Pretty limp wristed performance in the end.

Would really love to hear Bailey's reasoning for leaving Carroll out.

It cost us dearly having our three best defenders out (including Melbourne's most important player in Rivers).

There was just no resistance in the back half.

You cannot expect players like Frawley or Bell to be able to stand up and hold a very strong forward line like the Crows without the help of a bit of strength and experience.

ADELAIDE 150

MELBOURNE 73

We are letting teams kick disgustingly large scores against us.

Hawthorn next week could well score 200 points if we aren't able to produce a much more defense-minded performance.

I understand that Bailey wants to be attacking and optimistic, however he needs to understand how disheartening it is to see such mammoth scores being kicked by the opposition.

adelaide had 8 players score > 100 supercoach points... we had none... shows how much we were outplayed in the end...

Seems Bailey's knowledge of footy park did not help - anyway bring on the Hawks

Bailey's doing the right thing for the club. We could have played Carroll, Holland, Whelan and Yze today and we might have possibly finished up losing by 50 points instead of by 76.

The coach did say well before the season began that our future was in our 23 and under age group. I say keep playing the side we had today (allowing for form and the inclusion of even more youth) and get the experience of games in their legs. We'll have our good days and we'll have our bad days with the latter strongly outweighing the former but it's the only way to go forward.

Bailey's doing the right thing for the club. We could have played Carroll, Holland, Whelan and Yze today and we might have possibly finished up losing by 50 points instead of by 76.

I doubt if Holland and Yze will play again. I think Whelan will when injuries/illness sorted. I also think Carroll will play again when match ups demand. Adelaide have a very mobile forward set up; not Carroll's forte.

i thought garland looked ok today. and frawley had a dig and tried to use his body (or what there is of it). at least they had a go. play them 20 games and they will be better players next year imo

Bailey's doing the right thing for the club. We could have played Carroll, Holland, Whelan and Yze today and we might have possibly finished up losing by 50 points instead of by 76.

The coach did say well before the season began that our future was in our 23 and under age group. I say keep playing the side we had today (allowing for form and the inclusion of even more youth) and get the experience of games in their legs. We'll have our good days and we'll have our bad days with the latter strongly outweighing the former but it's the only way to go forward.

I absolutely disagree.

You put your best team on the park each week and Nathan Carroll should be one of the first picked.

What confidence does it give any footballer (or supporter)to see Carroll dropped for NO reason?

There is no communication from the club just speculation from trusting supporters.

To have Rivers injured yet again and to play Bell while dropping Carroll is bad coaching.

This total trust in bailey has hairs on it for mine.

What gives with Jared Rivers...injury or illness?

I absolutely disagree.

You put your best team on the park each week and Nathan Carroll should be one of the first picked.

What confidence does it give any footballer (or supporter)to see Carroll dropped for NO reason?

i'm sure there was a reason, and carroll would've been told that reason and told to work at it down at sandy...

as for a reason for the supporters the coach doesn't have to come out and justify every decision he makes to us... we would like him too, but it wouldn't be good for the team for him to do so...

I absolutely disagree.

You put your best team on the park each week and Nathan Carroll should be one of the first picked.

What confidence does it give any footballer (or supporter)to see Carroll dropped for NO reason?

There is no communication from the club just speculation from trusting supporters.

To have Rivers injured yet again and to play Bell while dropping Carroll is bad coaching.

This total trust in bailey has hairs on it for mine.

The Hawthorn folk said much the same about Al Clarkson back in 2005. They should have kept playing guys like Mark Graham and Jonathan Hay.

Bailey's doing the right thing for the club. We could have played Carroll, Holland, Whelan and Yze today and we might have possibly finished up losing by 50 points instead of by 76.

I'd argue that it may well have been worse had we played Carroll, Holland, Yze & co.

It was some of the younger players today that provided the excitement and spark for us. Garland, looked good up forward early when we were still in it, and when sent back in the second half, looked more composed and instinctive than he has all year. Aussie continues to impress, Cale was outstanding in the first half as was Jones, Buckley found lots of the footy (still needs to work on his desicion making though), Bell (ditto Buckley), Bartram's job on Andrew McLeod was great. Bate looked ok in his 2nd game back. All of these young guys will be better off in the long run for the experience and game time they got today.

It was a brave move bringing PJ in ahead of Carroll to replace Rivers, and many would argue it didnt pay off. But i actually thought PJ did quite well on Tippett despite conceding 4 goals (one per quarter). He was good on a few occassions in the air, and managed to nulify Tippett one-on-one and get a fist onto the high ball better than i'd imagine Carroll would have. It was a good match-up physically, better than Carroll v Tippett, with Tippett only prevailing in the end thru sheer weight and quality of numbers in supply from the Crows mids. Could have gone either way, as Tippett got a couple of lucky goals, but also missed one or two he should have got.

I still prefer PJ as a ruckman, but its good to know he has the versatility to take the big forward match-up (Ben Holland backline role) as another option. Jamar was pure cr*p today, 1 ineffective handball, no marks and 16 hitouts were his contribution, and no immediate match-up springs to mind for PJ in the Hawks forwardline, so i'd imagine he'll return to second ruck duties next week.

Jamar's "bash-into-other-ruckman-at-all-costs" ploy used so well against Sandilands last week, was exposed by the umpires, and he gave away several frees for having eyes on his opponent rather than the ball at stoppages.

There were definitely some positives, but the performance of our leaders continues to be a worry, as does the collective skill level of the group as a whole.

i thought garland looked ok today. and frawley had a dig and tried to use his body (or what there is of it). at least they had a go. play them 20 games and they will be better players next year imo

Our defernce was seriously undermanned without Rivers, Carroll and Wheatley (plus Whelan). They showed signs of being OK given inexperience and the ease the ball came in thru the centre of the ground.

MFC total lack of any defensive presure in 2nd & 3rd qtrs - getting towelled up in the middle and half forward line was non existent today. Aussie and Aaron were good in firts half and Batram held McLeod. Again it was more senior players who did not contribute much. Bruce, MacDonald and Brock was well held.

Suspect that DB conceded would lose the game and used it a development game for the future.

Main fault is decision making. Whitey run down from behind when called to play on of back line and Beamer after ducking two didnt know where to go were the worst!

PS to that idiot Pickering who was commenting on Fox. It is Mathew Warnock who plays for MFC not Robert! Suppose that does make his comment that Robert did not get close for the spoil correct! After all Perth is a fair way from Adelaide! Called him Robert several times and not corrected! Accuracy died with Fox Footy chanel!

OTHER MATCH TODAY:

SYDNEY 143

ESSENDON 52

I'd argue that it may well have been worse had we played Carroll, Holland, Yze & co.

It was some of the younger players today that provided the excitement and spark for us. Garland, looked good up forward early when we were still in it, and when sent back in the second half, looked more composed and instinctive than he has all year. Aussie continues to impress, Cale was outstanding in the first half as was Jones, Buckley found lots of the footy (still needs to work on his desicion making though), Bell (ditto Buckley), Bartram's job on Andrew McLeod was great. Bate looked ok in his 2nd game back. All of these young guys will be better off in the long run for the experience and game time they got today.

It was a brave move bringing PJ in ahead of Carroll to replace Rivers, and many would argue it didnt pay off. But i actually thought PJ did quite well on Tippett despite conceding 4 goals (one per quarter). He was good on a few occassions in the air, and managed to nulify Tippett one-on-one and get a fist onto the high ball better than i'd imagine Carroll would have. It was a good match-up physically, better than Carroll v Tippett, with Tippett only prevailing in the end thru sheer weight and quality of numbers in supply from the Crows mids. Could have gone either way, as Tippett got a couple of lucky goals, but also missed one or two he should have got.

I still prefer PJ as a ruckman, but its good to know he has the versatility to take the big forward match-up (Ben Holland backline role) as another option. Jamar was pure cr*p today, 1 ineffective handball and a dozen hitouts his contribution, and no immediate match-up for springs to mind for PJ in the Hawks forwardline, so i'd imagine he'll return to second ruck duties next week.

There were definitely some positives, but the performance of our leaders continues to be a worry, as does the collective skill level of the group as a whole.

I agree entirely with you. And I think PJ was preferred to Carroll just because of matchups.

A real worry for me, is Bruce's foot skills look to be deteriorating, and Jones poor disposal. These are key players.

OTHER MATCH TODAY:

SYDNEY 143

ESSENDON 52

Bombers are looking to make a serious play for the spoon.

A real worry for me, is Bruce's foot skills look to be deteriorating, and Jones poor disposal. These are key players.

Listened to the game on 774...which was next to useless as they didn't seem to know many of the Melbourne players names.

Was disappointed with Bruce's shots on goal, a couple sounded quite getable...how in this day & age of bio-mechanics etc etc can a players kicking skills get worse?

As for the debate about playing mature players v the kids...lets face it - right now were stuffed - we have to be looking two years ahead.

It was some of the younger players today that provided the excitement and spark for us. ......

And don't forget Valenti - 6 tackles & 10 possessions - pretty handy 1st game - don't know how much ground time he had.

Listened to the game on 774...which was next to useless as they didn't seem to know many of the Melbourne players names.

The feed was from Adelaide ABC commentators - I used to live in Adelaide (sigh) - and their parochialism was unbelievable, worse than Perth.

They don't commentate, they barrack. At one stage when Bock was bouncing down the wing, Peter Walsh shouted "Go Bocky!"

Pathetic - ABC should be better than that

And don't forget Valenti - 6 tackles & 10 possessions - pretty handy 1st game - don't know how much ground time he had.

Not an outstanding debut, but very solid first hitout for Shane. Looked comfortable at the level. Spent a bit of time up forward, and a bit on the pine too, but was very positive with what he did with the ball today. His defensive pressure when up forward was top notch. Pickering on Fox called him "quick"! hahah... tho he's a [censored], but it sure goes to show he certainly wasnt as shown up for pace as many thought he'd be.

Pathetic - ABC should be better than that

In Melbourne the ABC are the best for calling footy, but today I didn't even bother because as you mentioned it is all just completely one-sided.

We have to keep playing the kids at the expense of the older players, Yze, Holland, Crrol etc.

Football is a business.

You do not wait for stock to run out before you order more. See Hawks as an example of this.

Seriously SEN 1116 was alright but i couldnt stand darren jarman laughter.

I absolutely disagree.

You put your best team on the park each week and Nathan Carroll should be one of the first picked.

What confidence does it give any footballer (or supporter)to see Carroll dropped for NO reason?

There is no communication from the club just speculation from trusting supporters.

To have Rivers injured yet again and to play Bell while dropping Carroll is bad coaching.

This total trust in bailey has hairs on it for mine.

Players are always dropped for a reason Franky and I've never seen it written anywhere that a coach needs to explain every selection decision.

Carroll is a one trick pony. He is a negating defender who is reads the ball coming in reasonably well, but loses body contact too often with his direct opponent in doing so. He doesn't play the third man up role particularly well and his disposal is average and decision making is less than average. He's done well to overcome a poor 07, but in general he's a footballer of limited ability. Given the willingness to trade him last year and his 'cultural' issues he may not be part of the club next year.

Today Garland, and Warnock were servicible and are improving, Frawley had a shocker (but hopefully learnt a lot) and PJ is filling in till Stef Martin is ready. Bell plays as a small defender so I'm not sure why you'd compare him to Carroll. Adelaide are one of the most professional units going around so hopefully our blokes learnt a fair bit about honesty and commitment. We stuck to our guns in the first quarter, but really did not have a single player that could influence the contest after that. Our list has a long way to go, but there's promise there and at least this year we're seeing some real development from the kids.