I think there were a number of factors, as there always is. Of course missing key personnel doesn't help - Houlihan in particular has been pretty remarkable this year in terms of kicking a goal a game and locking down an opposing half back (generally one of the drivers of the opposition). That being said on paper we still had clear ascendancies in the ruck, defence and IMHO midfield so it wasnt a factor. Equally the games played - well' we won in Port after 5 days...

I think in the first half we really struggled to beat the zone. Hawks played some deep to stop our switching (and we gave up 3 goals to errors in trying to do this) and also some 75-90 metres away to stop us going long (and indeed over the zone). Clearly this means there must have been space but we couldnt find it. We panicked when we couldnt find it - there were a number of handballs to non-moving targets deep in the zone and a few goals lost to that.

The only time we had the ascendancy was in the third when Jacobs and hendo took some pack marks and we kicked to stationary targets. Not our Game A plan, more a back up plan. They didnt really find space here other than a couple of turnovers that went our way. We should have been closer at three quarter time but thopse misses were very poor. Betts' miss from 20 is very weak and not the first time he has done that. Bad kicking from that distance from your 2nd forward is shocking football and he must do better.

The last was a feeble effort and this is where the other factors looked like they were in play; in truth they gave up because they couldnt get through the zone and when the Hawks came through we gave up.

Clarkson must still be working on improving the zone. it worked better for him this week. We couldnt work it out. (Q. Are we a better MCG team this year, needing space?)

Overall i think we didnt structure up or modify the plan as it was rolled out. They tried switching the KPPs out to minimal impact, given we were missing the run and drive from having a more effective zone against us.