Jump to content

Hazard10

Members
  • Content Count

    117
  • Donations

    £0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Hazard10


  1. 1 hour ago, dkw said:

    Hmm.... 

    I haven't watched a lot of the top level women football ( compared to the amount of male football i've watched in my life.)

    I have watched female football but like i said the intensity is lacking. I just don't find female football as enjoyable to watch so i'm not watching it every week.


  2. 19 hours ago, bluedave said:

    That is so untrue...

    Nope plenty of studies prove What i said. 

    20 hours ago, Kentonio said:

    Have you guys actually watched any women's football recently? I hadn't for years (and it was terrible back then), but then I saw the Champion's League semi between Lyon and City live last year, and frankly I was extremely surprised by how much better it is now than it used to be. It's not PL level yet, but I'd have put it at around Championship level. Crowds were huge, even the local men's ultras had turned up to lend their support, and there was a great vibe with a crowd full of kids wearing their favourite players shirts and screaming their heads off. It made me change my mind about women's football very quickly.

    I haven't watched a lot of the top level women football but i've had my share of experience with the female football on mid to lower domestic levels. 

    I remember in my country when i was playing football in the youth ranks and there was this big push to make football more attractive to girls so they decided to allow all girl teams to join boy leagues.

    They quickly stepped off that idea though when those girl teams were getting obliterated by the boys teams.

    Up until pubertity an all boys team and an all girls team can be competitive with eachother however the moment  puberty hits there's just no comparison anymore.

    The boys develop their physical abilities much quicker then girls do. They simply become much stronger and faster then girls.

    Men have a substantial advantage when it comes to developing physical attributes: taller, stronger, faster. You can be as tactically smart and as technically skilled as you want if you're opponent is considerably stronger and faster then you then you're simply not gonna have a good time. 

    That translates to men being able to play the game at a higher intensity and a higher level then  women can. That's my biggest problem with female football. The intensity isn't there. 

     

    12 hours ago, Valerie said:

    Reading some of the posts here, women will never reach a managerial position in the Premier League, because they haven't the experience on that level. Well, that's quite some circular reasoning! Makes you wonder how some men ever got there and even manage to stay there :wink:

    I already said what i believe a women should do to reach a managerial position in the PL.

    "If a female wants to coach a top male team she should become a manager, assistant or coach at a male lower league club and work her way up. "

    It's not circular reasoning. It's simple and logical reasoning. Work your way up to the ladder from lower league to PL top flight football. 

    Top female football isn't equal to top male football. The gap is substantial. 

    Top female football is more comparable to lower league male football. So Emma Hayes only experience has been in the top female league therefore her experience is rated as a lower league male manager's experience.

     

    12 hours ago, Valerie said:

    That only suggests something about the level of the players, not of the managers.

    Are you really suggesting that there isn't a correlation between the level of players a manager manages, plays against and the level a manager has proven him or her to be at ?

    11 hours ago, Munkworth said:

    That’s how the like of Hughes, Pulis, Allerdyce etc. keep getting employed, they’re the only ones with experience :wink:

    You do realize Pulis and Allerdyce had to work their way up lower league teams before they ended up in the PL right ? 

    Adn Mark  Hughes had a succesfull career as a football player prior to his managerial career.

    He used those conncetions to get into A PL job. 


  3. 13 hours ago, Valerie said:

    This only shows how much work still has to be done to overcome prejudices. BTW the ability to battle big egos is more a personality thing than a gender thing, or a racial thing.... Not all women can do it, certainly, but equally not many men can either.

    Gender and personality traits have a connection with eachother though. Men generally are more dominant and assertive  then women.

      Doesn't mean there aren't dominant women ofcourse but it does narrow down the group of women who would be cut out for a managerial position at a top club. 


  4. No thanks. I don't care about her gender but the level she's been coaching at. 

    The level of female football is laughably bad. The gap is just too big. 

    If a female wants to coach a top male team she should become a manager, assistant or coach at a male lower league club and work her way up. 

     


  5. 2 hours ago, icecoolguy22 said:

    Really showed we were awful without him in the team, as soon as he came on things start to click. He should have came on at HT, unless Sarri was content with 0:0. I was disappointed with that play in the dying minutes, when he was running at defenders with 3 on 3, should have taken the shot like the boss instead of leaving to Barkley to finish off the job. Had he missed, we'd just accept and move on, instead he left the most important part of the job to lesser team mate. I get it he's a great team player, but you don't see Messi/Ronaldo pass up the opportunity to others in situation like that.

    Nah man Hazard made the right decision. Barkley should have done a lot better with that chance. That was a 1 on 1 with the goalkeeper.

    Still don't get why he decided to let the ball run on to his (left) weaker foot instead of taking a touch and putting it on his right foot. 

     


  6. 5 minutes ago, enigma said:

    This is the problem with Eden. Hazard isn't elite. He is a fantastic player on his day, but his day is far too infrequent to be classed as elite. He will win you games on his own SOMETIMES, but he's never going to be an incredible goal scorer. He's the best player we have, but he still never got close to Mertens' numbers under Sarri the previous two seasons at Napoli, and I wouldn't class Mertens elite neither. This is why I believe we should cash in in the summer and bring in somebody with an eye for goal with great movement.

    Liverpool have a great front three because they all enjoy scoring goals, but Hazard doesn't have that hunger for goals City or Liverpool's front three have. Heck, for all the hype Hazard gets, Heung Min Son of Spurs has similar stats when it comes to goals/assists. Like plenty of people have said previously, Hazard has all the talent in the world, but for many years it's been wasted and no coach has been able to unlock his hunger for goals. 

    Can't help but laugh when i read these type of posts. 

    Liverpool have a great front 3 because they've got THREE players that can score and assist. We've got 1 player who can score and assist. 

    10 goals and 10 assists Halfway through the season, directly involved in half of the goals we've scored  and your conclusion is he's the f*cking problem ?! 


  7. 7 hours ago, Ballack & Blu said:

    What Happens if in reality Hazard isn't top of Madrids shopping list

    Seems unlikely considering Real Madrid's current struggles and need for proven quality. 

    A 100 million (probably less considering our weak bargaining position) for a player like Hazard, in todays inflated market, is a bargain. 

    1 hour ago, I Am Gay 4 Diegod said:

    now he's totally moaning and gesturing to his teammates. 

     

    Think he's just fed up with the mediocre players he has around him. You can tell he's getting more and more frustrated. 


  8. 8 minutes ago, JM7 said:

    This is getting really boring and tedious now. I’m fed up of hearing about it. Eden, either sign a new contract or say you want to leave. It won’t do the club any good by dragging it out.

    He says that he doesn’t want to do a Courtious but by not signing a new contract, he is essentially doing that.  What’s the most that we could get for him with one year left? £60m? Nothing for one of the worlds best player. 

    How can you compare what Courtois did to this ? Courtois went awol when we refused to sell him essentially telling us to f**k off. He dishonored his contract. Hazard has done no such thing and has made it clear he has no intention of doing anything like that in the future. 

    The fact his contract is running down with less then 2 years is on the club not on Hazard. 

    We made the decision not to sell him this past summer. Hazard is under no obligation to sign another deal.

    I believe he's being genuine about being torn between the decision to stay or go. I think he loves Chelsea and loves being here but i imagine he has some serious concerns about the club and the lack of top transfers over the past years. He'll be 28 in january, He's won everything in the UK that can be won. I'm pretty sure he wants to win the CL at least once in his career. He's probably evaluating his situation and wondering whether or not we're capable of giving him the platform to win the CL. People complain about Hazard not doing much in the CL but since Hazard arrived, when have we ever had a team that was good enough to win the CL ?

    If we manage to keep Hazard and Kovacic i think we're only a couple of quality players away from that but will the club actually deliver them or will they sit on they're asses and not spend the money. 

    It actually wouldn't suprise me if he stayed though. The recent interview doesn't come across to me as a "come get me " but more of a player giving an honest assessment of what's going on. 


  9. 20 minutes ago, opinionsarelike said:

    I definitely think that Total-Football has a valid point. If you could have Hazard dribble 25 yards away from goal, or 45 yards away, you'd probably pick the former every day of the week. When Messi came through at Barcelona, he was chasing balls and pressing all over the pitch. Guardiola identified that he would be better off "resting" (hence people calling him lazy) once the opposition passed through the first line of press, to save his energy for the game deciding moments. A player of Hazard's skill level is more damaging further up the field and should probably get the same-ish instructions to maximize his potential.

    Lorenzo Insigne is a player pretty similar to Hazard, just worse at everything. He roamed, dribbled and got 5, 3 and 2 goals in the league prior to Sarri. The three seasons under Sarri he got 12, 18 and 8. Sarri's Napoli was more offensive than Benitez', but Insigne was played further up the pitch and made more productive off-the-ball movement with Maurizio. One can only hope that Hazard will gain x amount of goals with some tactical adjustments.

    Tbf i think "total football" exaggerrated his point a bit. Sure Hazard can sometimes drop a bit too deep and be a bit to eager to get on the ball but him dropping deep can be functional and it can help the team.

    Positional football is great but there is such a thing as creating overloads. Good example was his run where he picked up the ball on his own half and then ran past four defenders and was fouled just outside the penalty box.

    Huddersfield were trying to press high, it was a 3 on 3 in midfield, Hazard dropped creating a 4 against 3 situation, allowing Rudiger to play an easy pass to  Hazard, Hazard was able to turn and run with the ball with a lot of space in midfield to run into. Ofcourse Hazard isn't gonna be able to always go past 4 players but he has it in his locker so why not use it.


  10. 8 hours ago, Uno said:

    You would think that if you have a new manager you would want to come back on time/even a day or two early and certainly in shape. Not ask for an extra day off and return a little chubby. Maybe that just the way I think. 

    You do realize these players essentially play for 11 months straight playing games or training. they only get 3 weeks off for an entire year and people then expect them to hit the gym in those 3 weeks. lol

    Hazard's never been thin thin he's always been rather stocky. 

    763?appId=2dc96dd3f167e919913d808324cbfe

    He doesn't look chubby in this pic. Like already said in this thread everyone has their gut spilling out when their bending over. Unless you're really thin.


  11. 23 hours ago, Raff_Sarrista said:

    Sarri is a genius, language couldn't be a problem.

    Can I see training of the team anywhere?

    Not really no.

    Only thing we have is a daily 15 minute summary on Chelsea tv that shows some footage of what the players did and then usually a short interview with 1 of the players. 

    I think it's called "Blues news". In order to see it you're either going to have to subscribe to Chelsea tv (pay), find a live stream somewhere or wait for someone to record it and post it on twitter or youtube. 

    I think last year someone always recorded it and posted it on youtube. 


  12. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/07/12/revealed-inside-story-antonio-contes-chelsea-downfall/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

    The article, since it's behind a paywall:

    It was the 10 days last summer during which Chelsea could not get in touch with their head coach that the relationship between the club and Antonio Conte was terminally eradicated.

    And there has been some sense of revenge about the way in which the Blues left Conte in the dark over his future after May’s FA Cup final success, even allowing him to return for the start of pre-season training on Monday.

    There were few congratulations from on high after Conte’s team beat Jose Mourinho’s Manchester United at Wembley. Instead, there was largely silence that lasted until the inevitable was finally conveyed after he had taken training on Thursday.

    Some sources still believe Conte was last year considering an offer from Inter Milan, when he did not pick up the telephone, return messages or respond to emails.

    Whatever the exact reasons behind it, Conte’s disappearing act sent Chelsea into a state of panic and convinced them he wanted out. Peace talks were hastily arranged and a new contract was eventually signed as a reward for winning the Premier League title. But, tellingly, there was no extension.

    Nobody could be sure Conte would not pull a similar trick again and Chelsea did not want to be liable for more than one year’s money if, as has transpired, they decided to sack the Italian.

    It was not just Chelsea who had become suspicious, however, as Conte also lost faith in his employers during a summer in which he felt none of his main targets were signed.

    Conte wanted Romelu Lukaku, Alexis Sanchez, Alex Sandro and Virgil van Dijk, but by the time Chelsea returned for pre-season on July 10 last year Lukaku had joined Manchester United instead and the Blues’ only outfield signing, Antonio Rudiger, was not ready to start training after playing in the Confederations Cup for Germany.

    With a Premier League trophy to use as a bargaining chip against club policy, Conte felt empowered to take on his employers. He warned people their jobs were on the line and that they would see ‘the real Antonio Conte’ if he did not get what he wanted.

    He is still rated as one of the best coaches the club has ever employed, but there is a feeling that Conte’s judgement became clouded at key points by an obsession to prove he was right.

    There was bemusement from within the squad when he called a pre-season meeting to supposedly welcome Chelsea’s new signings and introduced Paolo Vanoli and Davide Mazzotta, who had joined his backroom staff.

    For a short while nobody knew whether or not Conte was being serious, but it quickly became clear that he was underlining the fact there were no new players for him to show off.

    Former technical director Michael Emenalo is believed to have been in the room for Conte’s joke that highlighted the gap that was already developing between the 48-year-old and his board.

    Of course, one player who had not been part of the pre-season meeting was Diego Costa, who effectively went on strike in Brazil after being informed he was no longer part of Conte’s plans over text message.

    That move went down spectacularly badly inside the Chelsea boardroom, as Conte had acted without their approval and had risked damaging Costa’s value.

    The message was also forwarded throughout the Chelsea squad, who were astonished that the club’s top scorer in their title-winning campaign could be treated in such a way – even though he had been causing problems since rowing with Conte last January.

    More difficulties with members of his squad surfaced during the season, as Conte dropped David Luiz after the Brazilian was perceived to have questioned his tactics during a stormy inquest in which Kenedy was given a dressing down for yawning.

    Injuries contributed to his absence, but Luiz only played five times after the thrashing in Rome, which took place in October and Kenedy was loaned out to Newcastle United in January.

    The 5-0 victory over Stoke City on December 31 meant that, despite all the angst, Chelsea finished 2017 in second place in the Premier League and still in all of the cup competitions.

    But tensions boiled up again during a January transfer window in which Conte wanted the Blues to back him with bids for Sanchez and Sandro, both of whom he believed were available.

    He had not spoken with anybody more senior than Emenalo, who left Chelsea in November, between August and December, and his requests were unsurprisingly ignored. In the end, he had to be content with Olivier Giroud, Emerson Palmieri and Ross Barkley.

    Conte had nothing against Giroud, who proved to be a shrewd addition, or Emerson, but felt that, while United were pushing the boat out for Sanchez, Chelsea were trying to strengthen from the substitutes’ benches of Arsenal and Roma.

    Once January passed and the transfer window had shut, Conte once again cut himself off from his employers and serious consideration was given to making a change after the embarrassing defeats to Bournemouth and Watford.

    Rather than sack him mid-season and land themselves with a huge compensation bill, Chelsea decided to see if they and Conte could ride out the storm together.

    But any hope of Champions League qualification was effectively eradicated by the successive defeats to Manchester United and City, when Conte’s tactics were widely condemned, along with his use of Eden Hazard as a false nine.

    Hazard had been prepared to sacrifice himself for the supposed greater good up to that point, but sometime after the City loss the Belgian was pulled aside by Conte and had his commitment questioned.

    Chelsea have desperately been trying to convince Hazard to sign a new £300,000-a-week contract, but word quickly got round that he was becoming annoyed by his head coach and it showed on the pitch.

    More fall-outs were to follow, as Conte dropped Rudiger for giving a television interview in which he appeared to question the team’s approach and the former Juventus coach screamed at his squad that they were all “s***” during half-time in the Premier League victory over Southampton, in which Chelsea came back from two goals behind.

    The FA Cup final success over United provided some consolation, but not even that could mask the disharmony in the background as Willian posted a picture on social media of the squad celebrating with carefully placed trophy emojis to hide Conte.

    Luiz and Willian would have never played for Chelsea again while Conte was in in charge and there is every likelihood others would have been frozen out as well.

    In his post-match press conference at Wembley, Conte repeated seven times ‘I can’t change’ which pretty much told Chelsea everything they needed to know and had Roman Abramovich reaching for the reset button once again - even if it took some time for him to press it.


  13. 26 minutes ago, Ballack & Blu said:

    Plus if Man You are valuing a nothing player in Martial at £100 million, Willian is worth at least that!!!

    Martial has 9 goals in the PL this season vs Willian's 6 and he did it playing 300 minutes less. Not to mention Martial is 7 years younger then Willian. 

    To be clear not saying Martial is worth 100 million just saying Willian is less valuable then Martial.


×
×
  • Create New...