Lonergan tackle on carrazzo

[RearNaked]

carlton supporters think he tried to injure in the tackle essendon supporters think it was just an accident so id like more neutral supporters view on it

[youtube]es_T2BKZyO8[/youtube]

looks like carlton are having a sook about it http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blues-fume-about-tackle-on-carrazzo-20120421-1xe3g.html

 

[boncer34]

Laughable the tripe being dished up by Carlton fans.

 

[Gydafud]

Neutral viewpoint? Ignore Carlton supports immediately following a loss.

Accident.

 

[JCore]

Poorly executed tackle, but obviously an accident. Not sure how someone could see it differently.

 

[jonesy86]

Just a normal tackle IMO, the only time he tried to inflict extra damage was with a swinging right arm over the shoulder which had no effect.

 

[whelan=legend]

More dangerous than most sling tackles.

 

[Refried Noodle]

If I was a Carlton supporter I'd be dirty.

There was intent to make an early statement. Lonergan must have known the way he approached and his follow through would have given away a free kick 99% of the time.

 

[DapperDon]

If I was a Carlton supporter I'd be dirty.

There was intent to make an early statement. Lonergan must have known the way he approached and his follow through would have given away a free kick 99% of the time.

Yeah, it was poor form.

I hope Essendon don't be as tough next week, oh the horror.

Seriously, harden the **** up.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Saw the thread title and was hoping it was a Carlton supporter just for the massive LOL's.

 

[Phone]

didn't like the tackle, but yeah intent to injury, like intent to take him out of the game, is pretty silly.

[youtube]es_T2BKZyO8[/youtube]

 

[blues4flag]

I have no doubt that he tried to hurt him.

There's nothing wrong with that. At every level of footy players are instructed to tackle hard. It makes the opponent second guess themselves and creates perceived pressure. All the better if they get up with a buise or two.

I don't think he intended to injure Carrazzo but it was a clumsy and crude tackle.

 

[seanoff]

If I was a Carlton supporter I'd be dirty.

There was intent to make an early statement. Lonergan must have known the way he approached and his follow through would have given away a free kick 99% of the time.

see that 100 times a weekend. technically a poor tackle but nothing sinister.

 

[Kong]

Free kick, nothing more.

 

[Ari]

I have no doubt that he tried to hurt him.

There's nothing wrong with that. At every level of footy players are instructed to tackle hard. It makes the opponent second guess themselves and creates perceived pressure. All the better if they get up with a buise or two.

I don't think he intended to injure Carrazzo but it was a clumsy and crude tackle.

Pretty much spot on.

I'm not convinced ANY AFL player in 2012 actually goes out to INJURE another player.

 

[Blue and Silver]

HAHA. Reading a board after a loss and spreading word as "_____ supporters thin this".

We're bitter and upset, we say stupid things.

The tackle was crude, and meant to hurt but not to injure and not MRP worthy.

 

[Rohan25]

Looked OK to me. The injury was unfortunate, but I hardly think Lonergan planned on breaking his shoulder.

 

[blblues]

Hard tackle that was executed poorly. No intention to hurt. Nothing to answer for.

 

[brendan84]

It was a hard tackle, not sure what is wrong with that.
A free in the back obviously.
Might have to check out the Carlton board for a laugh.

 

[Bengraham]

Thought it was a fantastic statement to Carltons taggers.

Was legal and he was trying to bury him, so he should.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

In Lonergan's defence, his massive head made him fall forward.

 

[saladodger]

He tackled him, WTF is the issue here? The reaction on the Carlton board is staggering, even for Carlton supporters.

 

[PP34]

You know I could wait for an Essendon loss and quote the crap you guys spew out after the game. But I don't and I never will because people get heated after a loss. Your board is just as bad.

The tackle itself definitely should have been a free kick. I'm not sure if he wanted to hurt him.

 

[HurlsMeister18]

You know I could wait for an Essendon loss and quote the crap you guys spew out after the game. But I don't and I never will because people get heated after a loss. Your board is just as bad.

The tackle itself definitely should have been a free kick. I'm not sure if he wanted to hurt him.

It was a free kick and that's all it should be and nothing more needs to be said about it.

 

[Magma]

oh please.

really?

 

[RearNaked]

You know I could wait for an Essendon loss and quote the crap you guys spew out after the game. But I don't and I never will because people get heated after a loss. Your board is just as bad.

The tackle itself definitely should have been a free kick. I'm not sure if he wanted to hurt him.

we blame the umpires because they hate us i mean jetta kicked the ball and they said he threw it 2 gifted goals for betts the umps love judd and all that but i wouldnt call for a clumsy tackle be looked at by the MRP and a guy get suspended for it