Eden Hazard

[didierforever 7,349]

No. Willian was good but Hazard has done more in attack. Hazard was also always marked by 2 whille Willian was given space.

willian was given space???? so tell me how many inches or centimetres of space was willian given when he was fighting for the ball surrounded by 3 (i think) atm players.

[Stingray 9,441]

[ZOS 580]

Hazard did well last night, IMO, Jose made the mistake of fielding Cesar as a RW, he should've been in-front of AC as a midfielder in a 433 line-up, that way Hazard wouldn't have to track back and we wouldn't have conceded any of the open play games goals ... with 4231 our left flank was very exposed, Hazard is not a good defender and a Luiz-Ramires just doesn't work

[haranr 485]

willian was given space???? so tell me how many inches or centimetres of space was willian given when he was fighting for the ball surrounded by 3 (i think) atm players.

Overall he was given more space, when Hazard got the ball, 2 defenders ran on him.

This is a fact mate.

[didierforever 7,349]

azard got the ball, 2 defenders ran on him. This is a fact mate.

and a player of his ability was unable to force anything on the game. fact.

fact, he failed to track his man for 1st and 3rd goal. fact.

he barely had a positive impact on the match despite being double/triple or quadrupled marked. fact.

hence your statement that he was our best attacking player is simply WRONG.fact.

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

Honestly i don't think it was lazy or even a lack of concentration from Hazard. He's basically being asked to play left back in that situation. He's being asked to man mark Juanfran.

He doesn't spot Juanfran's run. Hazard looked seconds before Juanfran made the run. Hazard knew he was there but he turned his head to look at the ball and that's when Juanfran made the run.

It's one thing asking hazard to track back and help out his FB, whole other story when you're asking him to play left back and be left on his own.

Like Skipper said Hazard should never be asked to defend that deep especially not on his own.

[haranr 485]

and a player of his ability was unable to force anything on the game. fact.

fact, he failed to track his man for 1st and 3rd goal. fact.

he barely had a positive impact on the match despite being double/triple or quadrupled marked. fact.

hence your statement that he was our best attacking player is simply WRONG.fact.

He was able to force something on the game. fact.

He had the biggest positive impact on the match regarding the attack (we didn't have a lot of attack going on)

He was our best attacker like always the problem is that he can't do everything alone.

[didierforever 7,349]

He was able to force something on the game. fact.

He had the biggest positive impact on the match regarding the attack (we didn't have a lot of attack going on)

He was our best attacker like always the problem is that he can't do everything alone.

he was able to force what exactky? 2 goals for ATM?

he had the biggest positive impact only for ATM.

he dint need to do everything alone. just play for the team. do your job. he dint.

[Stingray 9,441]

he was able to force what exactky? 2 goals for ATM?

he had the biggest positive impact only for ATM.

he dint need to do everything alone. just play for the team. do your job. he dint.

Now you are being overly negative in response lol

[Hamilton 2,118]

Are people really expecting that Hazard (our most creative player, who always should put his energy in attack) needs to save us in defence?

Maybe we should blame Torres for not standing besides Schwarzer on the goal line with the three goals to?

[Gilvorak 3,734]

This forum has also blamed Torres for scoring believe it or not. Don't take them seriously.

I actually thought he had a decent game but that defensive lapse for their 1st goal was disgraceful. That was pretty much unforgivable considering the magnitude of the game and it cost us dearly. Atletico were struggling to create chances up until that point and were becoming increasingly frustrated.

Unless you're Ronaldo or Messi that can bail us out on the other end then you can't completely ignore your defensive assignment like that.

[Jase 43,479]

This is not about views. You are no real supporter. Get lost.

Am not a real supporter? Yeah, like I give a shit about whether others think I'm a real supporter or not. It's quite sad when people have to resort to such cheap attacks in a discussion rather than have a civilized debate.

[Kieran. 6,317]

He had a job to do, he failed. Golden boy Eden is immune to criticism? Fuck that.

[bushman 2,043]

Nobody should be immune to critism. Not Hazard, Oscar, Willian..

The fact as pointed above Hazard failed last night. Who else should be blamed for his failure? Perhaps, Jose too. If Hazard was not ready to go, then why did he play him?

[kellzfresh 7,226]

He wasn't fit enough IMO, we should have brought him in the second half instead

[Belgiannutt 3,201]

He had a job to do, he failed. Golden boy Eden is immune to criticism? Fuck that.

Fuck sake, It's not about being immune to criticism. (He's gotten a shitload of it after the game)

The thing is do you really want Hazard to be in that situation ? My point is that we should have never let Hazard get into that situation.

He's a creative attacking midfielder and man marking isn't one of his strenghts.

Hazard is an attacking midfielder if you put him into a position where he has to manmark Juanfran on his own in our own 18 yard box then yeah things aren't gonna go well.

[didierforever 7,349]

Now you are being overly negative in response lol

I know. But how do u talk to a person whose only reply to whatever argument u give is "hazard is awesome, he played well!!!!"

[Stingray 9,441]

He had a job to do, he failed. Golden boy Eden is immune to criticism? Fuck that.

Most of us aren't saying he is immune to criticism. I do have a real problem with the 'he sucks, sell him' kinda vibe that went on here yesterday. He still is young, should have defended better, but we went down as a team as well imo.

So focussing on Hazard as THE reason we got kicked out of the CL is somewhat daft.