Hazard Vs The Ball Boy Shouldn’t Have Been Last Night’s Main Talking Point

Ian

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Davillin says:

    Before you blame the ball boy, you should look at the incident. I watched the entire incident on tape and timed the whole affair. The ballboy is being maligned.

    From the time the ball crossed the line until Hazard had it and was running toward the goalkeeper, only 10 seconds elapsed.

    Before the ball had crossed the line, the ball boy was already running for it;and he had it in hand about 3-4 seconds after it had crossed the line and bounced off the wall.About a second after he had it, Hazard pulled the ball boy to the ground, and less than two seconds after that, he kicked him. A second after that, Hazard just missed stomping on the boy, although to be fair, it is not clear whether that was intentional.

    How anyone could accuse the ball boy of intentionally time-wasting is beyond reason.Within 10 seconds after the ball had crossed the line, the entire incident had run its brief and violent course.

    If you don’t believe that, check it yourself with a stopwatch.

    All Hazard had to do is to appeal to the referee and, if there was time-wasting, the referee would have dealt with it.

  2. Dr Bob says:

    Interesting point Davillin. Are you suggesting that the total time elapsed would have been under 10 seconds had not Hazard intervened? Because the main point of your argument says that you are. That, it seems to me, is “beyond reason”. Hazard should not have done what he did in the way he did it. How many times have you ever seen ballboys at matches do what the 17 year old did at Swansea? Maybe they should do it more often and see what the reaction is then.

  3. Baron Von Tickleshitz says:

    i think there are 3 parts to all this:

    •Hazard was an idiot getting drawn in and doing what he did

    •The ball boy was massively at fault for concealing the ball and secondly for play acting

    •and the third part is, its a joke for footballers to complain that a ball boy was time wasting and play acting because that is exactly what they do. The rattiness of the ball boy is simply a reflection of the rattiness of footballers – at all levels and the rattiness of fans – at all levels. Football is a very ratty game. Its the game played by rats, watched by rats (not all obviously, but if you are a rat this is the sport you will be drawn to), commented on by ex football rats and ball boyed by rats. Rats that cheat and lie. Footballers like owen and nevin cant complain that the ball boy is a cheat when cheating is an integral “part of the game”. rats

  4. Paul says:

    It’s funny that the only two comments on this article relate to the ball boy incident and miss the point of the article completely.

    I’m very proud of Swansea City.

  5. Dai Little says:

    Here here Paul – I couldn’t give a toss about the ballboy – a silly, trivial incident handled well after the game by both Swansea and Chelsea. End of story – except journos need to keep it running to justify their jobs.
    Ian has written a remarkable article on a club who should be held up as a beacon. Having been one of those at the Hull game in May 03 (which was a bigger and more important game than the Chelsea one) you would have been carted off to some institution had you said that in 10 years we would be riding high in the Prem, financially stable, through to our first ever major final, acknowledged as a great footballing team and managed by Denmark’s 2nd best ever export!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>