Salah. I don’t often, if ever, praise a Liverpool player but his longevity and his actual impact on his club is greater than Hazards. Strange to think though that Hazard has twice as many Premier League titles.
Prime Hazard or Prime Salah?
- Thread starter tentan
- Start date
Its genuinely Sophie's choice here as I hate both of them but you have to give it to Salah for output over longer period
Prime Hazard, but that prime was only for around 4 years.
What a waste of a career. Worse thing he did was move to Madrid. He was quality for Chelsea.
Would the team play in the CL?
Basically the opposite for me. Hazard was a better player, for longer, and was more integral to his side and more impactful on the league being the best player for a significant period.
Salah at his best is a far better player than Hazard ever was, unfortunately
Have no regard for either of them or their teams, but Salah was a much better player. Personally think Hazard is the most overrated player I have ever laid eyes on.
Hazard was the focal point of 2 relatively poor title winning teams comparatively. That window of mediocrity post Fergie and Pre Pep and Klopp getting their teams right.
Salah was the spearhead for a team that achieved insanely high points totals competing with the artificially manufactured machine of City and did it over a longer span.
Hazard was the focal point of 2 relatively poor title winning teams comparatively. That window of mediocrity post Fergie and Pre Pep and Klopp getting their teams right.
Salah was the spearhead for a team that achieved insanely high points totals competing with the artificially manufactured machine of City and did it over a longer span.
Has it actually been longer?
Hazard burst onto the scene at a very early age and was well on his way to being world class even as a teenager (and won Ligue 1 POTY twice in a row at age 20-21). Salah was definitely more of a late bloomer and only really started performing at a decent enough level at Roma aged 23-24 before really kicking on at Liverpool aged 25, at which point Hazard was already a title winner and POTY at two separate top-5 leagues.
Just because Hazard fell off a cliff at an early age doesn't mean he didn't perform over a long period of time, it just means he started performing at a very young age. Should Salah continue performing at a really high level for another couple of seasons then yeah he'll have edged longevity but right now it's still close. And if Salah moves to the Saudi league next year then his peak as a player will have been of very similar length to Hazard's which is 8-9 years.
Hazard is very overrated on here. At his prime he was probably at the level of a prime Alexis Sanchez. Salah broke records and is still twice the player.
Yep this thread confirms that Hazard is ridiculously overrated, that or people just can’t accept a Liverpool player being too quality. Salah is the best winger the Premier League has ever seen outside of a couple seasons of Cristiano Ronaldo. Nobody has come close to matching his goals, assists and big moment plays. I don’t enjoy saying that but he’s truly world class. Hazard isn’t even in the same league.
Clearly Salah for me but posters saying Hazard was overrated make me laugh. "Most overrated player I've ever seen" 
Hazard for me. Carried that Chelsea team on his back at times
I feel Salah is the (far) more decisive player in terms of end product, but the Hazard type dribbler is more pleasing to watch.
Hazard was mostly just a worse Robben though.
Hazard was mostly just a worse Robben though.
Salah has been decisive for a much longer time, but Hazard was a better player to watch in his prime.
Not that I'm underrating Hazard but Salah is half a level above, IMO. Salah.
Yeah, as a United fan - thank you Pep/City for that because in any other period, Pool would/should have collected another 2-3 titles.
Hazard for me but I prefer Federer to the Joker as well so that should explain it...I hope.
Salah is in the top tier category of best PL forwards ever with Henry, Rooney, Shearer etc. and Hazard is just in the level below.
Salah is one of the main players who transformed the wide forward role in the modern game.
Salah is one of the main players who transformed the wide forward role in the modern game.
Last edited:
Hazard's game was aesthetically more appealing for me but Salah is more effective and I'd definitely rather have him. Both brilliant though
Salah, fairly easily.
It's a pretty simplistic point but there's nothing you can really do on a football pitch that has more impact than scoring goals and Salah's goalscoring peak was a 32 league goal season. And if you want to take consistency over multiple seasons into account, he's had six 19+ goal league seasons in a row. Whereas Hazard maxed out at 16 league goals and never had more than two consecutive seasons hitting double figures.
And even in terms of assists, Salah's output over multiple seasons holds up well against Hazard's.
Salah: 10, 8, 10, 5, 13, 12.
Hazard: 11, 7, 9, 3, 5, 4, 15.
Salah with twice as many double digit returns in one fewer season.
Hazard was quality and offered more to his teams than just output, but then Salah isn't without his own value beyond output either. I think pretty much every manager would opt for peak Salah if given the choice between the two, as there's just too much value in that consistent material impact.
It's a pretty simplistic point but there's nothing you can really do on a football pitch that has more impact than scoring goals and Salah's goalscoring peak was a 32 league goal season. And if you want to take consistency over multiple seasons into account, he's had six 19+ goal league seasons in a row. Whereas Hazard maxed out at 16 league goals and never had more than two consecutive seasons hitting double figures.
And even in terms of assists, Salah's output over multiple seasons holds up well against Hazard's.
Salah: 10, 8, 10, 5, 13, 12.
Hazard: 11, 7, 9, 3, 5, 4, 15.
Salah with twice as many double digit returns in one fewer season.
Hazard was quality and offered more to his teams than just output, but then Salah isn't without his own value beyond output either. I think pretty much every manager would opt for peak Salah if given the choice between the two, as there's just too much value in that consistent material impact.
The guy who was compared with Messi and Ronaldo is his prime, who carried title-winning teams on his back, who was considered the best player in the league for a large portion of his prime years, who has the fourth most motm awards in Europe after Messi and Ronaldo....is mostly just a worse Robben.
Salah of course. How's this even a question?
Salah every day. Hazard might have had some pretty moves and fancy footwork but Salah is just a machine.
By who? Chelsea fans?
The only right answer is Salah here. Not sure if it's because its a Man Utd forum so some don't want to credit a Liverpool player, but Salah has carried that Liverpool team for years now. Unbelievable footballer and a top human being too. Would have loved to have had him at United.
I mean, you can compare any two footballers just like you can compare any two numbers.
Just saw this comparison: Bale, Hazard, Salah, Robben?
how Would you rank those 4?
how Would you rank those 4?
Hazard was very good. Salah is a great.
I would say that Hazard had more ability but Salah was easily more effective. Overall you have to go with Salah.
Tough one. I'd prefer to watch Hazard but as for who I'd have in my team, I'm not sure. The thing about Salah is that because of his success at Liverpool, everyone has forgotten that he spent a large chunk of his early career being far from elite.
I think that if you're building an all-time PL team, and picking either 4-3-3 or 4-3-2-1, you have Henry as your tip with Ronaldo and Salah either side. As good as Hazard was, he wouldn't be in that team.
I'd rather watch Hazard play in full flow, but I'd rather Salah in my team, if that makes sense!
Hazard at his best was a beast for Chelsea, utterly sensational in his prime, he could be the difference and as a pool supporter as much as I hated him, I thoroughly appreciated his annoying brilliance
But Salah all day long, and a dozen times on Sundays please
I don’t think folks realise how much of a Great Salah is, he’s not just a fabulous goal scorer, he’s many things in top at the highest of levels and has been for 7 consecutive years at Liverpool, scoring, assisting, creating, he’s an EPL great without question
I know the thread isn’t about longevity etc, it’s about who at their best would one take, Salah hands down, and that does no disservice too Hazard, he’s just not as good a player as Salah at his peak imo
But Salah all day long, and a dozen times on Sundays please
I don’t think folks realise how much of a Great Salah is, he’s not just a fabulous goal scorer, he’s many things in top at the highest of levels and has been for 7 consecutive years at Liverpool, scoring, assisting, creating, he’s an EPL great without question
I know the thread isn’t about longevity etc, it’s about who at their best would one take, Salah hands down, and that does no disservice too Hazard, he’s just not as good a player as Salah at his peak imo
Hazards's career best in the PL was 16 goals and 15 assists.
Salah absolutely rips Hazard when you stop sentimentally recalling his dribbling exploits. He couldn't make the step up; Salah did.
Salah absolutely rips Hazard when you stop sentimentally recalling his dribbling exploits. He couldn't make the step up; Salah did.
Salah
Prime Hazard, probably easier on the eye, but Salah is just different level, his goalscoring record is incredible. Hazard scored his fair share as well but not the numbers Salah has. Salah for me.
This. If Chelsea waited a bit longer we could have seen both in the same side
I'd 100% rather watch Hazard. There aren't many players in the world in my lifetime I'd rather watch than Eden Hazard. But if I'm making a cold, emotionless call, I'm taking Salah, who for me is getting up there in Henry territory in terms of PL legacy.
I don't think this is particularly close.
Salah by a distance.
Salah by a distance.