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

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.

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.

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

I am sad, yet pretty okay with this news

This is terrible news, Melbourne favourites now.

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.

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.

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.

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...

Feel bad for him I hope he comes back next year.
Nothing has changed for me I still think Melbourne will win the title.

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?

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

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

Champion teams win when the chips are down. If Adelaide 36ers are a champion team they will respond to this with the energy and desire needed to overcome. I still believe they can do this.

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

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

I was starting to lean towards possibly Adelaide in 4. I'll now lock in Melbourne in 5.

Haha, chill, pardon the pun.

What Thunder Jam said is funny

Bad luck to Childress

Is David Barlow made of steel?

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.

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...

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

Barlow tunneled someone?

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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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?

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.

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