*Transfer Window 2014/15 Season Rumours/Signings *AKA Man U fans listing every player under the Sun

Status
Not open for further replies.
HazardO said:
Eden Hazard up for sale?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27258633

I thought he was the new Messi?
Click to expand...

I doubt it, it's just Mourinho putting Hazard in his place after his comments about Chelsea not playing football. Hazard failed to do his defensive job and was responsible for two of the goals, it's all well and good criticising Mourinho's tactics but imagine how the rest of the team who have been working their balls off defensively feel when Hazard can't be bothered to track his man and costs them dearly in a key game, then on top of that he just shrugs his shoulders and says something along the lines of "not my problem I want to play attacking football".
 
Last edited:
Robbo said:
Indeed, maybe.

Can't see us going for him though, or him leaving. He'll be off to PSG if he does leave.
Click to expand...

Hazard is probably more likely than Muller lol ( but I totally agree Hazard is highly unlikely to be playing in a Chrysler sponsored shirt next season)
 
Hazard said this a few weeks ago -

“I’m happy in life, I’m happy with my football and I’m happy at this club. I am in good form now, lots of nice things are happening and I hope to continue like this.”
Click to expand...

Then this last week -
'It's good for me but without the team I am nothing. I just want to say thank you to my teammates for this season. I'm happy to play for Chelsea and I hope I can win titles with this club.'
Click to expand...

Then after one mis-reported interview and a bit of criticism from his manager we're going to sell him? :p
 
mmj_uk said:
I doubt it, it's just Mourinho putting Hazard in his place after his comments about Chelsea not playing football. Hazard failed to do his defensive job and was responsible for two of the goals, it's all well and good criticising Mourinho's tactics but imagine how the rest of the team who have been working their balls off defensively feel when Hazard can't be bothered to track his man and costs them dearly in a key game, then on top of that he just shrugs his shoulders and says something along the lines of "not my problem I want to play attacking football".
Click to expand...

Hazard was completely responsible for both goals, because he was the last man back on both occasions?

You know how many crosses Liverpool fired in, when Chelsea won and Mourinho didn't complain about any of the wingers of fullbacks for not stopping every cross from coming in? But because Hazard was beaten twice, the 4 defenders(at least) and keeper are completely not responsible, nor Mourinho for his tactics that basically relied on keeping a clean sheet, which has failed significantly more often than it's succeeded.

But Hazard is responsible for both goals.... sure.

Hazard put Mourinho in his place, he was honest, he said they weren't set up to play football, and he was right, and 99% of those who watched the game would agree.

Mourinho decided to try and make him a scape goat, nothing more or less. Mourinho chose to ask a winger to play as both their main attacking outlet and a left back. Here's a hint, he's NOT a fullback, so expecting him to be as good as the worlds best left backs... when he never plays there, is absurd.

Mourinho is responsible. If what Mourinho said is true and Hazard wasn't willing to risk himself, or commit himself... then why did Mourinho choose to play him there... so the responsibility is still Mourinho's.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Hazard put Mourinho in his place, he was honest, he said they weren't set up to play football, and he was right, and 99% of those who watched the game would agree.
Click to expand...

I take it you've actually read the complete transcript from his interview -
Originally Posted by Hazard
"I don't know what we lacked tonight. After we scored we had the game in our hands. But maybe they wanted it a little bit more than us. It was an intense game and a nice one to watch. I'm sad tonight but the logic is respected because they deserved to qualify. Chelsea is not made to play "foot". We are good in playing on the counter attack, a bit like Real against Bayern. And we did well so this evening because we scored, but the penalty after half-time hurt us badly. In the second half we couldn't make the difference. It was a complicated match but this will serve as a lesson for next season"
Click to expand...
http://hereisthecity.com/en-gb/2014/05/01/ag-chelseas-eden-hazard-mis-quoted-by-french-tv-station/
http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/4/30/5669688/eden-hazard-chelsea-real-madrid

That's hardly putting Mourhino in his place is it, even JM said there was nothing critical in his comments.
 
JM said there was nothing critical in his comments... before tearing in to him.

"Chelsea is not made to play foot(implied football)..." is the only thing anyone has said he has said about chelsea, and your full transcript also says this.

It's funny that Mourinho doesn't have a problem with him saying that, then decided to tear him a new one, because obviously as I pointed out, he was the only player against Atletico or Liverpool to fail to stop a cross coming in, which is why there were only two crosses across both games. Likewise clearly Mourinho's rational thought process blamed Hazard entirely because the other 5 people capable of clearing the ball shouldn't be held accountable in any way, nor should Mourinho's decision to play him in a defensive role which he is ill suited to.

It's so ridiculously obvious that the comments did pee off Mourinho greatly. I do find it pretty laughable that you would believe him.

It's like on these forums people put up a disclaimer before bashing what it is.

"I have an Xbox 360, so it's totally okay that I bash MS/xbox one as I'm not a fanboy".

"I totally didn't get upset by Hazard's comments...... but it's like entirely his fault we lost against Atletico"... yeah, utterly believable. That his two best defenders, whose commitment can't be questioned, could both have cleared the first goal themselves and failed to. Hazard's is a short coming of his personality, Cole/Terry just made a mistake.
 
Last edited:
To be fair Atletico were very fast, skilful and quick movers of the ball in midfield. They looked much more fluid and controlled in their little triangles.

It reminded me of watching Bilbao vs Man utd - where man utd were just too static with too many players who don't have the speed, movement, technique etc to stop the opponent and do better themselves.

Yes Chelsea did seem too defensively set up and are always going to carry some threat but Madrid were just too good for them on the night.

It's like you need one type of player to win the premiership, playing teams like Sunderland etc, and a completely different one to play Barca or Atletico de Madrid because lumpers and hoofers don't cut it against these smaller near and skilful teams.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Mourinho is responsible. If what Mourinho said is true and Hazard wasn't willing to risk himself, or commit himself... then why did Mourinho choose to play him there... so the responsibility is still Mourinho's.
Click to expand...

Mourinho shouldn't need to question someones commitment towards a Champions League semi final.

Not being a fullback isn't an excuse, it wasn't a lack of ability for Hazard not fulfilling his defensive role it was either laziness or a lack of concentration. Chelsea were already 1-0 up so Hazard could focus almost fully on what Mourinho required of him defensively, he failed.

Mourinho's tactics were spot on (well I'm not sure about taking Cole off for Eto'o so soon) but individual mistakes by Hazard and Eto'o cost Chelsea not Mourinho's tactics.
 
JohnnyG said:
Evidently the quote you're on about was this -



Is that putting JM in his place?
Click to expand...

Funny, that isn't in the quote you put of Hazard, in fact it's twisting his words completely compared to the original quote you put. yet all these media guys reported Hazard's actual statement and are terrible.


Chelsea is not made to play "foot". We are good in playing on the counter attack, a bit like Real against Bayern.
Click to expand...

That isn't even close to what you then changed it to. They play counter attacking a BIT like Real against Bayern.

No, I don't think Hazard compared Chelsea's tame counter attacking in that game to the counter attacking game of Real AND Bayern.

he said their tactcs were a bit like Real against Bayern... except Real weren't even 1/10th as defensive as Chelsea, they got forward in larger numbers far more often.
 
Here's his quote & interview verbatim -

2yv777a.jpg


Now I don't really speak French/Flemish or whatever it is but it's obvious to me that he didn't just say 'Chelsea don't play football' which is what you seem to think he said.

What do you make of it?
 
JohnnyG said:
Now I don't really speak French/Flemish or whatever it is but it's obvious to me that he didn't just say 'Chelsea don't play football' which is what you seem to think he said.

What do you make of it?
Click to expand...

The first (relevant) part basically translates as Chelsea is not made to play football. Every translation says basically the same thing, every article and every quote I've seen agrees.

It's the third quote you found of Hazard, in which he says "chelsea is not made to play football" which you seem to be attempting to use as proof that Hazard did NOT say "chelsea is not made to play football". If you don't think that is what he said, can I suggest stop posting quotes which include it.

I don't disagree that Chelsea tried the same VERY basic tactic of counter attacking, but that doesn't mean they played the same. Counter attacking is not a single idea. Firstly they started the game in a 4-4-2 and usually left two attacking players in the opposition half. They frequently flooded forward in attack and had many attacks involving 4+ players. Chelsea rarely flooded forward, they frequently withdraw the lone striker deep into Chelsea's own half, they very rarely attacked with more than 3 players. It's not wrong to say both teams countered, but it's very wrong to suggest that two teams counter attacking will always play the same way or be similar tactically.
 
He's young, it was his first champions league semi final, emotions are high... Considering he was saying earlier on in the year/season, that Mourinho has made him a better player, I wouldn't read into it too much...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom