Watch it again, he doesn't knock him over. He comes in from the side, if he knocked him over the kid would have fallen sideways and not collapsed straight down on top of the ball (as he would if he had been pushed from behind). By no stretch of human imagination does Hazard push or knock the kid over. He is trying to strip the ball from the side - as quickly as possible, something which wouldn't be served by pushing the little toerag on the floor.
Ballboy jumps to defense of a football.
- Thread starter Randall Flagg
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
I hope they didn't eat or drink anything over there after the game.Its amazing how this story has gone from Hazard being a cnut to the ballboy being the spoilt brat son of a multi millionaire
The Mirror: Hulk Hogan says Hazard should've kicked him harder
This whole thing is getting sillier and sillier.
This whole thing is getting sillier and sillier.
Nice one Hulk
Watcha gonna dooooooo, brother, when a Belgian shitbag runs wiiiiiild on you?
Hulk Hogan!?
If we're going to go down that road how can any of us be sure that Hazard isn't a neo-Nazi or a member of Al Qaeda sleeper cell?
All I know from having viewed the video is that Hazard was only trying to get the ball out from under the ballboy, not to indulge in any kind of physical retribution against the boy (who's a little too old to be a ballboy IMHO) or to inflict pain on him in any way.
But yes, it is true that I do not know the mind of any other human being. It may well be that Hazard is an evil man and that he was in fact releasing his inner demons on this innocent little boy. I'm only inferring that from what each of us saw all Hazard was trying to do was to get the ball into play, for obvious sporting reasons, nothing else.
The red card is appropriate not because of Hazard's intent, but because of his action. He could have, accidentally, caused serious bodily damage to the boy. Red card all the way, but let's hope he gets the minimum ban allowable under this circumstance.
So, I've just seen this. Football is a bit crazy isn't it?
Why was anyone talking about a longer banning at any point? If you saw that at your local football game you wouldn't blink an eye. Great acting by the young lad though, he could go far!
Why was anyone talking about a longer banning at any point? If you saw that at your local football game you wouldn't blink an eye. Great acting by the young lad though, he could go far!
The ballboy is now getting threats from the Chelsea mob, don't think sections of the media are helpng here by solely blaming the 17 year old for all of this.
The Mirror: Hulk Hogan says Hazard should've kicked him harder
This whole thing is getting sillier and sillier.
enough Mockney, I'm pretty sure none of this actually happened. Feels like I'm in The Neverending Story except it's written by you and makes even less sense.Immediately after the kick Abramovich was seen talking to a couple of his Mob lieutenants. A couple hours later the Kid is no longer pressing charges.
I wish I could write this stuff. It's like a Black Mirror. Only shit, and real.
Do they not have more than one ball in the stadium? 
From the article;
"Hazard appeared to kick the time-wasting son of Swansea director"
Is this an insult? Is it the new "Son of a bitch"
I think it should be. It's class. I's my new favourite insult.
feck you Mockney, you son of a Swansea director!
feck you TD, you username stealing son of Tottenham supporter.
First of all, he's not a kid. He's 17, ffs. Old enough to drink, it appears.
Second, he tweeted before the game how he'll do the timewasting. How much more proof do you need? The so called ball boy is a spoiled rich shitbag, his daddy being who he is and the twat grew up thinking he can do whatever he wants.
I've been watching football for over thirty years and I have never seen anything like it. I remember Barca ball boys at Nou Camp, bringing the ball back at a speed of light, when playing Chelsea, to stop us from timewasting. Stoke boys are always ready to hand Delap a dry towel on a sideline. There probably other examples of that nature. But you can't really blame them for trying to help the home team and those things are hardly worth complaining about.
But refusing to give up the ball, holding up the play and if it wasn't bad enough, lying on top of the ball when a player is trying to recover it - I mean, wtf? Also, do you really think any of those real ball boys would have the audacity to pull something like that?
Still not a justification to kick out, whatever the intention.
3 match ban is more than sufficient. He will get an additional match though.
3 match ban is more than sufficient. He will get an additional match though.
I'm not arguing with the punishment, but I'd have done the same in Hazard's place.
Then you are as stupid as Hazard.
I don't think it was malicious and it's all been blown out of proportion, but you can't go doing that. Simples.
That ballboy deserves to be punished as well. Ban him from ballboy duties for 3 matches as well.
I LOVE that Hulk Hogan is now considered a football expert.
To be fair, his analysis is bang on
"Whatcha gonna doooo...."
Can he replace Craig Burley?
Yeah, that's true...I remember when United played Roma, the game in which Roma won 2-1. A number of times their ball boys would quickly collect the balls that went out for Roma corners and immediately place it on the dot so that Totti could take quick corners if he wanted. It was smart
Nothing beats a clip I remember. Think it was the Liverpool keeper who rushed out and cleared the ball into the stands. Ball boy basically had a ball to the attacker in seconds. Throw in was taken and goal scored all before the keeper had a chance to get halfway back to the goals.
As blind as wenger
It's mainly because the people who think Hazard is a cnut got bored of the story already, yet the people who are complaining about this thread being this big are actually the ones who are still going now on and on and on about it..
Also the fact that he turned out to be the son of a Swansea director might have something to do with some people opinions.
Wouldn't change anything though. Hazard is clearly a cnut for doing that and he will be punished..
But the lad was a nanosecond away from picking the fecking ball up before Hazard stuck his oar in you plonker. You can quite clearly see Hazard kicks the ball away as the lad is picking it up and then puts his hands on him which is when the lad goes down. Why didn't Hazard simply roll the lad over or even pick him up off the ball rather than kick out?I suggest you watch it again, properly.
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/video/espnfc/video?id=1310799&cc=5739
Not to be genuinely argumentative.
But as a ball-boy if someone came up to you saying 'can I have the ball' or in that situation if he see's Hazard (not really sure if he had time to) should he just back off and give the ball or leave the ball?
Would he have been in the right to physically try and take the ball away from Hazard and for example run off with it and hand it to the keeper? Or if a player is there and/or asking for the ball then for me it's the ball-boys responsibility to feck off out of there and leave the player to the ball. He/she are only there to return the ball if there is nobody about imo.
Like I said - I don't want to be argumentative for the sake of it. But I think the thing that genuinely kicked it off was his decision to go down on the cheap. I don't think Hazard did anything forceful to him and he seemed to just go down. If I was to see that I'd be thinking to myself 'come on, what's all this about, then?..' no doubt he shouldn't have tried to kick the ball out. He could have kept foraging with his hands to get the ball out and/or gestured to the referee and I'd have seen nothing wrong with it. If he had have claimed an injury from Hazard foraging with his hands is it still a red card?
But as a ball-boy if someone came up to you saying 'can I have the ball' or in that situation if he see's Hazard (not really sure if he had time to) should he just back off and give the ball or leave the ball?
Would he have been in the right to physically try and take the ball away from Hazard and for example run off with it and hand it to the keeper? Or if a player is there and/or asking for the ball then for me it's the ball-boys responsibility to feck off out of there and leave the player to the ball. He/she are only there to return the ball if there is nobody about imo.
Like I said - I don't want to be argumentative for the sake of it. But I think the thing that genuinely kicked it off was his decision to go down on the cheap. I don't think Hazard did anything forceful to him and he seemed to just go down. If I was to see that I'd be thinking to myself 'come on, what's all this about, then?..' no doubt he shouldn't have tried to kick the ball out. He could have kept foraging with his hands to get the ball out and/or gestured to the referee and I'd have seen nothing wrong with it. If he had have claimed an injury from Hazard foraging with his hands is it still a red card?
Hulk Hogan
I want Hazard vs Ball Boy II on pay-per-view, inside a steel cage.
I want Hazard vs Ball Boy II on pay-per-view, inside a steel cage.
I don't think the lad in this case had the time to leave it to Hazard...the whole coming together was over in 10 seconds which also suggests there wasn't any timewasting going on either. Maybe he did go down on the cheap as you said...or maybe Hazard did exert enough force in his shove or maybe the lad slipped...lots of maybe's and I guess we will never really know but the fact still remains if Hazard had kept out of it none of it would have happened.
It's an interesting thought if the lad had picked the ball up and not given it to Hazard but insisted in giving it to the goalie. Personally I think it would have been better for Swansea and Chelsea if Hazard had simply let the lad get on with doing his job.
That's the way I see it too Marching. I'd have understood it much more if it was a Chelsea throw in or corner, and ballboy was preventing them from taking it. It still wouldn't have excused the stupid reaction from Hazard, but it would have given him reason to be there getting involved with ballboy in the first place.
Again, it wasn't the most violent act seen on a football pitch, it was just a bit silly.
Again, it wasn't the most violent act seen on a football pitch, it was just a bit silly.
Fair play, when I watched it on YT today I thought 'wow it was over so quickly'.
I thought Hazard was within his rights to go over, even as he went down to attempt to forage for the ball. If he's saying 'gimme the ball champ, lets get on with it' anything from there is being made a meal of.
Obviously he kicked him and that was not on and a deserved red card in any case. I don't really think it was silly to attempt to speed the game up in that case. The meal that was made of it still for me is what kicked it off and then he went to far and kicked him. Like a kick or a slap or a shove or a push or a punch in a game. Before an after is irrelevant when someone goes to far.
One thing that is amusing is how the papers seem to be unified in their opinion of Chelsea FC being in the gutter. That's about right, the club is rotten to the core from the very top to the fans.
The Fa are being quiet too, bunch of old idiots should learn their lesson and deal with this sort of thing off the bat!
The Fa are being quiet too, bunch of old idiots should learn their lesson and deal with this sort of thing off the bat!
If the boy did not roll around on the floor feigning injury, it would have been a non-issue and no red card. The fact that he stayed down 'injured' put pressure on Foy to respond to Hazard obviously injuring him, which was obviously false. Tremmel, the Swansea keeper, was stood there watching the whole 'incident' and didn't even react at all at the supposed kick.
For me, given the boy is a Swansea employee, and Hazard is a Chelsea player, it is no different than any other player feigning injury to get an opponent sent off. It's only worse because he isn't actually a footballer, but an attention-seeking little shite, and the ridiculous implication that the incident is compable to Hazard beating the crap out of a minor in the Town Centre. I just think the whole 'you can't kick a boy' stuff from every angle is very hyperbolic. If the boy gets up with the embarrassed face that he should do, the game would hae just continued.
For me, given the boy is a Swansea employee, and Hazard is a Chelsea player, it is no different than any other player feigning injury to get an opponent sent off. It's only worse because he isn't actually a footballer, but an attention-seeking little shite, and the ridiculous implication that the incident is compable to Hazard beating the crap out of a minor in the Town Centre. I just think the whole 'you can't kick a boy' stuff from every angle is very hyperbolic. If the boy gets up with the embarrassed face that he should do, the game would hae just continued.
I agree, in general. But can you really not see the point, that Hazard shouldn't have got involved and whatever the reason you can't just kick out like that? Especially to a ball boy, no matter how old and scumbag like he is? Hazard didn't aim to kick him in my opinion, I think it's daft to say he did, but he didn't know the age of the kid ,he didn't know how the kid would twist and react, he just did something stupid in the heat of the moment trying to get the ball back and should take the red card and that be that.
Did Hazard know how old the lad was? nope....
Fair enough, I don't think the red card is outrageous, although I do think it was harsh. I doubt there would have been an outcry if he wasn't sent off, and I think the severity of the issue was in fact underlined by the red card that followed, as opposed to the other way round. It took a while for the card to come, and it seemed everyone from the fans, players and the commentators didn't really know what to think in the time in between. The commentators weren't immediately chastising Hazard, a gang of Swansea players were not fighting him. I think the card has dictated many opinions, in the sense that it told everybody to now take this seriously, and if it didn't come, nobody would have cared much. The ball boy would not be known as 'the boy who Hazard kicked' if he wasn't red carded. I think many would not have known what to think.
Was no means as clear as Cantona or Carragher's coin incident. I think Hazard should just take his ban and be done with it I suppose. I do also think that he's a victim of a constant demand for a story in today's game, and this one will run it's course. It's a soap opera.
That's all fair enough. One thing I will say though, is we don't know what would have happened had the boy not rolled around, the ref might still have sent him off for all we know. I would have, as you can't go doing stupid things like that.
I agree with the last paragraph though, it's nothing like Cantona's and it is all about the press wanting the story more than anything.