Eden Hazard

[ParNolio7 285]

Completely normal when you look at the teams in our group, only Croatia was a marginal contender. No idea why you include Scotland as an example, they're wank.

To take a 26/30 for granted like you do is just ridiculous. If even Germany drops points at home vs Ireland ...

He hasn't proven himself... nearly 3 years further and still no cohesive team, despite the players improving massively on club level. He's starting to get more and more criticism in Belgium from people who know what they're talking about as well.

Hasn't prove himself ... please don't let me repeat the incredible results that he achieved.

-- you're quote on no cohesive team etc. --

No cohesive team? WTF? Is this the same Belgium we're talking about? On a personal level they are one big group of friends, never any incidents whatsover. On a tactical level, they've been playing the same 4-3-3 variant ever since the beginning & the key players in the central ax have been the same since the beginning. Can't have more cohesion than that.

"People who know what they're talking about" ... you mean that small naive group of Belgian fans who sheepishly thought that we were going to win the World Cup eyes closed without breaking a sweat & got frustrated when the reality check came? There are more (AND BETTER) teams out there ... Germany, Argentina ...

You seem to focus solely on the results, which have been decent and absolutely normal for a team with a market value of 365 million euros. You could argue he's underachieved.

Only thing you can objectively evaluate a coach on are his results. All the blabla about this should be the lineup, or that should be the tactics, everybody thinks they're a manager, everybody thinks they would put together the best possible team ... stop dreaming, you can argue about that endlessly without ever knowing. Only thing objective is results. And 14 wins, 3 draws & 1 defeat out of 18 matches is pretty f-cking impressive.

Under Leekens we had Vossen and Ogunjimi as strikers, Legear as a winger and Simons in midfield, with sporadic stints by up and coming talents like Hazard and Lukaku.

BTW, Leekens already had an excellent Vincent Kompany, Axel Witsel, Marouane Fellaine, Steven Defour, Jan Vertonghen, Thomas Vermaelen, Nicolas Lombaerts, Dries Mertens ... at his disposition. Obviously they still improved. But you can't defend the terrible results he got with that team.

In conclusion, you can rant on about Wilmots all you like, and I will say it again, I'm not a fan either, but in the end, as long as he keeps piling up the incredible results the way he does & keeps on getting the respect of all players, there's absolutely nothing objective you can put in against him. But I'm sure you'll try to come up with a couple of clever lines.

[iseah100 5,612]

What is this based on?

Lack of experience, tactical flexibility, and poor decision making. Yes, he's gotten results, but that's because a lot of these players are just that good. He's an average coach, if Belgium want to do anything like win the Euro's or Confederations Cup, they'll have to reevaluate their staff. Starting with Wilmots.

[Shakez 755]

Mourinho on Eden Hazard:

We can never transform these fantastic players and men into a competitive animal, a competitive machine. Not even his father wants [that]. We have just to bring him to a different level, working hard in training, which he’s doing.”

Is Hazard responding to that message?

“Yes, yes, yes. He’s never afraid to play and take responsibility. But it’s not about that. It’s about him saying – today, I have to be decisive. What he says in that press interview, when he says ‘I’m not one of the five top players in the world’ – he can be, but he cannot be in a match where he doesn’t do something in the 90 minutes that makes him decisive.

A common belief is that Mourinho can’t abide players – wingers especially – not tracking back. It is more complicated than that, he maintains: “I had some guys in my career – they didn’t want to [defend]. You try to build something behind them to protect. His [Hazard’s] problem is not that. He wants. The only problem is to be focused during the 90 minutes and understand when he has to, and when he doesn’t have to.

Here is the link to the full interview: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/managers/jose-mourinho/11170519/Jose-Mourinho-talks-to-Gary-Neville-They-wanted-us-to-be-the-clowns-at-Anfield-we-werent-having-that.html

[Gilvorak 3,734]

[sutro 1,026]

wow amazing intervieuw

[Weckerz 3,781]

But I'm sure you'll try to come up with a couple of clever lines.

Thanks.

I could but we'd be going in circles. You lost all credibility saying Advocaat had 90% of our current team at his disposal.

[xPetrCechx 13,546]

Avram Grant.

Sure!

My neighbor.

[Barbara 15,149]

Well knowing Mourinho has been talking to his father and that he's said that to him, I'm more hopeful about Hazard staying here longer.

He doesn't seem to be motivated by ego or fame and that's basically what being at Madrid would give him over us. And a lot more exposition to his family - something that might be important to him to avoid.

Going to RM gives a player more visibility than any other club in the world (maybe tied with Barça), but it comes with a price. Perez is unpredictable, there's no managerial stability, they can be hot and cold. It's not all daisies and rainbows.

If his father is telling he's an amazing son, father and husband in the same breath he's saying Mourinho is the manager to make Hazard change enough to have more tenacity, ambition and mental aggression (something I've been begging him to have, so it's good to know his father thinks the same), but not too much, maybe senior Hazard will advise him to continue at Chelsea under Mourinho's tutelage. This interview has been very encouraging.

[Shakez 755]

Well knowing Mourinho has been talking to his father and that he's said that to him, I'm more hopeful about Hazard staying here longer.

He doesn't seem to be motivated by ego or fame and that's basically what being at Madrid would give him over us. And a lot more exposition to his family - something that might be important to him to avoid.

Going to RM gives a player more visibility than any other club in the world (maybe tied with Barça), but it comes with a price. Perez is unpredictable, there's no managerial stability, they can be hot and cold. It's not all daisies and rainbows.

If his father is telling he's an amazing son, father and husband in the same breath he's saying Mourinho is the manager to make Hazard change enough to have more tenacity, ambition and mental aggression (something I've been begging him to have, so it's good to know his father thinks the same), but not too much, maybe senior Hazard will advise him to continue at Chelsea under Mourinho's tutelage. This interview has been very encouraging.

I took something entirely different about Mourinho talking with Eden's dad. Mainly getting in the psyche of Eden Hazard, searching for mental aspects he could improve in Eden. Namely "A killer instinct", he basicly say's the same about Willian but much more concrete, in that he wants him to average more shots each game (wich kinda worked against Aston Villa with him scoring and assisting a goal).

There's also a comparison with Duff and Robben: "You don’t see Duff dribbling without a shot. You don’t see Robben attack the space without getting a penalty or shooting. We have some guys still in the line between the artistic side and the objective side. We need to kill more matches.”

"This team is not there. We are more artistic, I believe. We have better control of the game by having the ball, and by knowing how to move between players – the circulation of the ball."

Duff and Robben where killing machines but they don't have the flair players like Hazard and Willian have. They are much more direct.

[Barbara 15,149]

I took something entirely different about Mourinho talking with Eden's dad. Mainly getting in the psyche of Eden Hazard, searching for mental aspects he could improve in Eden. Namely "A killer instinct", he basicly say's the same about Willian but much more concrete, in that he wants him to average more shots each game (wich kinda worked against Aston Villa with him scoring and assisting a goal).

There's also a comparison with Duff and Robben: "You don’t see Duff dribbling without a shot. You don’t see Robben attack the space without getting a penalty or shooting. We have some guys still in the line between the artistic side and the objective side. We need to kill more matches.”

"This team is not there. We are more artistic, I believe. We have better control of the game by having the ball, and by knowing how to move between players – the circulation of the ball."

Duff and Robben where killing machines but they don't have the flair players like Hazard and Willian have. They are much more direct.

I'm not referring to what Mourinho said to papa Hazard, but what papa Hazard said back. If his father thinks Mourinho is the man to turn his son into someone more tenacious, ambitious and more aggressive mentally (the killer instinct you're talking about) is because he knows Hazard is far from being that person (imo) and he believes Mourinho being as tenacious, strong mentally and ambitious as he is, all while having a great relationship with his son, is the right person for the job, so I can see him staying longer than I initially thought.

Mourinho has been brilliant and I feel flattered to have been one to 'complain' about Hazard's lack of tenacity and ambition (and killer instinct) and Willian's lack of end product. Sometimes you criticize players hoping they'd improve in certain areas, not to simply badmouth them and ask them to be replaced by the flavor of the month. I feel backed up by Mourinho. Both of us could be wrong, but at least I'm aligned with our manager, so I can see the changes I want the team and the players to go through coming. That makes me happy - and a little bit cocky, hahahahahahahahaha.

[ballackstothat 43]

I took something entirely different about Mourinho talking with Eden's dad. Mainly getting in the psyche of Eden Hazard, searching for mental aspects he could improve in Eden. Namely "A killer instinct", he basicly say's the same about Willian but much more concrete, in that he wants him to average more shots each game (wich kinda worked against Aston Villa with him scoring and assisting a goal).

There's also a comparison with Duff and Robben: "You don’t see Duff dribbling without a shot. You don’t see Robben attack the space without getting a penalty or shooting. We have some guys still in the line between the artistic side and the objective side. We need to kill more matches.”

"This team is not there. We are more artistic, I believe. We have better control of the game by having the ball, and by knowing how to move between players – the circulation of the ball."

Duff and Robben where killing machines but they don't have the flair players like Hazard and Willian have. They are much more direct.

robben was shit, duffer was a much better player, didn't down like he'd been shot when tapped on the ankle and a much better crosser and not a greedy fucker like the old man.

[Chelsea? 892]

That was the most amazing interview I've ever read. So personal and honest.

[Jase 43,479]

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x284z8l_hazard-i-hope-we-can-win-a-lot-of-trophies-hd_sport

[kellzfresh 7,226]

Jose and hazard

When did hazard do this

[Gilvorak 3,734]

robben was shit, duffer was a much better player, didn't down like he'd been shot when tapped on the ankle and a much better crosser and not a greedy fucker like the old man.

Wat.

[sutro 1,026]

Jose and hazard

When did hazard do this

It from his lille days or early Chelsea days, seen this few years back ?

[nyikolajevics 2,422]

When did hazard do this

He got a rise in his new contract.

[ParNolio7 285]

Lack of experience, tactical flexibility, and poor decision making.

"Lack of experience" is not a shortcoming in itself, it could be the cause of a shortcoming. Given the incredible run of results, there's no reason to assume that the lack of experience has lead to major shortcomings.

"Tactical flexibilty" although true is debatable as a shortcoming. For every person that says flexibility is important to deal with different kinds of opponents, there's another one who says it's important to always start from your own strengths and impose your own game. It's up to the opponent to adapt. In club team football I wouldn't prefer one opinion over the other, but in national team football, given the fact that the players only meet once every few months, one may argue (like Wilmots does) that it's more important to build routine than try to create tactical flexibility. In fact if you look at the major national football teams, you will actually notice that most of them stick to the same tactics and line-up. It's usually the smaller teams that chose to adapt to the tactics of their stronger opponent. If you take Holland as a recent example of a major national team that does adapt their tactics under Guud Hiddink, switching between 3-5-2 and 4-3-3, you can see that it's not a success. Van Gaal with exactly the same players & sticking stubbornly to the 3-5-2, in spite of all the Dutch critics begging to switch to 4-3-3 against weaker opponents, made it 3rd in the recent World Cup. So, like Wilmots tactics or hate them, I think it's wise to stick to them as much as possible. He has tried some different tactics in friendlies, like playing two strikers up front (Lukaku-Benteke against USA & Colombia) but he evaluated it negatively and stuck to the 4-2-3-1. Again, purely judging on the results, which is still the only objective way to evaluate a coach, that was a wise decision.

"Poor decision making" is purely a subjective judgement from your side. You're probably bored of me repeating this, but again based on the results one could more objectively argue that his decision making has not been that poor at all. Rather the contrary.

It's okay to throw the towel by now.