Hazard deserved his red and the ballboy deserved his kick. Although Hazard was clearly trying to kick the ball out from under him...lol
explain how it's flawed? both 'victims' did something to provoke the other according to you so how do people condone one but not the other? moving away from the cantona thing, I don't see how people are criticising those defending Hazard? Our point is that he hasn't intended to hurt the cheating ball boy and has merely tried to retrieve the ball. I'm not condoning kicking children, I'm condoning someone trying to get a ball back from a cheating ball boy the lad posted on twatter earlier: The king of all ball boys is back making his final appearance #needed #for #timewasting.
surely a ball boys whole purpose is to give the ball back, not lie on top of it, for sure Hazard deserved a red, but the kid deserves a ban too.
****in' ridiculous that a ballboy is brought in for his first game of the season, after being a ball boy for the past few years and starts the worst timewasting I have ever seen from a ball boy. Hazard should not have kicked out, but nothing more than the red card should do
Don't think Hazard went for the lad, but he should have been nowhere near him. I pissed myself when it happened, ****ing brilliant.
Although I'm in favour of giving your own kids a smack to keep them in line (as well as teaching them respect), this is a totally different matter. If a parent can get into **** with the law for giving their kids a smack, how the hell is a multi-millionaire footballer meant to justify kicking a ball boy over a few wasted seconds? These players are meant to be role models, and by petulantly kicking out, Hazard's just set out an example to kids around the world that hitting out when things don't go your way is okay, how long before children start hitting their referees when a decision goes against them? And the fact that Chelsea, a world club, backed this position, is just going to enforce this notion that violence is justifiable in football when things go against you. If you think I'm overreacting, you might (or might not) remember what happened at your kid's local club after the 2002 world cup. All the sudden, diving just became prevalent amongst them as they saw their idols do it, and thought it was okay.
The comparison is flawed because you are using grown man hurling abuse at player and getting a kick as a way justifying another grown man kicking a school boy in the ribs because he won't give him a ball. In black and white, that is why it is flawed. It also looked absolutely deliberate to me.
Usually they are not pushed to the ground before they can return the ball. Chelsea had over 180 minutes and couldn't score a single goal. But having to wait a few extra seconds apparently excuses assault. Begovic must be scared, if this becomes a trend he will get a kicking 20 times per game.
What should have been understood is, that any time wasting tactics that were going on, would simply be unrewarded by a ref who stopped his watch while this cheating was happening!
Chelsea FC's official response is to blame football: https://twitter.com/chelseafc/status/294194277423124480
Obviously I'm one of the tree hugging anti chelsea pc brigade so instead of making a point I'll ask a question... you have a teenage son ... he is in the park while a group of grown men are playing football. the ball comes his way and he pratts around showing off. He lays on their ball. He does attack or threaten the adults he just lays on the ball. The adult man attempts to kick the ball even though its obvious that he'll probably kick your son. Then after kicking the your son he steps over him picks up the ball and walks off to continue his game leaving your son on the floor. Do you really tell the bloke well done? or do you tell your son he was an idiot for pratting around and tell the adult to grow the **** up and stop being a thick ****? I genuinely don't understand how not one chelsea response has said Hazard was a ****ing idiot...
