Obviously Hazard shouldn't have kicked him, but really - that's really disrespectful for a ball boy to do. That kid must be the worst kind of ###### bag at school.
Someone trying to kill time near the end of a game? Colour me shocked!
Whats next? snipers for when a ball is kicked into the stands and the supporters would rather play with it like a beach ball than toss it back? Has anyone ever noticed that the balboys always roll the ball back to opposing team players and hand or throw it back to home team players?
And by the way, that kid is a hero now
__________________
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
ya the Kid should be removed from being a ball boy, no doubt about that, but you don't kick a kid
Agreed. Not only that, but you're losing your #### over a kid wasting time at the 78' mark? It's not like this was in the waning seconds of extra time.
He was definitely trying to kill time. Probably for about 5 seconds.
Hazard is in the wrong here for sure, but I don't have much sympathy for the kid either.
I think 5 games is fair.
How is 5 games fair here when Cantona got 8 months? What is so different here that it warrants a minuscule fraction of the punishment handed out for a previous incident of a player kicking someone? Has there been another comparable incident that acts as precedent? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to figure out the thinking behind calling for 5 games or 30 games.
How is 5 games fair here when Cantona got 8 months? What is so different here that it warrants a minuscule fraction of the punishment handed out for a previous incident of a player kicking someone? Has there been another comparable incident that acts as precedent? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just trying to figure out the thinking behind calling for 5 games or 30 games.
I think the Cantona one has a pretty clear intent to injure, and it was to a fan in the stands.
With Hazard's, I completely agree he is in the wrong, but I don't think he is attempting to injure him. That plus the fact that it happened on the field with the kid purposefully interfering with the game.
Maybe 5 isn't quite enough, but I think it should be considerably less then the Cantona incedent.
The Following User Says Thank You to The Big Chill For This Useful Post:
After seeing it a couple of times now (Google video search), I must say that the ball boy is a little puke and deliberately fell onto the ball and smothered it. I will also say that Hazard is also a puke because you just can't kick kids, even when they deserve it.
I think it'll be less than Cantona because the fan in that case provoked Cantona verbally and was not physically involved (until Cantona kicked him). The ball boy was using his position to deliberately and physically interfere with the match, and the kick was less malicious. But.... it was a kid. They both share some of the blame for this one.
After seeing it a couple of times now (Google video search), I must say that the ball boy is a little puke and deliberately fell onto the ball and smothered it. I will also say that Hazard is also a puke because you just can't kick kids, even when they deserve it.
I think it'll be less than Cantona because the fan in that case provoked Cantona verbally and was not physically involved (until Cantona kicked him). The ball boy was using his position to deliberately and physically interfere with the match, and the kick was less malicious. But.... it was a kid. They both share some of the blame for this one.
That's sort of my thinking, it wasn't as bad as the Cantona incident for the reasons you state, but then it's a kid so there's an element of optics that make me think he's done for the year at a minimum.
On a related note, ball boys doing this doesn't seem that uncommon, which is crazy to me. I mean I get that they're fans of the home team, but you'd think there would some level of professionalism required to hold that position. Do the clubs instruct them to waste time? Does the FA care? I've gotta imagine they'll come up with some sort of standards on that following this if they don't already exist.
The Following User Says Thank You to valo403 For This Useful Post:
The kid was lying down on the ball, Hazard could honestly argue he was trying to kick the ball from under him. It is hard to tell since we can really see where the ball is when Hazard kicks him.
Honestly I have no issue with Hazard doing that, the kid was being an idiot and got was he was asking for. If you are dumb enough to try and smoother the ball with your body you can expect to be kicked.
The kid was lying down on the ball, Hazard could honestly argue he was trying to kick the ball from under him. It is hard to tell since we can really see where the ball is when Hazard kicks him.
Honestly I have no issue with Hazard doing that, the kid was being an idiot and got was he was asking for. If you are dumb enough to try and smoother the ball with your body you can expect to be kicked.
And if you're dumb enough to kick a ball that's underneath a child you can expect to spend a good deal of time out of the game.
Has the official or FA made any comment yet? The Red card comes out after a fairly long discussion so I wonder if Hazard said anything (for the record, I am fully in favour of the red for the kick)
