• Liverpool Message Board

  • dsteer_lfc_68 dsteer_lfc_68 Jan 24, 2013 13:36 Flag

    Ball Boys

    Not an LFC subject I know, but since we have a Chelsea fan and a few others who like to discuss the transgressions, real and imaginary of the LFC players on here, I thought I'd open up a thread to allow them to discuss other clubs’ less than stellar behaving players. If they wish to.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • To be honest, I think the red card was harsh and don't think Hazard should be punished, or, it shouldn't be an offence even if it is to the letter of the law. I know you aren't allowed to physically interfere with anyone but the Swansea ball boys were 'cheating' throughout the game. It is one thing to throw the ball short or a little slow but with 20 minutes to go to lie down on the ball?! Hazard didn't kick him either, he kicked the ball.

      It was in frustration and I know Hazard as a proffesional shouldn't have got involved but I would have been fuming! To see him post a twitter comment showing off about it later is stupid as well. No doubt, he was encouraged to do so and I am sure the Swansea players and fans loved him for doing so, for me though, it is worse then when keepers take ages for goalkicks despite only being allowed 6 seconds. How he is going to miss 3 games for that is crazy.

      • 2 Replies to Hobitez
      • Not really going to disagree with you on anything said about the ball boy or the actions he took, however I think you have to judge what Hazzard did in isolation in deciding whether it deserved a red card or not.

        Put it this way, time wasting is as old as the game itself. It happens every week. But under what extreme circumstances of time wasting gives the right of an opposing player to lash out with his foot? If a fouled player laid on the ball and did not want to get right back up, is kicking him okay? What about a keeper who decides to hold the ball a little longer than he should while on the ground. When would a kick not result in a red card?

        The second point Hazzard and you make is that he was trying to kick the ball not the player, and we can all check every angle to see how much if any real contact he got on either. But again that’s a bit irrelevant. The question on any other dangerous challenge that might result in a red card is not whether the contact caused harm, but whether the challenge was reckless or not. I think kicking at a player on the ground whether real contact was made, would always be deemed reckless and therefore worthy of an early shower, so the same standard should be applied.

        Lastly is the argument that Hazzard only did it out of frustration, and here I have a little sympathy for him, however sympathy is not the same as excusing him from blame or punishment. I felt a lot of sympathy for Zidane in the WC, I'm sure whatever the Italian said deserved a good slapping, however a head-butt no matter the reason for it, does not belong on the football pitch, and nor does the kicking of ball boys imo.

      • I thought Devon made a good point on the United board regarding the ball-boy holding onto the ball ...

        It was a goal-kick to Swansea and therefore why was Hazard involved at all? The ball boy needed to give the ball back to Swansea not Chelsea.

        The player shouldn't have got involved and probably deserves some kind of punishment but I agree with you - it seems to have been blown up out of all proportion.

    • I'm very happy to discuss it. I have been all morning on the United board. I don't really feel the need to repeat everything I have said over here. But if you object to anything I have written you can take issue with it over there or over here as you wish.


    • Time wasting and time keeping in general seems to be one of those items the FA likes to keep behind the curtain like the wizard of Oz. Rightly or wrongly refs seem to tolerate a certain amount of time wasting as part of the game, and while once in a while a keeper will be given a warning, and even less often given a caution for the offense for the most part refs let it go. They are supposed to add time on, but who knows exactly how much is added, it’s subjective and far from a science.

      But it works both ways, we've all heard of Fergie time, whether it’s real or imagined we have seen SAF (as well as other managers) tapping his watch plenty of times when he thinks too much time is being added, and he's only doing it to try to influence things (like most things he does). Whether it works or not who knows, but for everyone who complains refs don't add enough time, there will be an equal amount of people who say too much time has been added.

      I did not watch the match so can't comment on other incidents of potential time wasting by the Swansea staff, but like I said regarding the Stoke towels I think if there is clear evidence the clubs staff were trying to influence the outcome the FA should look into things, but if its 10 seconds here, or 5 seconds there, I doubt they'll do anything. Besides while it obviously frustrated at least one Chelsea player not sure it can be argued that it really influenced the outcome of the match.

      Now maybe we can come up with a more scientific method of time keeping like taking the watch away from the ref, and having an official game clock that stops if there is a delay of 10 or 15 seconds after the ball has gone out of play, and the same if the ref stops the match to allow medical treatment or for substitutions. But then again I’m sure we’d find fault with that at some point. Right now refs rarely blow for full time if an attack is underway, so can you imagine how upset we’d be if the official game clock struck zero just as someone was about to shoot, or just after a corner or free kick has been taken.

    • I think that is fair and measured. End of the day Hazard lost his head when he should have known better, and will take a punishment for that. The ball boy I'm sure has also learnt a lesson, but reminding clubs of what the role of sideline staff should be, would not be a bad idea. But it is really a storm in a teacup if we want to make more of it. Like I said on another post did all the supposed time wasting actually change the outcome of the match? And, even if someone thinks it did, or thought it might have, can you also say there is evidence that Swansea deliberately had its staff try to influence things?

    • You are right that it is just a storm in a tea cup? The FA however, just to make it a complete nonsense, are taking the matter further with Eden Hazard, but apparently not with the overage ball-boy masquerading as a big kid, who actually thought he could influence the outcome of a football match. Nothing "even handed" about this then which just about sums up the usual performance from the FA resident clowns. As for evidence we have the pre-match "time wasting" twitterings of an inflated "more money than sense" 17 year old Ball-Boy whose "big wheel" Daddy just happens to own a sizeable chunk of Swansea. Given that Daddy is a man of influence and responsibility at the Club and his kiddywee is an influential Ball Boy do you think there could have been some "fatherly" words tendered pre-match, even in jest, about the need to win the game and get to the Cup Final? Probably?? And isnt the Law of Probability something that the FA are fond of using when it suites them, and we at LFC should know all about that shouldnt we? As you say, time wasting dosent matter 'cos its all part of the game, but what about "winning a penalty" "faking a foul" "simulation" "getting a player sent-off" little things, but all part of the unfair, unsporting nastyness that ruins the modern game. Little things that are overlooked and go un-punished just serve as an encouragement to do it again, or even "go one better" next time. As I said in a previous post on this matter, Hazard deserved his Red Card but the Ball Boy deserves 6 of the best on his bare ar@e administered in the Centre Circle 5 minutes before kick off at Swanseas' next Home Game in front of all the speckys, the Ref and assistants and both teams and told not to do it again. I bet he'd learn his lesson then, along with all other Ball-Boys in UK. It might not cure diving immediatly, but you have to make a start somewhere,......dont you?

    • Chelsea didn't score in 180 minutes and didn't look much like scoring if they'd added on another 180. But that's not the point, of course.

      I would very happily legislate for football a mixture of basketball and rugby timekeeping. That is, start the clock when the ball is in play and stop it when it is out of play. Then when time is up the game stops when the ball next goes off the pitch. I can't see a problem with that.


    • 3 games is plenty IMO. Nuff said

    • Come on Robert are you saying you don't like Fergie time?

    • Yes. It's a poor system in principle and a terrible system in practice. We could do so much better.