·0·1·0·0·1·0) | 10/20g | 52/157g | 38% | — | 🏉 75' |
| – | Angus Anderson | FWD | 1 in 2g | 1/2g (1·0) | 0/0g | 0/1g | 50% | — | 🏉 63' 78' |
| – | Dan Houston | DEF | 1 in 6g | 3/10g (1·0·0·1·0·0·1·0·0·0) | 5/11g | 8/33g | 26% | — | — |
| – | Darcy Cameron | RUC | 1 in 6g | 3/10g (1·0·1·0·1·0·0·0·0·0) | 8/8g | 39/73g | 30% | — | — |
| – | Patrick Lipinski | FWD | 1 in 6g | 3/10g (0·0·1·1·0·0·0·0·0·1) | 3/8g | 30/61g | 34% | — | 🏉 72' |
| – | William Hayes | FWD | 1 in 2g | 2/4g (0·1·0·1) | 0/0g | 2/2g | 50% | — | 🏉 23' |
| – | Billy Frampton | DEF | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 2/8g | 4/31g | 2% | — | — |
| – | Brayden Maynard | DEF | 0 in 6g | 1/10g (0·1·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/18g | 15/142g | 12% | — | — |
| – | Harry Perryman | DEF | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 3/11g | 3/33g | 10% | — | — |
| – | Isaac Quaynor | DEF | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 1/8g | 3/79g | 4% | — | — |
| – | Jeremy Howe | DEF | 0 in 4g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 6/17g | 56/165g | 8% | — | — |
| – | Josh Daicos | DEF | 0 in 6g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 6/11g | 30/90g | 6% | — | — |
| – | Scott Pendlebury | MID | 0 in 5g | 0/10g (0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 8/24g | 80/187g | 16% | — | 🏉 61' 84' |
| – | Steele Sidebottom | MID | 0 in 5g | 4/10g (0·0·1·3·0·0·0·0·0·0) | 18/22g | 105/184g | 28% | — | 🏉 80' |

### Player Props — Disposal Counts

_Bookmaker disposal lines vs our model's read. ⚡ = the validated under signal (model ≥10 points past the price) — everything else is market intel, not a tip. The ⚡ under signal's verified record: 57.7% of 1,278 flags in 2025._

**Essendon**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Archie Roberts ⚡ Under | 33.5 | $1.87 | 73% | 42 ✗ |
| Zach Merrett | 29.5 | $1.91 | 56% | 22 ✓ |
| Darcy Parish | 28.5 | $1.88 | 60% | 23 ✓ |
| Elijah Tsatas ⚡ Under | 25.5 | $1.87 | 94% | 18 ✓ |
| Kyle Langford ⚡ Under | 22.5 | $1.77 | 90% | 20 ✓ |
| Jye Caldwell | 22.5 | $1.91 | 46% | 16 ✓ |
| Jacob Farrow ⚡ Under | 21.5 | $1.77 | 81% | 19 ✓ |
| Andrew McGrath | 20.5 | $1.93 | 33% | 22 ✗ |
| Sam Durham | 16.5 | $1.83 | 25% | 15 ✓ |

**Collingwood**

| Player | Line | Under | AI Under | Actual |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nick Daicos | 33.5 | $1.88 | 59% | 42 ✗ |
| Josh Daicos | 27.5 | $1.88 | 63% | 35 ✗ |
| Dan Houston ⚡ Under | 24.5 | $1.85 | 66% | 27 ✗ |
| Scott Pendlebury ⚡ Under | 24.5 | $1.90 | 64% | 43 ✗ |
| Jack Crisp | 22.5 | $1.80 | 52% | 28 ✗ |
| Patrick Lipinski | 18.5 | $1.87 | 56% | 22 ✗ |
| Brayden Maynard | 17.5 | $1.87 | 40% | 18 ✗ |
| Darcy Cameron | 16.5 | $1.90 | 49% | 15 ✓ |
| Harry Perryman | 16.5 | $1.83 | 43% | 20 ✗ |

**Prediction by Alphr** (https://alphr.com.au) — free AI predictions for every AFL, NRL & Super League match, published before kick-off and never edited. Verified track record: https://alphr.com.au/accuracy

---
Canonical URL: https://alphr.com.au/afl/match/2026-r7-essendon-v-collingwood
RSS feed: https://alphr.com.au/feed.xml
Prediction JSON API: today https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/today · this week https://alphr.com.au/api/predictions/weekly
Markdown view for AI agents. Machine-readable index: https://alphr.com.au/llms.txt · full reference: https://alphr.com.au/llms-full.txt
All predictions are published before kick-off and verified after full time. Free, no login. 18+ gamble responsibly (AU).
Last updated: 2026-04-25 12:03 UTC (latest tip update)