Body slam - Worcester player (1 Viewer)

[Otis]

Thoughts?

Can't see how anyone can come out and defend that at all.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31588349

 

---

[Sky Blue Kid]

Thoughts? Can't see how anyone can come out and defend that at all. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31588349

Oh there will be some that will Otis..trust me.

 

[Nick]

I know it is wrong, but it is funny.

 

[lewys33]

I know it is wrong, but it is funny.

The vines which have come out with WWE dubbed over the top are amazing.

 

[TrueSkyBlueLiam]

I think it was more of a german suplex than a body slam

 

[duffer]

It's an awful tackle, but it's hardly leg breaking. There's a lot more scope for seriously injuring the other player with that reaction. You can't use previous injuries as an excuse for completely losing your head and commiting a deliberate and dangerous assault. For me that's a red for both players, and a long ban and a visit from plod for the Worcester lad. If he can't control his temper, he doesn't belong on the pitch - and he needs reminding that the law doesn't cease to apply just because you've crossed the white line.

 

[bringbackrattles]

Thoughts?

Can't see how anyone can come out and defend that at all.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31588349

Yes Otis it does look a bit over the top, but be honest now wouldn't you love to do that on Tim Fisher ? I know I would in fact I'd do it and just wait for all the thank you cards from happy City fans !

 

[Ashdown]

Excellent, I like that !! The game would be a lot more entertaining with a few more of those !?

 

[Otis]

Excellent, I like that !! The game would be a lot more entertaining with a few more of those !?

Yeah and the odd broken back wouldn't do any harm to the game either would it.

 

[Joy Division]

That tackle is horrendous, and the lad clearly says something to him afterwards. I'd say the tackle is more of an assault than the 'body slam'. Usual over reactions from people.

 

[duffer]

That tackle is horrendous, and the lad clearly says something to him afterwards. I'd say the tackle is more of an assault than the 'body slam'. Usual over reactions from people.

The tackle is a whack on the shin on his non-standing leg - it's reckless and it's crap, and probably deserves a red, but there have been far worse ones even this week. It's also nothing like as dangerous as lifting someone up and then dumping them on their back and neck.

The over reaction here is by the player retaliating, and the manager and others trying to justify it by saying that the player has been hurt by previous tackles. That, to me, is pathetic. If your past experiences have left you so fragile that you're going to react like that to every unpleasant tackle on the pitch, you probably don't belong on one.

The reaction of Worcester's own number 11 says it all, in fact.

 

[Otis]

The tackle is a whack on the shin on his non-standing leg - it's reckless and it's crap, and probably deserves a red, but there have been far worse ones even this week. It's also nothing like as dangerous as lifting someone up and then dumping them on their back and neck.

The over reaction here is by the player retaliating, and the manager and others trying to justify it by saying that the player has been hurt by previous tackles. That, to me, is pathetic. If your past experiences have left you so fragile that you're going to react like that to every unpleasant tackle on the pitch, you probably don't belong on one.

The reaction of Worcester's own number 11 says it all, in fact.

Yes indeed.

And yes, the tackle is very bad, but it pales in comparsion to a player picking another player up and slamming him to the ground.

Good job this wasn't in the Premiership, because the player involved there would be looking at a very lengthy ban indeed.

 

[Joy Division]

The tackle is a whack on the shin on his non-standing leg - it's reckless and it's crap, and probably deserves a red, but there have been far worse ones even this week. It's also nothing like as dangerous as lifting someone up and then dumping them on their back and neck.

The over reaction here is by the player retaliating, and the manager and others trying to justify it by saying that the player has been hurt by previous tackles. That, to me, is pathetic. If your past experiences have left you so fragile that you're going to react like that to every unpleasant tackle on the pitch, you probably don't belong on one.

The reaction of Worcester's own number 11 says it all, in fact.

A whack on the shin? Are you kidding me? The tackle is absolutely awful, the Stockport player went into the tackle to intentionally hurt him and no intention to play the ball. Of course the Worcester player should have been sent off as should the Stockport player, but its just that its something that people havent seen on the pitch before and the word 'body slam' is being used so people are going fucking mental over it.

I think I'd rather be 'slammed' than be on the end of that tackle.

 

[Joy Division]

Basically, what I'm trying to say is they are both dicks.

 

[duffer]

Basically, what I'm trying to say is they are both dicks.

No argument here. If you're daft enough to kick a big bloke over, the smart thing to do is to at least apologise afterwards rather than chop off at him. But that tackle still isn't anywhere near as dangerous as that WWF move, imho. If you dump a bloke on his neck and back like that there's scope for injuries way beyond a broken leg. It's why 'spear tackles' in rugby (where you lift and dump a player) attract so much attention and long bans these days. It's not unheard of for serious spinal injuries to occur.

Anyway, happy to leave it there - like you say, they're both dicks!