Hoops

Childress Out For Remainder of GF Series

If only it was consistently called that way. Hence the confusion around what the hell the rule is this year/week/last 5 minutes...

If he doesn't extend the arm, it's within his cylinder and it's no foul.

The question is whether he had established defensive position. I think he did. But either way, there was no foul because of anything he did with his *arm*.

This is seriously basketball rules 101.

There is so much confusion around calls in the NBL because there is not really any consistency in what is being called. Do we go on the rules in the rule book (which Fiba keep changing anyway) or go with the way the refs are calling the rules from one week to the next?

Tell that to the refs. A lot of the Centers/ forwards in this league would love them to know that rule.

Notice Boone says "arm" and not arms. I really don't think Barlow tried to hurt him on purpose.

His left arm is up but he makes no effert to get the right one up and it makes contact with Childress's body. I'm calling 2 free throws and that's it.

Interesting to read the United perspective on the Barlow Childress incident.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/basketball/melbourne-united-defend-barlow-will-flex-when-they-win-title-20180322-p4z5oo.html
AS I said earleir when I saw the vieo for the dirt time the other day I thought Chilress ran into Barlow.

Boone says"“Barlow stood straight up and put his arm up and Josh jumped into him,” Boone said.
“If you disagree you can watch the video, it was an awkward play but he ran into a very strong guy and in no way were we trying to hurt him.”
That's exactly how I saw it IMO.

not saying it was a tunnel in respect of intent ( which seems to be the great unwashed definition of tunnelling, if not FIBA's), just a stupid illeagal move on barlow's part that put another player into a risk situation.

1) was there physical contact between barlow and childress while childress was in the air - yes

2) was Barlow stationary or moving away from childress during the contact - Not stationary , seems to be moveing backwards into the contact

what the contact to the centre of barlow's chest , No , it was to his back while moving backwards into Childress

was there disadvantage to Childress because of the contact - yes he fell rather than landed as his legs were moved out from under him.

Did Barlow intend for this contact - probably not.

Did Childress use barlow as a "leg up" to jump - No

Would there have been any public outrage if an "ordinary" foul had been called on Barlow ? - No

IMHO pretty hard not to argue that a foul could easily have been called on barlow with little outrage by anyone, including barlow.

... with no bandwidth to boot!

"How was Barlow still on the court. The tunnelling foul should have been an ejection. USF at the very least."

Saying Barlow tunnelled Childress is one of the finer examples of stupidity on Hoops.

In Josh's last interview the reporter asks if he could play if there was a game 5. He says he wouldn't rule it out. Think the reporter jizzed in his pants from the look on his face.

The right arm of Barlow is down and makes heavy contact with the body of Childress so I'm saying foul in the act of shooting (going on consistency over a number of years of that being the call). Nothing more than that though. He could have put both arms up but was probably bracing for inevitable contact with the right.

Barlow tunneled someone?

How was Barlow still on the court. The tunnelling foul should have been an ejection. USF at the very least.

Fair enough- maybe Childress was very important after all.

No foul on Barlow there.

I agree that by the standards of Game 2 it was a foul. But if every game was reffed like Game 2, I'd probably lose interest in basketball, after nearly 25 years of playing, watching, and sometimes coaching, reporting on it...

What is Childress' +/- and Deng's in this series?

In Game 1 Childress was shut down by Barlow.

In Game 2, it was late in the second quarter when Deng came on that Adelaide really extended their lead from a few points to 15 or 16 at the main break. Deng ended up with 18 points in 16 minutes.

Wow. I just saw the clip and it was almost as if Childress charged into Barlow and he went down. No foul what so ever IMO.
Unlucky he got hurt. Clearly shows his fragility and the unluckyness he attracts.

Haha, chill, pardon the pun.

What Thunder Jam said is funny

Thunder Jam it was a second scan on the back that showed referred pain was coming from there. do you even know where the scapula is ? Grow up and be a civiliswd intelligent human being if that is at all possible

We rolled the dice with Childress knowing his history. Damn bad luck.

At least we learned something. Never get scans done in Adelaide!

Wow lucky break for Manu's $$$.

I agree Tornado I'd like to see Deng come into the starting lineup now.

This is a directive from the top. Childress was ordered by LK to claim it was a season-ending injury so that United could win the championship. He's not even injured

Big blow, he's been huge int he Playoffs. I still think they can do well without him though, he wasn't always huge during the season and Adelaide went alright. They're a deep team so hopefully some guys can step up and make the series interesting.

This is where Champion teams show you what they are made of...they either thrive under the adversity or they buckle.

Similarly, this is where players make a name for themselves.

You have to reward Deng at this point and elevate him into the starting 5. He has the length to defend the perimeter and the paint and has the ability to draw Boone/Wesley away from the paint...taking them out of rebounding contests and keeping the lanes open for the likes of Shorter, Sobey & Creek.

You would keep Moore first off the bench as that is the role he has played so well all year...no need to unsettle that.

However, it would not surprise me to see Joey elevate Teys to the starting 5 much like he did in the finals a few years back.

On another note....are Ware and Boone actually injured or is that just all speculation?

Deng, Moore should fill the void admirably, slight loss off depth but still either teams ball game.

Childress goes down, so lets abuse one poorly run entertainments venue for lack of eftpos facilities...

14 See the whole country pleased... WTF

There are likely more that hate Mel Bun than Adelaide and for the love
of the game they want to see a good series with all players in it.

Gee Melbourne your tickets really are cheaper than I thought they were

If the Adelaide bigs don't rack up fouls they should be right. Early foul trouble will be telling though. Boone looked to be hobbled on Friday so see how he pulls up. Childress leaves a big hole to fill...

Deng can be good on the boards, but he's got big shoes to fill there. It'll be interested to see what the Starting 5 will look like. I guess in a small way that's an ace that Wright has up his sleeve. He can make a change that Melbourne might not expect. He could throw Hodgy back in the starting 5, but it could just as easily be Deng, Drmic or Moore.

In fact, to add to the above, I thought in Game 1 Barlow locked Childress down really well. And Melbourne was able to clog up the paint with plenty of helpside D, as Adelaide wasn't threatening from outside.

Having Deng as an outside threat at the 4- or Creek at the 4 with Drmic coming in at the 3- will mean Melbourne's D needs to spread and the driving lanes will open up a bit more for everyone else.

I'm a big fan of Deng. This gives him a real opportunity.

Obviously a totally different type of player to Childress, but has the potential to be really dangerous- he can run the lanes and shoot 3's.

This hurts Adelaide's rebounding advantage but it could help them spread the floor and get their outside game going, with Deng and Drmic getting more time.

Disappointing- I'd rather see United beat a full strength Adelaide team.

Having said that, Ware and Boone are both under an injury cloud and I see them as far more important to Melbourne's structure than Childress is to Adelaide's. And we're yet to hear much about their ongoing status? Obviously they'll play but I guess we'll never really know exactly how impeded they are by their injuries.

Sixers in 4

United are in trouble

This is terrible news, Melbourne favourites now.

I am sad, yet pretty okay with this news

Massive adelaide fab here... sadly his ends the series. The absolute worst guy adelaide could lose at this point. The intangibles he offered was immense. United just caught up in the depth department. Unless there is another chapter to this book, United probably win in 4.

As a United fan this disappoints me for Chill, the 36ers, and also the series. He is a pivotal piece to their campaign.

and they said a no. 16 would never beat a no. 1 in the NCAA - hardly game over - time for someone else to step up

Big loss but yeah, it's not like Adelaide don't have depth. Deng and Drmic don't do all the things that Childress does obviously, but both are capable of filling it up.

Adelaide responded well when Creek went out earlier in the season. Most people wrote them off for those games. You gotta think Deng will get minutes. Hodgson will be begged to stay out of foul trouble, and everyone else is gonna have to crash the boards like their life depends on it.

Huge blow. Series defining unfortunately for the Sixers. Can't see them winning it from here.

Having watched most games on One, I think the mini into gimmic's used are quite creative and really funny. I know One HD have their faults but this part is quite good. What are people thoughts on these?

My favourite two would have to be in Sydney, when Andrew Gaze was rolling around in the big see through ball and in Melbourne when Carfino was part of the Cheerleaders dancing routine. What are your favourites?