StefanAVFC Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Can't underestimate what it did to the fans though. Though Ryan, I presume you love a big hit in the NFL? Isn't it the same thing? Say Luke hits a guy, perfectly legally but way harder than he needed to. Are you off your seat or calling it filth? Of course. If it's a legal hit then I have no problem with it. Clark's wasn't legal. He got the ball. Schlupp didn't moan. The ref didn't whistle. Nobody from leicester moaned about it. How much more legal can you get? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazvfc Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 I thought it was filth to be honest. The worst part of it all is the calculated nature of it, Clark knew how hard he was going to hit him. If he'd not got the ball then he'd left Schlupp in two. I don't enjoy seeing that type of tackle at all. Could've easily won the ball without throwing himself in there. No complaints by Schlupp, any other Leicester player or anyone off the Leicester bench, though. I often find that to be the indicator of a true bad tackle. Exactly - look at how we reacted to that challenge on Cleverley - now THAT was bad and there was no intent to get the ball - there was to get the player! By the reactions of fans ans players that was reckless. Whereas with Clarks - not ONE single Leicester Player, the victim or manager was up in arms - so therefore if THEY deemed it a fair challenge - then what's the problem! Wanna fight??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazvfc Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Regardless of whether you think Clark's was a foul or not, that's quite a bizarre explanation to be honest. What's bizarre ? If Clark had gone in studs showing buy the player JUMPED to avoid being caught then the intent was there and rightly a sending off. He went in side footed and got the ball - so played the ball clearly so there was no intent. That's a totally different point to the one you made earlier. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume I interpreted it wrong Thank you sir - probably interpretation - must try to write without an Asian Accent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milfner Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Can't underestimate what it did to the fans though. Though Ryan, I presume you love a big hit in the NFL? Isn't it the same thing? Say Luke hits a guy, perfectly legally but way harder than he needed to. Are you off your seat or calling it filth? Of course. If it's a legal hit then I have no problem with it. Clark's wasn't legal. He got the ball. Schlupp didn't moan. The ref didn't whistle. Nobody from leicester moaned about it. How much more legal can you get? Excessive force. And it was excessive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 18, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 18, 2015 Can't underestimate what it did to the fans though. Though Ryan, I presume you love a big hit in the NFL? Isn't it the same thing? Say Luke hits a guy, perfectly legally but way harder than he needed to. Are you off your seat or calling it filth? Of course. If it's a legal hit then I have no problem with it. Clark's wasn't legal. He got the ball. Schlupp didn't moan. The ref didn't whistle. Nobody from leicester moaned about it. How much more legal can you get? Getting the ball and the reaction of other players doesn't really have any relevance to be honest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Can't underestimate what it did to the fans though. Though Ryan, I presume you love a big hit in the NFL? Isn't it the same thing? Say Luke hits a guy, perfectly legally but way harder than he needed to. Are you off your seat or calling it filth? Of course. If it's a legal hit then I have no problem with it. Clark's wasn't legal. He got the ball. Schlupp didn't moan. The ref didn't whistle. Nobody from leicester moaned about it. How much more legal can you get? Getting the ball and the reaction of other players doesn't really have any relevance to be honest I'd disagree. When I've played football, you as a player know straight away if a tackle is bad. That tackle was right in the middle of the pitch, seen by pretty much everyone and NOBODY reacted. If it was as bad as some are making out, people would have been fuming and nobody did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Excessive force is subjective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bose Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 He absolutely needed to go in to the tackle with that force, otherwise he wouldn't have made it in time. Just excellent defensive play from an ever improving defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Excessive force is subjective. Exactly. And my NFL analogy holds true as well still. Especially considering excessive force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 I thought it was fine to be honest. He wins the ball cleanly and in one movement he is back up on his feet and urging Delph forwards - buts thats with the benefit of a slow motion replay. The fact that Schlupp goes spinning in the air makes it look worse than it was and I would understand any referee in real time giving the foul and a booking. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted February 18, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 18, 2015 He went in hard. He won the ball. He put the opposing forward on his ass. They think twice before any 50-50's from that point, so you've made life easier on yourself. Good piece of defending, that - and all perfectly legal. If you want to talk illegal tackles, then you need to take a look at the yellow card incident where the Leceister player came in late and took Cleverly's standing leg. Now that should have been a different colour card. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VILLAMARV Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Timing wins the arguement for me, He times it to perfection. mistimed and the ref could see it differently. Whatever the rules say theres nothing wrong with winning the ball back. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KJT123 Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Completely agree with Ozvillafan. I thought that tackle was disgusting and easily a leg breaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lapal_fan Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Any tackle can be a leg breaker, it depends on where you kick the other player, or your trailing leg hits a part of the body. Some completely innocuous challenges result in very bad injuries. Clark has half a second to see the situation and decide on the action he takes. It was the epitome of a 50/50. Is it hard tackle? Yes. Schlupp went into that challenge knowing the winner of the ball was either him or Clark. They both went in with some degree of force, if you're a professional, you don't let the other guy beat you. Clark didn't let Schlupp beat him. Had Clark of gone into that tackle willy-nilly, he wouldn't have been doing his job (the job he's paid thousands a week for), someone could have gotten hurt and had Schlupp won the ball, could have gone on to create or score a goal for Leicester. He did what he had to do, there's no point hypothesising if it's over zealous at all, because if it was a bad tackle and got away with at the time, he'd have been pulled up retrospectively, which he hasn't. Youtube "Block Tackles" for 100s of examples of what Clark did and are being call good, hard but fair tackles. To get back on topic. Clark had a really good game, hope he keeps it up because he's been my most improved player of the season so far, he's really upped his game and is keeping Okore out of the team alongside Vlaar for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 18, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 18, 2015 He absolutely needed to go in to the tackle with that force, otherwise he wouldn't have made it in time. Just excellent defensive play from an ever improving defender. He needed to go in at that speed. The swinging leg and use of his other leg afterwards is the excessive part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 18, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 18, 2015 Also Schlupp went in with zero force. He took evasive action from the tackle. And like I said above it's a good job he did because a planted foot with that tackle could have seen him in heaps of trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 He absolutely needed to go in to the tackle with that force, otherwise he wouldn't have made it in time. Just excellent defensive play from an ever improving defender. He needed to go in at that speed. The swinging leg and use of his other leg afterwards is the excessive part. You think that was intentional? Also Schlupp went in with zero force. He took evasive action from the tackle. And like I said above it's a good job he did because a planted foot with that tackle could have seen him in heaps of trouble. What Schlupp does IS completely irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 18, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted February 18, 2015 (edited) He absolutely needed to go in to the tackle with that force, otherwise he wouldn't have made it in time. Just excellent defensive play from an ever improving defender. He needed to go in at that speed. The swinging leg and use of his other leg afterwards is the excessive part. You think that was intentional? Also Schlupp went in with zero force. He took evasive action from the tackle. And like I said above it's a good job he did because a planted foot with that tackle could have seen him in heaps of trouble. What Schlupp does IS completely irrelevant. I agree. But people are saying Schlupp went in with force when he didn't. I was just correcting them. I don't think the use of the second leg was intentional. Doesn't make it right. I think swinging his leading leg was intentional. Intention is again, largely irrelevant though. Edited February 18, 2015 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 Okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcTheObsession Posted February 18, 2015 Share Posted February 18, 2015 I'd like to see Clark stay in the team for a while now and form a partnership with Vlaar. Think we need players who know the PL at this stage, Clark over Okore, Westwood over Sanchez, etc. Experienced PL players to get us over the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts