If it was the case that Hazard did only kick the ball and the idiot ballboy just put it on about being injured why is Hazard getting sent off the correct decision. When you look at how good he is as a player is it so unbelievable that he could tap the ball out with his toe without touching him? I'm sure we've all done the same when we've been playing kickabout with friends. Here in Sweden there are about 5-6 match balls. The ballboy at Helsingborg IF are amazingly quick, if they were any quicker they would have to take the throw-in themselves. It was funny reading the Celtic fans comparing how slow there "fat pie munching glasgow kids" are compared to the HIF lads.
I'd say Hazard was silly getting involved, but at least he was showing some passion, trying to win the game for Chelsea. 10 more players like that and maybe they would have been in the final. I don't think there was any intention at all to kick the ball-boy, but while kicking the ball out from underneath him, the kid does get a small whack on the side (but certainly not enough for his reaction). You could tell by Hazard's reaction it was the ball he was going for - a short stab at the ball, it pops ouot the other side, and he steps over the boy to get the ball to restart the match! As the for ball-boy himself. I'm unsure if anything was said from any management at Swansea, but I would suggest the ball-boys amongst themselves said about slowing the game down at any opportunity, and this was one of the more senior ball-boys, and as his Twitter account shows, had it already on his mind! It was an act of stupidity, but how many other teams have their ball-boys do things that slow the game down? I'm sure once an opposition manager complained after a match when we started with multi-ball but during the game when we were winning, someone went around collecting all the balls so we played with just a single ball. There are plenty of this going on, this one is just highlighted because a player got involved! Mountain out of mole-hill comes to mind. Hazard servers a 3 match suspension, the ball-boy goes back into 'retirement'
Watford at home against Sheffield Utd (I think) when Aidy Boothroyd was in charge instructed the ball boys to dry off the ball with a towell for the Watford throw ins and not the oppositions - embarrassing!
To be fair i would have been deeply embarrassed and shamed about that episode - but Neil Warnock was managing Sheffield United at the time so it was all fair game
Referee absolutely right to send Hazard off, quite correct in law. Hazard did not kick the ballboy as such, he kicked the ball but his shin connected with the little gits ribs. Classic case of 'playing through the man to win the ball'. The BB should be 'retired' from being a BB, Hazard's punishment from club and standard 3 game ban from the FA is enough, no need for police involvement. Not often I agree with Joey Barton, but I'd have kicked the ball harder! Not like the BB's a naiive 12 year old... he's old enough to be a soldier, knew what he was doing and it was most certainly a premeditated action. The both got what they deserved.
I'd have kicked the other balls, but anyway. Pretty much agree with Hornet-Fez. Apologies for the double negative, but you can't not send someone off for kicking anywhere near the ballboy, even if he wasn't the target. That said, people from Surrey and Kent phoning the police is just ridiculous. The FA are being their usual incompetent selves too, charging Hazard with violent conduct on the basis that "the standard three match ban for a red card wouldn't be sufficient".
I see that Mr. Integrity has joined the debate by saying that any manager would want their ball boys to do the same as this lad.
I'm sure that comment has absolutely nothing to do Liverpool's shopping list, or with the ball boy being a Swansea director's son...
i don't suppose Swansea care what he thinks tbh...they probably wish he'd been the ball boy and that the kick had been harder lol
I just hope the ball boy never admits to taking a tumble. If he does Mr Integriy will be sending him death threats - in a Calm, mature, dignified and respectful way obviously.
What do I think? I think If I had been in Hazard's boots instead of kicking the lad I would have gently pressed my boots on his head downwards into the turf forcing him to eat mud/grass.
Yes I agree with that. Does it deserve a long ban as such though..given some players have elbowed and punched others in the past without really get much of a punishement. Ofcourse the FA want to show kids etc this isn't a right thing to do but then nor is swearing at officials and diving which players do each week.
Far, far too much focus on the actions of Hazard IMO - and I fail to see why he should receive any punishment other than a reprimand/warning from the FA. It was neither violent nor dangerous - in the heat of the moment, he was simply trying to dislodge the ball from underneath someone who had absolutely no right to be where he was/was deliberately trying to gain an advantage for his preferred team. I'd question whether he was actually hurt either - a bit of playacting there methinks. I think all of the focus should be on the 'boy' - a 17 yo ball boy ffs?? - who should have been tossed out on his ear and banned from future games for a while, even as a spectator. That's exactly what would happen to any of us should we take it upon ourselves to do what he did.
The little darling is an heir to a fortune so he will not receive any punishment as he is a spoilt little bar steward, yes Hazard was wrong but the little darling was in the wrong to IMO and I see that Judas knows and likes the little mite!!!!!! If the club had instructed the ball boys to cause slow play then they should be punshed!
I think you are missing the point BB - I have not seen anyone defend the actions of the boy. Punish him as he deserves. The point is that Hazard did wrong and as a professional footballer should have known and acted better. Whether he hurt the boy or not is not the issue - although if he had the police would have something to say - and don't footballers play act? Was Anton Ferdinand "hurt" in the Terry incident - no - it was the principle - racism is wrong and here kicking the ball from under a boy is wrong. Both bring the game into disrepute without either leaving physical harm
I think you are missing my point too, Leo. I'm not saying that anyone has defended the actions of the boy - I'm saying that all of the focus should be on what he did and how wrong it was. The very fact that he almost immediately gained thousands of followers on twitter should be setting off alarm bells at Lancaster Gate (if that is where the FA still have their home). I really don't believe that what Hazard did was particularly wrong under the circumstances, fail to see how it falls into the category of bringing the game into disrepute and I certainly don't believe that it warranted any ban, let alone a five match ban. He was simply trying to get on with the game as the ref was apparently blind to what the ball boy was up to - nothing wrong with that in my book. If there is any future adverse effect on the game from this incident, I suspect that the root cause will have been the imbecilic actions of the boy - having inspired God alone knows how many wannabe copycats in the crowd. I only hope that it doesn't herald a return to the days of fencing around the pitch.
hang on - what copycats have there been - and the crowd are not ball boys - and if he hit someone inthe crowd it would have been a Cantona incident - seen far more seriosuly Hazard should have drawn the referee's attention to it and pointed at his watch - fail to see how you can say kicking a boy on the ground - gently of course - was not particularly wrong - around the world people have seen a footballer kick a boy on the ground and you don't think that will bring the game into disrepute - fair enough if that is what you think - I disagree of course. The followers on twitter probably spammed him or whatever it is called - adversely - most people take him for the idiot he is Finally the game is about footballers and what they do - they make the news not sad little prats We will have to agree to disagree I think on this one - we don't seem close to agreement
