2024/25 James Tarkowski

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well it is debatable because we are debating it. It is not about hating on Liverpool.

I am looking at that clearance and saying there is mitigation.

Do you agree that he put force into kicking the ball?
Do you agree that he got to the ball a good second or so ahead of Mac Allister and connected with the ball perfectly?
Do you agree that the force he put into kicking the ball would inevitably mean that his leg would not just stop?
Do you agree that he was also sliding which would be even more difficult to stop the leg from going past the contact position?
Look at the still posted ( I think in this thread earlier) of the contact with the ball. Do you agree that Mac Allister is in the process of trying to block the clearance?

That last one is key for me. Mac Allister did not have the ball, it was loose. Tarkowski saw that it was loose and knew he needed to clear it. It is no different to somebody clearing the ball while stood up with a player coming across the front of him and the player kicking the ball then following through and kicking the opposition player after. There is, in my opinion, enough difference to a tackle where a player has the ball and the tackler comes in full blooded and misses the ball. That is what the pundits are likening it to, with all this 100% a red stuff.

For me, all those questions point to valid debating topics. You may or not believe me but if it was the other way around I would have the same view.
I agree with yourself, would also like to add, What is Jota's responsibility in all this? Is the fact that he is 2nd reactor mean he put Tarkowski in danger? If Tarkowski, somehow manages to prevent follow through from clearance, how much danger is he now in injury wise? Always told commit to challenge or you will get injured.
 

Won the ball perfectly well and then spoiled it by going through the player and by doing so gave the footballing World and the media something to whinge about, which deflects the opportunity to talk about why Liverpool's "goal" should have been ruled out for offside. We had a much closer goal rightly ruled out after a var check, why wasn't Liverpool's ruled out, Diaz whether he touched the ball or not, he did a moment later I think, was in Tarkowski's way or in his line of sight. Anyway that's my view, but you can guarantee Sky and Co will be working overtime trying to convince themselves and the rest of us it was just fine.
 
It was a Red card, dangerous tackle in modern football (maybe not back in the 80's/90's where you just had to get the ball first). Extremely shocked when VAR didn't take further action. He knew exactly what he was doing, trying to make an early statement that they were in a battle, old fashioned defender 'putting something on them early'. However, I don't believe he did it with the intention of snapping a leg which could easily have happened.

It was stupid in more ways than risking a potential Red card. He was easily clearing that ball normally and in doing what he did, put us immediately back under pressure with a dangerous free kick at goal. Players should know by now that you simply cannot follow through a tackle, studs up with your entire body off the ground.

Obviously, it's weird world we live in where people think it's OK to threaten death on somebody that makes an error of judgement or a bad tackle in a game of football, that realistically, should have zero impact on any sane person, regardless of who you support. People are unhinged.
 
I agree with yourself, would also like to add, What is Jota's responsibility in all this? Is the fact that he is 2nd reactor mean he put Tarkowski in danger? If Tarkowski, somehow manages to prevent follow through from clearance, how much danger is he now in injury wise? Always told commit to challenge or you will get injured.
Jota is just a complete *******. But Macallister also puts JT in danger with his lunge without being anywhere near the ball.

Good job JT went in strong.
 

It's a clear red card. That type of tackle just isn't allowed anymore. Sure, I've seen worse, but that doesn't excuse him. If that was against us we'd all be up in arms about VAR and corrupt refs. If Keane or Young had that made that tackle people would screaming it was bad because of how crap they are.
 
Won the ball perfectly well and then spoiled it by going through the player and by doing so gave the footballing World and the media something to whinge about, which deflects the opportunity to talk about why Liverpool's "goal" should have been ruled out for offside. We had a much closer goal rightly ruled out after a var check, why wasn't Liverpool's ruled out, Diaz whether he touched the ball or not, he did a moment later I think, was in Tarkowski's way or in his line of sight. Anyway that's my view, but you can guarantee Sky and Co will be working overtime trying to convince themselves and the rest of us it was just fine.
It appears to me that what some are now advocating is that defenders who are no longer allowed to tackle from behind even if they get the ball, they aren’t allowed to play the ball first if their movement then carries them into contact with their opponent now are not permitted to tackle at pace because that pace may carry them into contact. Why don’t we just ban all contact, maybe do away with goalkeepers as they have an unfair advantage over forwards as they can use their hands, we could then call football something like foot basketball.
 
Didn`t watch last night as I find it hard to watch a derby these days, but all the talk is about the tackle and the picture on sky is not a view that you could stand up and defend. Ref looking right at it and VAR must have been brewing a cuppa and were`nt bothered looking too hard at it.

1743679416795.webp
 
No mention of Nunez disgraceful two shinned lunge at Pickford near the end surprisingly enough. Also I have to mention how Liverpool players constantly pressured the officials all night over nearly every decision, Jota rightfully booked for berating the linesman, who then informed the referee which led to Jota sarcastically applauding the linesman. Should that not have been a second yellow and a sending off ? I'm sure it would have been if the shirt was a different colour.
 

It was a Red card, dangerous tackle in modern football (maybe not back in the 80's/90's where you just had to get the ball first). Extremely shocked when VAR didn't take further action. He knew exactly what he was doing, trying to make an early statement that they were in a battle, old fashioned defender 'putting something on them early'. However, I don't believe he did it with the intention of snapping a leg which could easily have happened.

It was stupid in more ways than risking a potential Red card. He was easily clearing that ball normally and in doing what he did, put us immediately back under pressure with a dangerous free kick at goal. Players should know by now that you simply cannot follow through a tackle, studs up with your entire body off the ground.

Obviously, it's weird world we live in where people think it's OK to threaten death on somebody that makes an error of judgement or a bad tackle in a game of football, that realistically, should have zero impact on any sane person, regardless of who you support. People are unhinged.
100% this. It was a stupid reckless challenge and he absolutely intended to follow through and clatter him, but not to actually injure him. It was a blatant red but not worthy of all the cryarsing since.
 
Didn`t watch last night as I find it hard to watch a derby these days, but all the talk is about the tackle and the picture on sky is not a view that you could stand up and defend. Ref looking right at it and VAR must have been brewing a cuppa and were`nt bothered looking too hard at it.

View attachment 302085
No picture of the ball as it 150 yards away - the LFC player jumped into that follow through after it was kicked - a late upward lunge deliberately trying to get our player sent off .... rolled over like he was dead to - nothing wrong with him .....just one big act .....
 
Well it is debatable because we are debating it. It is not about hating on Liverpool.

I am looking at that clearance and saying there is mitigation.

Do you agree that he put force into kicking the ball?
Do you agree that he got to the ball a good second or so ahead of Mac Allister and connected with the ball perfectly?
Do you agree that the force he put into kicking the ball would inevitably mean that his leg would not just stop?
Do you agree that he was also sliding which would be even more difficult to stop the leg from going past the contact position?
Look at the still posted ( I think in this thread earlier) of the contact with the ball. Do you agree that Mac Allister is in the process of trying to block the clearance?

That last one is key for me. Mac Allister did not have the ball, it was loose. Tarkowski saw that it was loose and knew he needed to clear it. It is no different to somebody clearing the ball while stood up with a player coming across the front of him and the player kicking the ball then following through and kicking the opposition player after. There is, in my opinion, enough difference to a tackle where a player has the ball and the tackler comes in full blooded and misses the ball. That is what the pundits are likening it to, with all this 100% a red stuff.

For me, all those questions point to valid debating topics. You may or not believe me but if it was the other way around I would have the same view.
You're right, I don't believe you.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top