Manchester United Message Board
most seem to be on his side and doing all they can to demonise the ballboy. Can`t help wondering if the player involved had been Rooney, Suarez or Barton whether their attitude would have been the same. Given the way they reacted to Suarez`s recent handball and Rooney`s swearing at the camera - both of which although not acceptable are in my opinion less serious than kicking someone - I doubt very much if it would have been.
Robert it was so blatant that all he had to was walk away in the opposite direction and the ref would have adjusted the time anyway.
Frustration and resorting to violence surely isn't the answer, Infact is that what we want to teach young footballers to do ?
Careful with the paranoia.
The fact is that Hazard isn't Rooney, Suarez, Barton. Or JT. Or Balotelli. He hasn't been in serial negative headlines of his own making. (Just the one about his tweeting when he joined Chelsea.) And in this particular case, although it is generally agreed by everyone that he went about what he was doing in the wrong way, his motivation was in the spirit of the game.
This is the first red card of his career. He has had ten yellows in over 260 matches. If I remember correctly his only yellow for Chelsea came when he was fouled and the ref incorrectly decided he had dived. He gets fouled and kicked a great deal in matches due to his skill and threat, and I have never seen him complain or retaliate.
So I think he deserves a bit of a break, where Suarez or Rooney or JT or Balotelli or BArton might not get one. But I tend to think that the press wouldn't have been too hard on any of them. Although "football star kicks ball boy" is a wonderful headline, even the press can see that it was something with the right intention gone wrong.
The ball boy was his own worst enemy with the prematch tweeting. But I think everyone should lay off him. He's only a kid who has done something silly. He doesn't deserve the world picking on him.
- 2 Replies to Robert M
I'm in agreement with much of your comments above, but I just don't buy this "his motivation was in the spirit of the game" thingy.
From where I'm standing, it seems like a 'selfish' motivation to me as Chelsea had a game to chase at the time. I don't believe for a second that Hazard would have acted differently if Chelsea were leading which blows the "the spirit of the game" argument out of the window.
"his motivation was in the spirit of the game" - since when has kicking someone on the ground been in the spirit of the game? And you have just proved my point by trying to argue that because of his previous good record Hazard deserves a break - no he doesn`t. He should be judged on the severity of the offence and that alone and that should apply to all players whether their reputation is good or bad.