My own view of the game is that we played competitively in the first half while MCity were planning to take it easy (by their standards). Rado Vidosic must have had a word with the team at half time but it was only when we scored that gave MCity a sense of urgency and they switched to their regular level of performance.
In other words, we did not "fall apart". MCity lifted one notch up at 1:1 (or possibly at 2:1) and never let up until the end. They soon had good energetic skillful subs on the field who were out to prove a point, which meant the game speed remained quite high to the end; it is however not the speed but better passing that made them lethal near our box.
MCity were a much better team overall and exposed our shortcomings in player quality and tactics, much like Adelaide did recently (but worryingly also Melb Victory, twice).
For my money, the situation is made worse by what I suspect is absence of a natural, instinctive leader on the field. Others may see other reasons for our failings.
In other words, we did not "fall apart". MCity lifted one notch up at 1:1 (or possibly at 2:1) and never let up until the end. They soon had good energetic skillful subs on the field who were out to prove a point, which meant the game speed remained quite high to the end; it is however not the speed but better passing that made them lethal near our box.
MCity were a much better team overall and exposed our shortcomings in player quality and tactics, much like Adelaide did recently (but worryingly also Melb Victory, twice).
For my money, the situation is made worse by what I suspect is absence of a natural, instinctive leader on the field. Others may see other reasons for our failings.