Hazard was class when he fancied it, seem to remember him having more brilliant moments but surely Salah's output is better
Prime Hazard or Prime Salah?
- Thread starter tentan
- Start date
Hazard was more talented/gifted. Salah more productive, efficient and essentially the better player.
Good thing I didn’t say that then
Hazard is the more gifted footballer, but I think Salah is a more effective footballer and suits teams a bit better.
Salah
Salah
Watching Hazard now is a sad experience compared to his peak years, can’t even beat a man now.
He beat a man once yesterday with a nice shoulder feint on the edge of the box, and it got me off my seat
but he didn't have the acceleration to get away from his marker so he just took a shot from where he was, straight at the keeper. Sad to see indeed. He has no business even being at the World Cup to be honest, let alone starting every game. Same goes for a quite a few of those old Belgian stars.Salah. Hazard was easier on the eye but Salah is far more effective and impactful. Too many games just passed Hazard by.
What a question. I'd take Prime Mane over the 2.
Salah will get you more goals but I really enjoyed watching peak hazard so I go with him.
Its been mentioned by many but it really can't be understated that Hazard played under Mourinho and Conte and at times, was tasked with carrying a whole attack by himself particularly when Costa decided to talk half of the season off.
We've seen Salah this season have to carry a lot more of the offensive load. Previously he had TAA and Robertson in peak form as well as Firmino and Mane who could all create to a very high degree. This season he hasn't looked as special because he's had to take on the added responsibility of creating for others.
Hazard has always been rated strangely on here and by a lot of football fans who only value stats. There's no doubt he should have scored more but at the same time look at his achievements, you don't get that by being a pointless dribbler.
Two PL titles where he was arguable the best player in both seasons and had domestic and European cup success too. His final season is seen by some as his best and it was certainly his best output wise and its the only time he played under a non pragmatic manager at Chelsea.
Salah played under Klopp, a manager who is perfect for any offensive player. Firmino scoring 27 goals in a season tells you all you need to know. The same with Pep at City, Raheem Sterling scored 31 fecking goals in a season. I really don't see a world in which the likes of Sterling, Mane, Salah could keep the same goal scoring statistics if they were in the same setting Hazard was at Chelsea. They probably still do score more than Hazard but it would be as big of a gap. Hazard on the other hand certainly adds 10 goals a season to his tally playing under Klopp or Pep.
Hazard edges it for me but can understand anyone saying Salah, his output and consistency is almost impossible to argue against. What edges it for me is Hazard's big game performances in the PL. Salah has many of his own too but Hazard looked far and away the best player on the pitch when other stars were playing. He's had so many highlight performances with greay goals against top teams. The fact that the game where Herrera marked him out is still spoken of says a lot because he tormented us for years.
We've seen Salah this season have to carry a lot more of the offensive load. Previously he had TAA and Robertson in peak form as well as Firmino and Mane who could all create to a very high degree. This season he hasn't looked as special because he's had to take on the added responsibility of creating for others.
Hazard has always been rated strangely on here and by a lot of football fans who only value stats. There's no doubt he should have scored more but at the same time look at his achievements, you don't get that by being a pointless dribbler.
Two PL titles where he was arguable the best player in both seasons and had domestic and European cup success too. His final season is seen by some as his best and it was certainly his best output wise and its the only time he played under a non pragmatic manager at Chelsea.
Salah played under Klopp, a manager who is perfect for any offensive player. Firmino scoring 27 goals in a season tells you all you need to know. The same with Pep at City, Raheem Sterling scored 31 fecking goals in a season. I really don't see a world in which the likes of Sterling, Mane, Salah could keep the same goal scoring statistics if they were in the same setting Hazard was at Chelsea. They probably still do score more than Hazard but it would be as big of a gap. Hazard on the other hand certainly adds 10 goals a season to his tally playing under Klopp or Pep.
Hazard edges it for me but can understand anyone saying Salah, his output and consistency is almost impossible to argue against. What edges it for me is Hazard's big game performances in the PL. Salah has many of his own too but Hazard looked far and away the best player on the pitch when other stars were playing. He's had so many highlight performances with greay goals against top teams. The fact that the game where Herrera marked him out is still spoken of says a lot because he tormented us for years.
Salah of course.
Hazard was great in the PL but his performances in Europe were mostly poor. 10 goals in the CL and half of those were penalties.
Hazard was great in the PL but his performances in Europe were mostly poor. 10 goals in the CL and half of those were penalties.
The second half of the Jose title season was the biggest example of this. Performance wise "15/16" started for us in that period but him and Courtois played like supermen carrying the rest of them.
Hazard at his absolute best in a single game was unplayable and I think better than Salah. Problem is he couldn’t hit that level with any real consistency. Salah has been banging in goals and performing week in week out for several years which makes him the better player.
Prime Hazard has never been close to prime Salah's level. Wish it was the other way round.
For me Hazard always threatened to be world class, without quite getting there (lack of consistency). Now he's atrocious.
Salah was literally world class for two seasons. Thank feck the scouse Aubameyang'd him with the £400k wage, but he is still dangerous and could become quality again were Liverpool to find form.
For me Hazard always threatened to be world class, without quite getting there (lack of consistency). Now he's atrocious.
Salah was literally world class for two seasons. Thank feck the scouse Aubameyang'd him with the £400k wage, but he is still dangerous and could become quality again were Liverpool to find form.
Crazy thing is that he's only 31 years old!
Can't believe the drop off in him compared to 2019!
People forget how good Hazard was, a shame he played under Conte and Mourinho as opposed to Klopp and Guardiola.
Hazard was never going to come out well on this sort of forum debate, as forums are notorious for recency bias.
Hazard was a supreme dribbler, and you just had to hack him repeatedly to stop him.
Salah has played essentially as a striker in some wildly attacking teams, whereas the Chelsea teams Hazard was in he was never a striker and not as open a system.
It's a much closer debate than this forum suggests.
The question is regarding them in their 'prime', so Hazard for me. I deem Hazard more gifted, just that Salah is the more consistent, effective and non-crocked one that teams can rely on. At his best, Hazard could beat teams on his own, in very defensive set-ups like some have mentioned earlier
I wouldn't say it's recency bias in this case, even when he was at his absolute peak these same arguments were being used.
I can understand why people would favour Salah and even I would say his UCL record gives him the edge (*) when everything is factored but when I see arguments citing his goal stats and how he was "inconsistent" then for me that's pretty much an entry level football knowledge fail.
(*) however that said, as has already been pointed out Salah isn't looking half the player now most of his world class supporting cast has left or declined.
I'd say
Hazard = Ribéry
Salah = Robben
First two play 30 games, score 10 and assist 20
Second two play 30 games, score 20 and assist 10
Wide playmakers vs wide forwards
The best tandem a coach could ask for
Hazard = Ribéry
Salah = Robben
First two play 30 games, score 10 and assist 20
Second two play 30 games, score 20 and assist 10
Wide playmakers vs wide forwards
The best tandem a coach could ask for
Salah is on course to have his 2nd or 3rd best season, not looking half the player is an exaggeration.
Which further proves my point that often you need to delve deeper than the top line.
Nearly a 1/3 of his goals came against a woeful Rangers side. Diaz looks their best all round attacker in the present day.
If the question is Prime Hazard v Prime Salah, it’s clearly Prime Hazard.
But if the question is who has the greater career, then it’s clearly Salah.
But if the question is who has the greater career, then it’s clearly Salah.
I don’t think so he might have score a few less goals but creatively he is still up there with De Bruyne as the best in the league, not much difference maybe he was a bit too far wide at the start of the season but the last month he is back to his best.
Yes definitely, people have always judge Hazard somewhat unfairly to me, he’s a throwback player his impact on the team can’t be quantified by just goals and assists alone, especially in a Mourinho and Conte side where he was almost the chief playmaker as well the one to score goals, at his best he was as close to Messi lite as anyone not named Neymar.
Interested how you're working this out? He's well, well off every other season he's played for Liverpool pro rata in the Premier league.
6goals in 14 which is a 0.43 hit rate
versus
23/35 0.66
22/37 0.59
19/34 0.56
22/38 0.57
32/36 0.89
If you're going off overall goals, they are propped up with 4 goals against Rangers who'd probably be lower table championship level in England/.
It's shocking analysis really to suggest Salah is in any way on course to rival his best seasons here.
Goals are way down, and Liverpool media aside, everyone's been saying he's been well off since signing that new mega bucks deal.
Maybe a change of system hasn't helped, but alongside TAA and Van D, they're in a competition who has been most off their top level this season.
He's the ultimate what could have been player. Could have potentially been on the Ronaldo/Messi level had he actually applied himself and tried.
It’s probably Salah based on his output, but prime Hazard was a glorious player
I was looking more overall he has 14 in 21 all competitions. last season he started off way better but had a lull at the end of the season. I don’t think there’s much difference last season and his first not included but we’ll see at the end of the season, and I don’t see the argument for rangers either because there was a season he scored 5 against Norwich?
Not sure where your other post went, but if he continues his scoring rate of 0.43 for a full league season, that's 16 goals.
His other years have been 19, 22x2,23 and 32 premier league goals. So he's showing nothing other than it's actually his worst league season here.
can't believe how far hazard has fallen
Hazard anyone
Hazard
Salah
This. At his prime Hazard had better one off games but Salah always has better seasons.
It's a tough call. In a man to man comparison I'd probably take Hazard since he was just so naturally gifted. Salah has been more consistent throught his prime years (not to say Hazard wasn't) but it feels like Liverpool is especially suited to his strengths.
Hazard for the eye, Salah for the rest.