Eden Hazard

[lionsden 4,689]

average for 85 mins apart from 2 or 3 good runs and the one that led to the goal.

[Anme 5]

WIlmots isn't a great tactical coach, but I think people underrate the mentality aspect. In previous years, we often played decent football but we lost due to a lack of concentration at the end of a game. Nowadays, we always seem to win regardless of how smooth we play. Wilmots brought a winning mentality to the team.

I also don't really see how people are expecting us to play with a more tactical coach. We don't have the players to play a high pace and play very attractive football. It's not that we have quality players like Hazard, De Bruyne that our entire team is fit to play a fast aggresive style. We'd be way too vulnerable with players like Kompany, Van Buyten, Vermaelen prone to errors.

It's just slightly surprising that, when you have a coach who brought a team from not qualifying and losing against very weak teams, to a team that has gotten 32 on 36 points in their last games of importance, the only thing you read about Wilmots (on internet fora) is how horrible he is tactically.

[johnnythefirst 1,076]

Had a quick look: Gillet, Deschacht, Swerts, Martens, Simons, Sonck and De Camargo played that game, with De Sutter and Lamah as substitutes. Hardly this generation...

Advocaat wasn't even coach then, Vercauteren's last game.

Hmm, you're right. Holy shit, those players...

[Gilvorak 3,734]

He's the first manager that was able to take these guys to an actual tournament. They adore him. What should we do? Pay Capello 10 million a year so he can come play catenaccio with our team?

That's all very well and nice but you simply can't waste this group of players. Simply can't gamble on a mediocre manager when you're such a small nation.

[johnnythefirst 1,076]

That's all very well and nice but you simply can't waste this group of players. Simply can't gamble on a mediocre manager when you're such a small nation.

Tell me what manager would be a. affordable and b. better? Getting the likes of Van Gaal is impossible unless they do it for scratch. Also, Van Gaal failed to qualify Holland for the 2002 World Cup, with a better team than he has today.

Wilmots yet has to lose his first competitive game as a coach, and during the qualification matches his tactical choices almost always proved right.

[johnnythefirst 1,076]

Another thing: how many horrible, horrible games did Chelsea play this year? Enough, right? Does that mean Mourinho is not a good coach? Sometimes your key players are just not performing. It's no more than that...

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Says a lot about his ability (and the lack of quality in the match) when he can easily win MOTM for showing up for less than 10 minutes in the whole match.

But, FFS, Eden, it won't kill you to be a bit selfish at times!

[Sheva. 5,373]

Tbf to the Belgian manager, that squad has no fullbacks to support the wingers, and their best CM's aren't exactly creative.

It's pretty much Chelsea of last season, except they can't go out and buy Fabregas and Luis.

[Xtraxion 100]

Tbf to the Belgian manager, that squad has no fullbacks to support the wingers, and their best CM's aren't exactly creative.

It's pretty much Chelsea of last season, except they can't go out and buy Fabregas and Luis.

Ok, we don't have natural full backs, but at least you have to play Vertonghen high so Hazard can do his thing. I have the feeling the squad followed Wilmots orders until minute 80, where Vertonghen and Alderweireld were going forward and so Hazard (and mirallas) did have the space to do his (their) thing. Wilmots has all credits for managing the social aspect of the team, but he lacks the tactics and guts at this stage.

[haranr 485]

Hazard CAN take Belgium right to the very top but he has to decide NOWW!!

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

Tbf to the Belgian manager, that squad has no fullbacks to support the wingers, and their best CM's aren't exactly creative.

It's pretty much Chelsea of last season, except they can't go out and buy Fabregas and Luis.

I've got the same opinion as Xtraxion even if you don't have natural fullbacks you need to push your fullbacks up high, atleast on that left side with Vertonghen.

That way Hazard can get away from his flank because now he's getting way to isolated on his side.

He's constantly getting double marked with a third player covering. The only way to counteract that is by having your fullback push up high and overlap Hazard.

Even if Vertonghen isn't that great going forward the opposition still has to cover his run and allow Hazard some more space to work with.

[BlueLyon 9,359]

The only real problem Belgium will have in future are fullbacks...they have Tielemans who will add creativity in midfield and Januzaj who will be the danger man next to Hazard, it wont be oneman team at least. And Benteke at best, Origi improving and Lukaku maturing will give them more stable options in attack. But they have no fucking fullbacks this team...

[Mustafa 885]

I don't know why.... but the more and more I watch Eden play, the more I feel like he will prosper more in the #10 role.

Why?

Look at Mertens' display in the first two games for example. He was immense in both games (imo) just cuz of his direct nature. He looks to beat his marker and deliver a cross or shoot. That's what a winger should do in my opinion. Eden does that too. But but not often enough.

On the other hand, what Hazard has that most LW's don't, is magnificent vision. The best LW in the world (Cristiano Ronaldo) has average vision. Eden almost always creates a couple good chances for his team mates whenever he's on the pitch.

Now, if he played in the role behind the striker, he would be in positions to play in on-running STs and Wingers. Like he did for Schurrle's second goal against Fulham. He skipped past two players and then calmly caressed the ball into Schurrle's path. And I think he can do that on a regular basis. Also, if he played in the role behind the striker, he'd get the ball ALOT with his back to goal. In that situation, Eden is incredibly clever in how he turns the defender on his back and sprints away from him. Can't think of a better example than his first goal against Newcastle in the 3-0 victory at Stamford Bridge.

I think this is something Jose should consider and maybe even Belgium too. Both the Belgian NT and Chelsea have players who would love to play in Hazard's position week in week out but just cant get into the team because of Hazard. As for Chelsea, I think Hazard would give us more creativity than Oscar would in the #10 role.

Just a thought...

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

I don't know why.... but the more and more I watch Eden play, the more I feel like he will prosper more in the #10 role.

Why?

Look at Mertens' display in the first two games for example. He was immense in both games (imo) just cuz of his direct nature. He looks to beat his marker and deliver a cross or shoot. That's what a winger should do in my opinion. Eden does that too. But but not often enough.

On the other hand, what Hazard has that most LW's don't, is magnificent vision. The best LW in the world (Cristiano Ronaldo) has average vision. Eden almost always creates a couple good chances for his team mates whenever he's on the pitch.

Now, if he played in the role behind the striker, he would be in positions to play in on-running STs and Wingers. Like he did for Schurrle's second goal against Fulham. He skipped past two players and then calmly caressed the ball into Schurrle's path. And I think he can do that on a regular basis. Also, if he played in the role behind the striker, he'd get the ball ALOT with his back to goal. In that situation, Eden is incredibly clever in how he turns the defender on his back and sprints away from him. Can't think of a better example than his first goal against Newcastle in the 3-0 victory at Stamford Bridge.

I think this is something Jose should consider and maybe even Belgium too. Both the Belgian NT and Chelsea have players who would love to play in Hazard's position week in week out but just cant get into the team because of Hazard. As for Chelsea, I think Hazard would give us more creativity than Oscar would in the #10 role.

Just a thought...

Well Hazard isn't really a winger or a 10 he's something between the two. I think we should keep playing him on the left wing but allow him to sometimes move away from the sideline and roam into the centre.(like we've been doing last season)

Let him be unpredictable.

I think the most important thing is getting an attacking left back to help him get rid of the double marking and to keep the width when he roams to the centre.

I actually don't think Hazard is less direct then Mertens. I think Mertens looked more direct because he was constantly able to go 1 on 1 with the Russian left back while Hazard was double marked.

When Hazard gets into a 1 on 1 situation he usually goes for it. It's just that teams rarely allow that to happen because they know how good he is at it.

Both of his decisive assists came on the counter when the opposition couldn't doublemark him as they didn't have enough players to do so.

[iseah100 5,612]

Well Hazard isn't really a winger or a 10 he's something between the two. I think we should keep playing him on the left wing but allow him to sometimes move away from the sideline and roam into the centre.(like we've been doing last season)

Let him be unpredictable.

I think the most important thing is getting an attacking left back to help him get rid of the double marking and to keep the width when he roams to the centre.

I actually don't think Hazard is less direct then Mertens. I think Mertens looked more direct because he was constantly able to go 1 on 1 with the Russian left back while Hazard was double marked.

When Hazard gets into a 1 on 1 situation he usually goes for it. It's just that teams rarely allow that to happen because they know how good he is at it.

Both of his decisive assists came on the counter when the opposition couldn't doublemark him as they didn't have enough players to do so.

This.

[Ze Mario 638]

Well Hazard isn't really a winger or a 10 he's something between the two. I think we should keep playing him on the left wing but allow him to sometimes move away from the sideline and roam into the centre.(like we've been doing last season)

Let him be unpredictable.

I think the most important thing is getting an attacking left back to help him get rid of the double marking and to keep the width when he roams to the centre.

I actually don't think Hazard is less direct then Mertens. I think Mertens looked more direct because he was constantly able to go 1 on 1 with the Russian left back while Hazard was double marked.

When Hazard gets into a 1 on 1 situation he usually goes for it. It's just that teams rarely allow that to happen because they know how good he is at it.

Both of his decisive assists came on the counter when the opposition couldn't doublemark him as they didn't have enough players to do so.

He's actually the better version of young iniesta. Hope he improve to be better than that cunt

[kellzfresh 7,226]

Well Hazard isn't really a winger or a 10 he's something between the two. I think we should keep playing him on the left wing but allow him to sometimes move away from the sideline and02roam into the centre.(like we've been doing last season)

Let him be unpredictable.

02

I think the most important thing is getting an attacking left back to help him get rid of the double marking and to keep the width when he02roams to the centre.

02

I actually don't think Hazard is less direct then Mertens. I think Mertens looked more direct because he was constantly able to go 1 on 1 with the Russian left back while Hazard was double marked.

When Hazard gets into a 1 on 1 situation he usually goes for it. It's just that teams rarely allow that to happen because they know how good he is at it.

02

Both of his decisive assists came on the counter when the opposition couldn't doublemark02him as they didn't have enough players to do so.

I've said this before in this thread. He holds unto the ball too long when double marked, and it slows down the attack.

That's why I said earlier that he should try to do quick one twos when double marked. Like anytime he see's two players around him, he should pass out and run towards the box for the return pass.

Mertens made a lot of runs and crossed into the box and hazard didn't come in from the far post, so once it goes past lukaku, no one else was in the box.

I'm begining to think hazard is more of an iniesta than bale/ronaldo/robben. If you even watch iniesta on the wings sometimes, he plays just like hazard. Both don't run into the 18box much, and both don't shoot.

Because of this, Hazard might actually be better in the center with his back to goal quick turns used to the maximum and more touches of the ball.

[BlueLion. 21,491]

average for 85 mins apart from 2 or 3 good runs and the one that led to the goal.

What most Chelsea fans are scared to admit is that was the story of his season, four or five magnificent, world-class performances aside. The most sobering thought is that in that five minute window he offers more than the rest of our attack does in 90 minutes. That's what cost us last season. He's still very raw and miles away from being the player most of us think he is, but he is nonetheless a special player with all the ability in the world. It's just his mentality that concerns me. Does he know how good he can be? I hope he gets a little more licence to play next season, now that we have a more responsible component in the midfield in Cesc (as opposed to Ramires' headless forays into No Man's Land that left us exposed time and time again last season) and with the (possible) signing of Luis, a defender who'll have the ability to cover further up the pitch than Cole or Azpilicueta.