So if I smacked a kid and said I did it because he had a black widow spider on his face that I was trying to kill before it bit him, would that be ok?
Not being funny, he didn't kick him with the intention of hurting him (although I would've). And if that was my kid anjd he was being a little ****ing **** then I d still be pissed off at Hazard but I wouldn't be able to say he didn't deserve it. Bearing in mind my kid would never be such a prick to an adult Yes, that would have been the correct way to deal with it but you wouldn't be thinking like that in the situation. You just want the ball, why can't he just give it to you?
He tried to kick a ball out from under a 15/16 year old "LAD" who was deliberately keeping it away from him. The way you and WJ are going on you'd think he'd Cantona-d a toddler.
He booted a kid in the ribs, quite hard. Intent doesn't matter in this situation. If intent mattered in situations like this, then half the red cards that are given out wouldn't be given out as "I intended to get the ball, I just missed and went through his legs by accident". He intended to kick a ball out from under a kid, and booted him in the ribs. Unacceptable.
I think its a red card, I don't think its a law suit. If anything Cheslea should sue the kid for negatively affecting the game
I think some of you guys have been spending too much time with Dave Jones. So it's ok to kick a kid now. You obviously don't have mirrors in the house to look at. Tell me honestly what you would think if a fancy dan millionaire athlete kicked your kid on live television. And what would your mates think of you if you did nothing? And could you really tell the missus 'he deserved to have a grown man kick him!".
If my kid was on purposely being a prick and negatively affecting play, I'd say he deserved it. Of course I wouldn't be happy with Hazard, because that's just the nature of the relationship between father and son, but if you can't do your job properly, you shouldn't do it at all. And if that kid would rather win by effectively cheating (granted Swansea probably would've won regardless of whether or not Hazard stayed on the pitch) than lose gracefully by playing fairly, then quite evidently he needs someone to teach him a lesson.
It's assault on a minor. If this happened in a park it would be assault on a minor. Just because it happened in a football stadium, doesn't change morality or the law. What the kid did was wrong but not illegal. What Hazard did is against the law.
I wouldn't call him a kid. He's a 17, nearly 18, year old Swansea director's son who was bragging about time wasting on his twitter (where he is seen drinking and describing himself as a "LAD") before the game. Honestly I couldn't care less if Hazard had deliberately kicked him.
As I have already said previously what I would've done in the situation and how I woulda reacted if that was my kid I have 0 sympathy for the kid.
Jeez, talk about overreaction. Some chav kid didn't give the ball back and had it kicked from under him, he didn't get hurt, nobody will be charged with anything and the kid will never be a ball boy again. Pantomime season just went on a little longer than normal this year.
I don'l t think it's acceptable to kick a kid, but I don't have an issue with that particular young man being shifted off the ball for being a prick and trying to influence an important game (and get some attention at the same time)
Therefore still a minor. Still assaulting a minor. Footballers need to be reminded they are not above the law
The kid and his dad met with Hazard, Terry and Lampard after the game, all shook hands, no police action, common sense prevails.
