Not experienced enough yes, not good enough no.

You have to remember a lot of it comes down to something as simple as how many preseasons are in the legs.

It's frustrating while you're watching those final qtrs & there will no doubt be more of those type of losses this year & next, but seriously, big deal. Enjoy watching Carazzo Bentick Betts Blackwell Murphy Walker etc knowing how much better they're getting each month & what they'll be like in 2008.

As a result of the much smaller lists developing players in the Reserves is a luxury some clubs cannot afford.

Denis Pagan was right a couple of weeks back when he described the competition as being 'two-tiered'.

In very simplistic terms you have 8 teams of men playing 8 teams of boys.

I cannot remember a time in the VFL/AFL when so many 18-20 year olds were playing senior football at the same time across the competition.

I reckon the balance is out of whack at the moment and the whole competition is suffering because the list restrictions are not allowing 16 teams of roughly equal experience playing at the highest level. It's only half a competition at the moment.

Jarusa - this is what the myopic tools in charge of the game wanted. Small lists because there was not enough talent around the country for 16 teams.

Wanted to spread the talent around as they were sick of 5 clubs just dominating the competition through the late 60s to late 80s (ie. Essendon*, Carlton, Hawthorn, Richmond, North Melbourne).

Now they have got 8 teams "vying for a finals" with 8 teams "developing".

Is this better??? - we will see in another 10 years or so - when the tools at the AFL House get the crumbs left over after the FFA take the lions share of the FTA Channels Budgets for TV Rights Money.

Why pay shitloads for a two tier AFL Competition when you can pay shitloads to see the Socceroos vying for the Asian Cup one year and the World Cup the next, and throw in Melbourne Victory vying for the Asian Version of the Champions League.

I fear instead of changing the list structure to make it a competition of teams of roughly equal experience, the AFL will keep going down the road of changing the game (taking away the physicality) so that teams of boys are more able to compete against teams of men.

I don't understand the problem Carlton Old Skool Blues,

look at it this way. The reason we were beaten on Friday night was because of the Kangaroos mid-old age players. This list includes Harvey, Simpson, Rawlings, Petrie, Thompson, Jones, Harding, Brown, Hale, etc. Now then, remember 2004? In the second game we took North to the cleaners. Why was this the case? The answer was Teague, Scotland, De Luca, McGrath, Morrell, Harford, Camporeale, Kouta, etc.

See any similarities? Just like our win in 2004 was fools gold, so too was the Kangaroos' on Friday night. Indeed, their mid-senior age players could only just hold out our young kids. The loss means we will almost certainly have a top 3 pick in this draft. Hopefully we will have about 3 top 20 picks in total this year.

Now, would I be backing Simmo, AB, Betts, Walker, Murph, Blackwell, Kennedy, T-Bird, Bower, Hartlett, 2006 pick number 2, 2006 pick number 18, and 2006 pick number 20 against North next year? You bet I would. Would I pick them in 2008 against North? I reckon we'll be about a 10 goal better side than them at that stage.

Just sit back, calm down, smell the roses..... cause for the first time, I reckon there is some real light at the end of the tunnel for all of us in this whole sorry affair of rebuilding the club

It looks as if teams who play against Carlton pace themselves to win games. They stay within reach of victory then blow them out of the water with an outstanding quarter to win the match. Only on a few occassions have we suprised teams Melbourne & Essendon*, every other match has gone along those lines. Simply the team is not good enough at the moment, and will take time to evolve into a better side.