James Tarkowski
Re: James Tarkowski
I might be in the minority but I think it's a fucking disgraceful challenge tbf, could easily have broken his leg and it was done with full intent.
But as mentioned it's also exactly what they've done to us in the past.
It's also a shocking challenge but it's not a 'death threat' shocking challenge, but it's exactly the kind of shit they do when things go against them, which just loses them any credibility in the complaints department.
But as mentioned it's also exactly what they've done to us in the past.
It's also a shocking challenge but it's not a 'death threat' shocking challenge, but it's exactly the kind of shit they do when things go against them, which just loses them any credibility in the complaints department.
-
777Kidnappings
- Posts: 2306
- Karma: 1257
Re: James Tarkowski
AjaxAndy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 04, 2025 5:59 pm I might be in the minority but I think it's a fucking disgraceful challenge tbf, could easily have broken his leg and it was done with full intent.
But as mentioned it's also exactly what they've done to us in the past.
It's also a shocking challenge but it's not a 'death threat' shocking challenge, but it's exactly the kind of shit they do when things go against them, which just loses them any credibility in the complaints department.
It's a bad tackle and should be a red. It's not anything more than that though. Fuck them. I couldn't care less.
Re: James Tarkowski
Yeah I couldn't care less either tbh, like you said... Fuck em!777Kidnappings wrote: ↑Fri Apr 04, 2025 6:33 pm It's a bad tackle and should be a red. It's not anything more than that though. Fuck them. I couldn't care less.
-
777Kidnappings
- Posts: 2306
- Karma: 1257
Re: James Tarkowski
I think more than anything it's just an incredibly weird thing to be crying about. They won. No one got hurt. It's all a bit meaningless. The level of outrage is very much something only Liverpool would be capable of
Re: James Tarkowski
Yeah if Van Dijk had done it to Alcaraz you can guarantee that pundits would be laughing and talking about how derby games always bring out the more robust challenges777Kidnappings wrote: ↑Fri Apr 04, 2025 6:47 pm I think more than anything it's just an incredibly weird thing to be crying about. They won. No one got hurt. It's all a bit meaningless. The level of outrage is very much something only Liverpool would be capable of
Re: James Tarkowski
It wasn’t the tackle but the follow through that should have brought the red….deffo a red nowadays…..however the reflection of how bad it actually was is evidenced by the fact macallister got up and played on and finished the game…
WBFBTPL
Re: James Tarkowski
I'd be going mad if he got sent off for it but do I want an Everton side incapable of throwing them in? Absolutely not.
Been a net very good signing, whether I like watching him or not.
Been a net very good signing, whether I like watching him or not.
Re: James Tarkowski
I just think you can put in a strong tackle like that without running the risk of a red card.
He gets away with it constantly so maybe he knows how to just toe the line but I think it’s a huge flaw in his game.
Go in hard by all means but keep the studs on the ground.
But yeah, he’s been a solid signing. Loved his little flick when he was under pressure the other night. Lovely bit of composure. Be more of that centre back, you’re good on the ball. Less of the hard man shite.
He gets away with it constantly so maybe he knows how to just toe the line but I think it’s a huge flaw in his game.
Go in hard by all means but keep the studs on the ground.
But yeah, he’s been a solid signing. Loved his little flick when he was under pressure the other night. Lovely bit of composure. Be more of that centre back, you’re good on the ball. Less of the hard man shite.
Re: James Tarkowski
I do buy his explanation that he thought he was going in for a 50-50 but then MacAllister pulled out and he was already committed.
Re: James Tarkowski
Of course, because it's likely the truth. More so than the incendiary bullshit that's been put out by talking heads. How the hell do they know what he was thinking? They've no fucking idea.
I also don't see how a defender can both go for a 50 50 clearance, and always have studs pointing down towards the ground, and always be protecting the opposition player's wellbeing. It's a physical impossibility in some circumstances in a physical game - a follow through with velocity and momentum can't always be halted. As a defender, you're committed or you're not. Should he give less commitment because he's a big fellow?
Like that video earlier about the offside, a defender can't have ten different and opposing thoughts going through his mind in one action, most ex footballer pundits barely have one in 90 minutes!
-
Paddockoldie
- Posts: 1197
- Karma: 563
Re: James Tarkowski
Considering Tark's challenge being what is was, the whinging red cunt played the rest of the game, so why all the post mortem in the media. As said, the other way round it would described as 'full blooded', typical old school derby tackle from VVD
"Go in hard by all means but keep the studs on the ground."
Kind of difficult with a full slidy
"Go in hard by all means but keep the studs on the ground."
Kind of difficult with a full slidy
- Toddacelli
- Posts: 1164
- Karma: 1186
Re: James Tarkowski
Also, if we’re going to dissect this properly, let’s please acknowledge a very important fact: as a CB in that position you are not only tackling but you are also clearing the ball from danger. This is not always possible, but in this instance, JT had the opportunity to win the ball and if he went through it well enough, get it further down the pitch. But ONLY if he got under it and sent it high - which he achieved well. As a CB myself (retired from pub leagues 20 years ago) if I have the chance to clear a ball over people’s heads rather than at their legs - I am doing this every time. Why would I make a challenge that put the ball at the opponent’s feet and left me on the deck? Not happening. The rising nature of the tackle is 100% him clearing the ball from danger. Did he know he was going to clatter MacAlister? Yes. But it was that or go in half-hearted and risk injury or giving the ball away whilst on the ground and unable to defend.
Man did his job.
Man did his job.
-
Bluedylan1
- Posts: 3551
- Karma: 3734
Re: James Tarkowski
Don't think we need to overthink it. He went for the classic ''get the ball first, and hammer the player in the follow through'' that he does numerous times a season. He fully knows what he's doing and it's a red all day long.
It doesn't need discussing in parliament, as the other lot seem to want, but it's a nasty challenge and he was lucky to get away with it. When he first came through as a player, that was deemed a fair enough challenge but the game has changed and he needs to adapt like everyone else.
It doesn't need discussing in parliament, as the other lot seem to want, but it's a nasty challenge and he was lucky to get away with it. When he first came through as a player, that was deemed a fair enough challenge but the game has changed and he needs to adapt like everyone else.
Re: James Tarkowski
Some horrible vile chat going on about Tarks and his missus on the LFC official forum, FANS demanding an apology from Tarks, you would have thought that given we are talking about death threats here that their moderators would close down such provocative posts.
Re: James Tarkowski
He’s done what any decent human being would do and admitted it was a bad tackle, apologised to Mac Allister - who has accepted his apology. Get over it FFSEscalator wrote: ↑Sat Apr 05, 2025 7:39 am Some horrible vile chat going on about Tarks and his missus on the LFC official forum, FANS demanding an apology from Tarks, you would have thought that given we are talking about death threats here that their moderators would close down such provocative posts.
It's probably not unique to the shite but some of their fans do seem like a special kind of moron…fuelled no doubt by the ludicrously over the top reaction of the shite oriented punditry