Well, we need to have something to discuss after all
. Can't just all stick with the same opinion for 5 years and let the Caf die a slow death.Hazard, where does he rank among the best in the world
- Thread starter Someone
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
. Can't just all stick with the same opinion for 5 years and let the Caf die a slow death.I think there was a spell a couple of years back where Mata, Oscar and Hazard destroyed everything in sight, and you chelsea fans coined it as 'Mazacar'
but that was very entertaining to watch.Haha, true.Well, we need to have something to discuss after all
I think there was a spell a couple of years back where Mata, Oscar and Hazard destroyed everything in sight, and you chelsea fans coined it as 'Mazacar'
That was a fun time, it was the first sight we had of Chelsea playing really creative and intricate fast short passing. I used to lose count of how many backheels the feckers would try in a match.
What we have now is an evolution from that. A bit less showy but more responsible and a lot more reliable. We used to win some games beautifully and then get rolled over by other teams before, whereas now we're far more solid as a unit.
Well a lot of that has to do with the inclusion of Matic who I think transformed your team completely. Being off topic here but with that transfer and Jose returning, I could definitely see you becoming reliable and solid.That was a fun time, it was the first sight we had of Chelsea playing really creative and intricate fast short passing. I used to lose count of how many backheels the feckers would try in a match.
What we have now is an evolution from that. A bit less showy but more responsible and a lot more reliable. We used to win some games beautifully and then get rolled over by other teams before, whereas now we're far more solid as a unit.
The third best player in the world changes. What a shock.
Maybe other players would be higher in the lift if they played in England where a lot of hype gets attached to players. I agree they're incomparable, in that Hazard is far behind, apart from being a different kind of player.
For you and some others, maybe.
Yeah Matic was a revelation, but also the change of Mata for Willian had a big impact. We needed that extra grit up front.
It seems to be a shock only for you.
I bet the 5th best changes often too.
Personally I'd have Robben and Suarez joint third depending on the formers' fitness situation.
Well I never quite agreed with Jose on that one, but at the same time it was obvious that he wouldn't prefer him, given his philosophy. I can think of a few managers, past or present, who would have decided to play Juan even if it meant others having more workload or the team being bit more attacking.
You seem to have missed the part when I said 'on ability', not on season based performances.
Robben pisses all over these muppets.
Yeah, it was a ballsy play. If it had backfired it would have brought fury down on him.
Yep and Jose is as pragmatic as they come. Probably someone like SAF would have taken that gamble..
Performances are what matter though. Ability is harder to gauge, and even more subjective, and at the end of the day not what matters when comparing players.
Also, I do think you're overrating robben with the last sentence. There's not much between him and Suarez.
Of course they do, but not what I was talking about there.
Can't really agree Suarez being near Robben, but to each his own.
The point is if a team doesn't at least have a foothold in a match its difficult for the designated match winners to do what they're paid to do. Muller hasn't played in any Bayern team that's been completely dominated by the opposition. Attackers are victims of their midfield's work. If the midfield has a totally dysfunctional match like chelsea has had on occasion, even someone like muller won't be making the difference in all the big matches that he has. Hence saying Muller has consistently done it on the big stage really is a by product of how good his team has been in the past little while.
Take this into consideration. No player that doesn't play for Barca, madrid or Bayern would be deemed consistent in big games. No matter how good said player is. Take Suarez for Pool, or even Aguero for city. These players for some are inferior to other players cause of how they are said to have failed to do anything in the CL, but how's aguero expected to beat barca when his is struggling to get the ball to the other third of the field?
The theory that Hazard doesn't contribute to the bigger matches in the CL would be a reason to criticise him the day Chelsea ends up putting together a side that can hold their own once the big boys come into town. Then you can say he's not that good because of that. Until then its a pointless discussion. The sort of criticism that players who spent their whole career at less than great teams have suffered over the years(I.e Totti)
Take Figo, put him in this chelsea side and he wouldn't be doing more than what Hazard is doing. Something similar but not more. Very similar players in the sense that their dribbling and ability to hold on to the ball is unmatched. Both not so great at ball striking and mediocre offensive movement. Hazard is faster though, both on and off the ball and Figo put in more crosses in the box while Hazard tends to always try to go on the inside.
Figo stood out because he could both deliver and dribble: a rare combination in a winger. Even at Real with their expansive collection of dead-ball specialists, he was at the front of the queue for the free-kick.
lol wow Cazorla is a distant second.A guy from the new users forum, Buffer, sent this. Crazy stat.
The flashy parts you are about right, but he was far more effective/impactful/influential, whatever you want to call it. Why? Because he was a more intelligent footballer.
Leave aside leagues as you can bang on about clubs, rivals, etc.
Internationals: 34 in 127 for Figo, 8 in 57 for Hazard (Portugal wasn't FIFA ranked any higher than Belgium are these days)
Champions League: 24 in 103 for Figo, 5 in 28 for Hazard (Figo's being a career-long CL record mixing Real, Barca and Inter, on average about Chelsea's level).
Assists would be unfair, as the finishing from the assisted one is relevant, but that also favours Figo.
I totally disagree with how you downplay the strength of that Chelsea side and don't get why you feel the need to compare it to Barca, Real, Bayern when we're talking about games against PSG & Atletico. In no way is it comparable to Totti's career at Roma, who also had many individually outstanding games against stronger teams even though more often than not the overall quality of his team let him down and Roma lost. You're basically saying Hazard doesn't need to stand out at all, when his team plays badly, to prove he's one of the best players in the world. That makes no sense at all. Hazard needs to show his top level in the CL and for the nationalteam. If his teammates let him down and it's not enough to win games, fair enough, I certainly won't hold it against him. But that's not what happened in the past 2-3 years. And blaming everything on his teammates, who, if I understand you correctly, totally fail to put him into a position to show more, seems very wrong to me. He's not a poacher, who's 100% dependent on service. He's a well rounded attacking midfielder, who has a lot of freedom and sees a lot of the ball. He just needs to do more with it when it matters the most. Being surrounded by quality players and coached by arguably the best manager in the game today can't be that big of a hindrance.
Also, none of what you've written explains his underwhelming performances for Belgium against mostly inferior teams, while De Bruyne doesn't seem to have a problem to excel.
Can't believe you find it useful to compare the statistical accomplishments of a player who's yet to even reach 25 years to one who's career has already put him in the all time legends list.
Do your stats also take into consideration that Messi is marked on a completely different level than Hazard? The tactics of the best managers in the world revolve entirely around stopping Messi. Remember the Clasicos when Mourinho was Madrid coach and played that tripple pivot formation with Pepe as a man marker on Messi? The result:
Do your stats also take into consideration that dribbling in La Liga and especially for Barca who face 11 men behind the ball week in week out is a different ball game than dribbling in the Premier League? 3 seasons in a row at Barca Sanchez was averaging 1 dribble per game. In fact he publicly admitted he had to improve that aspect of his game. The moment he moved to the Premier League his dribbling stats exploded and trippled to more than 3 per game. Another example: Suarez was averaging around 3 dribbles per game when he was at Liverpool. One season later at Barca his dribbling stats dropped to 1 per game.
Robben is underrated on here. He was the best player in Brazil '14 while playing for a generally uninspiring Dutch side. Actually, his perfomances in Brazil were the most exciting peformances from a forward since Ronaldo in France '98. Hazard is a class or two below that level, especially for Belgium.
Has Neymar done it on the biggest stage? I'm being serious when I ask that.
Scoring twice in UCL. Leading Brazil to world cup semi final.
1-Messi
2-Ronaldo
3- Suarez
4, Aguero
5, Hazard
2-Ronaldo
3- Suarez
4, Aguero
5, Hazard
Topscorer of the CL with Messi and Ronaldo without taking set pieces. Well on the way to breaking Pele's record for Brazil, 44 goals and he's only 23 y.o.
I find this interesting. I remember a Fabregas interview where he said it was easier for players like him to shine in england because the game was faster and there is more space to exploit and thread a pass i assume. Torres when he first moved to england said the same thing about finding space and how the english game suited him more. Also was reading an article on Bojan last month and he's averaging more dribbles per game than he has ever done before although this could be down to his confidence levels. Maybe he feels more trusted by Hughes at Stoke. Considering his intelligence, role and experience in both leagues id say Cesc is best placed to discern the difference between the two leagues.
Last edited:
Amazing.
Do your stats also take into consideration that Messi is marked on a completely different level than Hazard? The tactics of the best managers in the world revolve entirely around stopping Messi. Remember the Clasicos when Mourinho was Madrid coach and played that tripple pivot formation with Pepe as a man marker on Messi? The result:
Do your stats also take into consideration that dribbling in La Liga and especially for Barca who face 11 men behind the ball week in week out is a different ball game than dribbling in the Premier League? 3 seasons in a row at Barca Sanchez was averaging 1 dribble per game. In fact he publicly admitted he had to improve that aspect of his game. The moment he moved to the Premier League his dribbling stats exploded and trippled to more than 3 per game. Another example: Suarez was averaging around 3 dribbles per game when he was at Liverpool. One season later at Barca his dribbling stats dropped to 1 per game.
Very interesting. This sort of kills the myth that it is easier for attackers to shine in La Liga.
You are the one saying there's no difference between them.
OK, Figo pre-25: CL 4 in 18, Internationals 8 in 42, both records being better than Hazard's so far.
And no, I'm not one to usually resort to stats, but if you can't see the difference between a devastatingly effective winger and a really gifted one whose decision-making isn't at the same level, all I can do is resort to stats.
Just in case those, let's be clear that I do rate Hazard. I said earlier in this thread that bar Messi/CR7 I would only rate Suárez and Mülller higher in terms of who would improve us the most upfront. But Figo was, as you say, in a different tier altogether (and I preferred his Barca version better than his Real one so age and career accomplishments have no bearing on it).
Agree, I sometimes wonder if we all watched a different tourno altogether, he destroyed defences single-handedly.
If you watched Chelsea vs PSG and Atletico then you'll understand why its a valid point. They were absolutely terrible in both ties. Totti had some great games and a lot of terrible ones where it seemed like he wasn't on the pitch. That's the effect having an incompetent team around you can have on a great players performance.
No one sees the ball a lot in a team that has 33% of the ball. No matter how good the player. He's an attacker, he's midfield dependent even if he isn't a poacher. Whatever his teammates and whoever his manager, fact is this chelsea team isn't close to the elites in European club football.
Honestly haven't seen enough of Belgium to have an opinion on his performances or De Bruynes.
This video absolutely cracks me up:
How tall is he? I know Terry, Ba and Ivanovic are tall but feck me.
Excellent player, was gutted when we missed out on him after the big Twitter announcement, even more gutted now he's brilliant.
How tall is he? I know Terry, Ba and Ivanovic are tall but feck me.
Excellent player, was gutted when we missed out on him after the big Twitter announcement, even more gutted now he's brilliant.
Players develop at a different rate so that's pretty much inconsequential. What's that supposed to prove? That one developed quicker than the other?
Figo was never devastatingly effective especially at club level. For a moment for Portugal he was the holy grail though, I'll give him that.
I'm talking hazard now and not his past. The Hazard we're seeing is as good a footballer as Figo at his peak. The similarities are uncanny and he himself faced similar criticisms.
I might be bold for saying this but I would be very confident that Hazard would be world-class for Barcelona however, I wouldn't be so confident that Neymar would be as effective for Chelsea as Hazard is. That statement does not necessarily mean Hazard is better than Neymar though but maybe more versatile and all round.
Did you really wanted to write that or did you misspelled something?
You're pE="Brwned, post: 17886901, member: 34496"]If you're taking national performances into the equation then Sánchez is at the very least at the same level as Hazard, IMO. Hazard has been better for Belgium recently but still miles behind Sánchez for Chile and there was little between them in the PL or CL last year.
I do think Hazard is very overrated because of the aesthetics of his game. For a great playmaker he spends an awful lot of games - big and small - drifting along on the periphery of matches. That chance created stat is ludicrous...if any stat tells you that Hazard is more creative than Messi then it goes without saying that stat is meaningless.
For someone who's given that much creative responsibility he needs to create more to be close to being one of the best players in the world. If he wasn't part of the PL hype machine it wouldn't even be mentioned.[/QUOTE]
You're probably right on the Hazard v Sanchez issue, the latter is one of the best international footballers in the world tbh..I think he needs to win the league at Arsenal and cause some damage in the CL to edge it though.
Hazard has to watch out for the level of energy he displays during games, if he drops in terms of intensity I can see him becoming overhyped. He needs to remain humble and keep being involved during a game and keep running at players. He's not productive enough to be a lazy player who can just goal hang in final third.
I do think Hazard is very overrated because of the aesthetics of his game. For a great playmaker he spends an awful lot of games - big and small - drifting along on the periphery of matches. That chance created stat is ludicrous...if any stat tells you that Hazard is more creative than Messi then it goes without saying that stat is meaningless.
For someone who's given that much creative responsibility he needs to create more to be close to being one of the best players in the world. If he wasn't part of the PL hype machine it wouldn't even be mentioned.[/QUOTE]
You're probably right on the Hazard v Sanchez issue, the latter is one of the best international footballers in the world tbh..I think he needs to win the league at Arsenal and cause some damage in the CL to edge it though.
Hazard has to watch out for the level of energy he displays during games, if he drops in terms of intensity I can see him becoming overhyped. He needs to remain humble and keep being involved during a game and keep running at players. He's not productive enough to be a lazy player who can just goal hang in final third.
Yet until February this year he still held the all-time assist record in La Liga. Of course, Messi broke it, after almost ten seasons at the top of the game in a dominant side. True, Zidane and Goofy didn't play in La Liga as long as he did, but Xavi spent his whole career playing for Barca in La Liga, so did Iniesta... yet Figo had the record, a record it took a freak of nature like Messi to break.
Never devastatingly effective my arse.