Hazard, a ball boy and some very unusual morals

Just when you thought you'd seen everything in football, along comes an incident that leaves you utterly speechless. Speechless at the event, but more so at the stream of commentary that followed.

Eden Hazard, the Chelsea midfield play maker and Belgium international, went to retrieve the ball during his teams dismal League Cup semi-final performance away to Swansea City on Wednesday. As he did so, a Swansea ball boy intervened and, after a little nudge from Hazard, fell on top of the ball thus denying the quick retrieval that Hazard was hoping for.

As he lay on the ball, Hazard tried to kick the ball from beneath him and, in doing so, kicked the ball boy in the ribs. This sparked immediate debate as Ashley Williams, the Swansea captain, confronted Hazard who was swiftly removed from the developing melee by his teammates. After things had calmed down and following deliberation with his match officials, Chris Foy, the referee, decided to show Hazard a red card. What followed was absolute delirium.

Firstly it is worth pointing out that the ball boy, who is 17 years of age, could have retrieved the ball a lot quicker than he did. In actual fact, he let the ball run past him before stepping across Hazard's path to obtain the ball. The chances are quite high that the ball boys of Swansea were encouraged to take their time in returning the match ball, in an attempt to waste time. This is something that has been happening in football for decades and was confirmed by former Chelsea midfielder, Craig Burley, on TalkSport on Thursday.

Some have suggested that Hazard's actions were akin to the infamous incident involving Eric Cantona assaulting a Crystal Palace at Selhurst Park in 1995. The truth is, it was nowhere near as bad. But it was wholly irresponsible.

Added into the mix of this whole debate is the fact that Hazard plays for Cheslea, who have an unerring consistency to attract negative media attention. The official Chelsea Twitter feed reacted to the incident within minutes, tweeting "Has football gone mad? Hazard is sent off for kicking the ball under a ball boy attempting to smother the ball rather than return it", which was later removed. It was an incredibly ill-advised tweet from a club which does little to endear the neutral fans. Added to this is the wait for a Chelsea statement that suggests what Hazard did was wrong. So far, all that has been communicated is that he and the ball boy have apologised to each other.

The commentary and debate that erupted in the aftermath of the incident was typically insidious on Twitter but, most alarming, were the comments made by Alan Smith, commentating live for Sky Sports, and John Salako, providing updates in the Sky Sports News studio. Without the benefit of hindsight, Smith was dumbfounded by the decision of Foy to dismiss Hazard but Salako, when questioned by Sky Sports News presenter, David Garrido, as to how he would react if the ball boy was his son, quipped: "I'd shake his hand and say 'you've won us the game there, well done'...Hazard has pinched him at best."

Such was the surprise and forthright nature of Salako's comments that Garrido posed more questions. Salako, although entitled to his opinion, was guilty of completely misreading the situation.

Having been shown a straight red card, Hazard will get a minimum three game suspension which could increase depending on how The Football Association view it. What cannot be ignored, however, is that these are professional footballers and, with that, they are expected to act professionally. Forget the ball boys age, it is only relevant for those wishing to gloss over misdemeanours.

As Burley pointed out, and what football fans have known for a long time, ball boys deliberately slowing down the speed at which the ball is returned is something that has been happening for an awful long time.

Whilst you can understand Hazard's frustration at these tactics, he must be made aware that behaviour like that is completely unacceptable. You get the feeling his employers may not be the ones to tell him this.

Has Lambert Bent his bridges?

As the dust settled on what was a hugely embarrassing night in Aston Villa's history, attention has turned to the future of their manager, Paul Lambert.

Having lost the first leg of the Capital One Cup semi-final 3-1 away to Bradford City, of League Two, Villa were expected to overcome the two goal deficit and show their superiority. They didn't. They lost 4-3 on aggregate and not even the 2-1 win on Tuesday could mask the deficiencies of a side lacking in confidence and leadership.

Even the staunchest of Villa supporters would have trouble denying that Phil Parkinson's Bradford are worthy finalists. En route to Wembley, they have knocked out three Premier League sides in Wigan Athletic, Arsenal and Villa; becoming the first fourth-tier side in over 50 years to reach the League Cup final. It is a feat that will take some beating.

Something that doesn't take a lot of beating is Villa, but what is surely most worrying for the fans of the Midlands club is the ineptitude of their performances and distinct lack of cohesion under Lambert.

Too many managers are dispensed before being given a chance to turn things around and, if his tenure at Norwich City is anything to go by, then Lambert should be given time. What he is trying to achieve at Villa is admirable and, in many respects, it mirrors what Brendan Rodgers is attempting at Liverpool, admittedly with varying levels of success. The key difference, which has been highlighted so frequently this season in regards to Villa, is the absence of experienced players.

Whilst the likes of Raheem Sterling, Suso, Andre Wisdom and Jonjo Shelvey are being given regular opportunities in the Liverpool first team, the level of success would undoubtedly be lower if they were not playing alongside experienced, senior players such as Steven Gerrard, Luis Suarez and Martin Skrtel.

Despite being unfortunate with the likes of Richard Dunne and Stiliyan Petrov, absent through injury and long-term illness respectively, Lambert still has enough quality to choose from. It's merely a question of stubbornness. Many forget that he has Stephen Warnock and Alan Hutton available and, although they may divide opinion in terms of quality, they would certainly add some experience to the back four and starting eleven.

Then there is the curious case of Darren Bent, a player who has routinely found himself amongst the top scorers in the Premier League in recent seasons. It soon became apparent that Bent did not figure in Lambert's first team plans but whenever questioned about the situation, Lambert would gloss over any reports of a fall-out and be extremely vague when asked about his future at the club.

For seasoned observers, it had all the makings of a manager deciding that a player was surplus to requirements and waiting for the January transfer window to offload him. Thus far this has not happened, which is rather bizarre.

If Lambert was hoping to bolster his squad from the sale of Bent, then it makes the delayed action all the more peculiar. For a side so clearly struggling to be so reliant on the young Belgian striker, Christian Benteke, in his debut season in the Premier League shows a distinct lack of regard for Bent who, if not first choice striker, could surely help shoulder the responsibility of scoring the goals.

As it is, Bent has been restricted to the odd appearance in league and cup games, scoring the equaliser in Villa's recent 2-1 FA Cup victory against Ipswich Town. Still no bids have arrived.

This has led to an enormous amount of speculation about Lambert's future and, injuries aside, it's all of his own making. But if you are to believe what you hear, he is in defiant mood and "thriving" on the pressure.

This may sound like something he thinks the fans will want to hear but it also sounds like a man who is unwilling to change his approach; adamant that it will eventually work out. It is this attitude, when players such as Bent, Warnock and Hutton are at his disposal, that could eventually seal his fate.

Too much, too soon

If reports are to be believed, then Wilfried Zaha, the Crystal Palace winger, will be confirmed as a Manchester United player by the end of the January transfer window.

Many are already predicting big things for the 20 year-old, who has scored 15 goals in 124 appearances for Palace. Against the backdrop of Michael Johnson, the Manchester City midfielder, who, last week, was finally released by his employers three years after his last appearance for the club, it is particularly poignant.

Troubles with alcohol and mental health have seen a footballer, once billed as a future England star, walk away from the game a shadow of his former self and pleading to be left alone to get on with the rest of his life.

In the ensuing opinion pieces following the breaking of this news there was no one who quite said it better than the manager of Swansea City, Michael Laudrup, whose comments came after his side lost their FA Cup third round replay to Arsenal at the Emirates. They had nothing to do with Johnson.

Laudrup was speaking about a certain Jack Wilshere, whose late goal sent Arsenal through to the fourth round. After the inevitable superlatives were heaped on the young England international, he said: "You don't want to push your young players too much. Sometimes people are a little too fast, too quick with the big words...we have to let them grow because young players can always improve, that goes for Jack Wilshere too."

It was an extremely salient point from a man who absolutely knows what he is talking about. He later added: "To be world class you need more at the highest level. We are talking about a 21-year-old and we're already talking about him being the best."

Laudrup highlights an incessant problem within the English game. Our eagerness to embrace talent, coupled with an ever-increasing desire to see England challenge for major honours on the international stage only serves to cloud judgement and heighten expectation. It is this mentality that could well have contributed to Johnson failing to live up to these expectations. Expectations set by us and beyond his control.

Manchester City will feel that they have done everything to help Johnson try to resurrect his career and this is not in question. There are only so many times you can be forgiven.

So much pressure is bestowed upon English players that the moment they show a morsel of talent the floodgates open and, before they know it, they're the great white hope for the Three Lions. 

There has been a seismic shift in attitude among some of the Premier League's more established clubs with the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and Aston Villa favouring youth ahead of experience. 

Whilst this may bode well for the future of England and The FA following their much publicised unveiling of St George's Park, there also needs to be an emphasis on protecting those that begin as prospects and are suddenly being touted as "world class".

It is this combination of exposure, money and insurmountable media expectation that is too much, too soon for many players.

Luke Shaw, the latest product of the Southampton Football Academy, has put together a number of promising performances this season. He is just 17 but he is already being spoken of as a future England regular. 

Laudrup is right and we all have a part to play. So as the next crop of hopefuls such as Zaha and Shaw filter through, it is worth remembering the case of Michael Johnson. There are few greater regrets in life than a talent unfulfilled.  

The FA, on the balance of probabilities, are one of the most spineless governing bodies in the world

Against the backdrop of John Terry's disciplinary hearing with The Football Association for the alleged racial abuse of Anton Ferdinand, much debate has emanated regarding the wider issues of racism within the sport.

Whilst Terry was found guilty of using abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour towards Queens Park Rangers' Anton Ferdinand, which included a reference to colour and/or race, many have suggested that racism is a widespread problem, with the inclination that it is an incessant disease manifesting itself within the sport.

In the past 12 months there have been a number of issues that have brought this argument to the forefront of people's minds.

Luis Suarez, the Liverpool striker, was found guilty of racially abusing Patrice Evra, the Manchester United defender, in a league game at Anfield last season -a week before John Terry, the Chelsea captain, was alleged to have racially abused Anton Ferdinand, the Queens Park Rangers defender.

These two cases alone brought such unwanted attention to a sport that has, we are lead to believe, worked tirelessly to rid itself of this type of incident.

The outlook is very different to how it once was. Gone are the days that, in this country at least, black players are be subjected to the abuse that is so evident in countries such as Ukraine, Russia and Spain.

But how far have we actually come?

As children, we are told by our elders to 'speak up' if we are bullied, in the knowledge that those responsible will be dealt with accordingly. But, if the aforementioned cases are anything to go by, why on earth would you put yourself through what Evra and Ferdinand have had to endure?

For having the temerity to make an official complaint of racist abuse against Suarez, Evra finds himself on the receiving end of insults and boos every time he faces Liverpool. Similarly, Ferdinand is roundly booed by Chelsea fans and has received bullets in the post. This abuse has extended to his brother Rio, the Manchester United defender, and other family members who have received death threats.

There is a lot to love about football but there is an awful lot to loathe. It is a sport that is riddled with such hypocrisy and run by organisations that cause offence to the word organisation.

Remind yourself briefly of the uproar in this country when, despite receiving an almost unbeatable 'technical bid' to host the FIFA World Cup in 2018, the tournament was awarded to Russia with England finishing fourth in the voting process.

Remember the finger pointing? Remember the accusations? Remember The FA getting on their soap box and highlighting the flaws within FIFA and citing Russia's record of racial discrimination?

Cast your mind back to whenever England players have been subjected to racial abuse while away on international duty playing in Spain, Poland, Ukraine... the list goes on. Remember the reaction of The FA? Remember how they insisted that FIFA and UEFA take this issue seriously? Remember how we scoffed at the paltry fines and sanctions that were given?

Now think how hypocritical this all sounds when, yesterday, The FA finds John Terry guilty of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand and serves him with a four match ban and a fine of £220,000.

The stage was set for The FA to take the lead and show FIFA, UEFA and the world just how intolerant they are of such discrimination, but they failed horrendously.

Regardless of the differences in the Suarez case, where he was banned for eight games and fined £40,000, this punishment will not act as a deterrent.

It will not inspire those from grass-roots level upwards to speak up against racism. It will not make players, at any level, feel any more protected and it will certainly not make people believe they belong to an organisation that takes racism seriously.

By ignoring the wider ramifications of such a weak sentence, The FA have once again shown that, on the balance of probabilities, they are one of the most spineless governing bodies in the world.
 

Terry plays the victim in cowardly England exit

As the news of John Terry's retirement from international football filtered through last night, it was The Football Association that were the subject of fierce criticism.

Whilst there can be no doubt that The FA have approached Terry's impending disciplinary with a huge amount of reluctance, the timing of his retirement shows a distinct level of arrogance.

Every player has the right to retire, this is not for discussion, but when a player decides to call time on his international career a day before an FA disciplinary hearing, citing the situation as "untenable", it shows the making of the man.

Today's FA disciplinary hearing is into the "alleged reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Anton Ferdinand, the Queens Park Rangers defender. It is not, as many have wrongly suggested, a hearing into whether Terry racially abused Ferdinand.

It is ludicrous that this has taken so long to be heard by an FA disciplinary panel. Notwithstanding the fact this was the subject of a court case, The FA have had months to deal with this issue since Terry was cleared of racially abusing Ferdinand at Westminster Magistrates' Court in July.

In his statement, the Chelsea captain, said: "Pursuing charges [when] I have already been cleared in a court... has made my position untenable. Representing and captaining my country is what I dreamed of as a boy and it has been a truly great honour. I have always given my all and it breaks my heart to make this decision."

From the opening comment in his statement, Terry seemingly believes that he is beyond reproach for his actions. This is unforgivable and obscenely arrogant.

The FA have a duty to the sport and its reputation to run the rule over any incident(s) that they deem brings the game into disrepute. It is astounding that Terry, or whoever has advised him, has dressed this up as a witch-hunt.

What makes this statement even more deplorable is that an FA hearing into the events at Loftus Road last October was inevitable. So much so that, as soon as the Police became involved and it was the subject of a legal dispute, The FA said that any hearing would be conducted following the conclusion of the court case.

Regardless of the fact that Terry was cleared of racially abusing Ferdinand, his actions warrant an FA hearing - if only for a 'bringing the game into disrepute' charge. With the very public court case, in which the entire football fraternity had to endure, there can be little doubt that the image of the game was tarnished.

Whilst we shouldn't forget that Terry has been a colossal figure at times for England, he is also someone who epitomised the spirit England fans expect from their players. You don't win 78 international caps for being an average player. However, with the same token, we also shouldn't forget that he has been stripped of the England captaincy twice. This is not the record of a role model.

Terry's statement also suggests that because he has been cleared in court then that should be it and that he should not be answerable to an FA hearing. You may wonder how that kind of decision would go down on Merseyside, with Liverpool losing their striker, Luis Suarez, for eight games last season after being found guilty of racially abusing Patrice Evra, the Manchester United defender.

Although there are slight differences in the two cases, The FA would be pilloried should they show anything but a consistent approach to these issues.

However, in delaying the date for Terry's hearing, The FA have shown a complete lack of authority and have forced Roy Hodgson, the England manager, into inheriting a problem that should have been put to bed months ago.

Whilst many will respect Terry's decision to retire and his reasons for doing so, it is difficult to see beyond the comments of a man that appears so reluctant to face the consequences of the actions that brought such shame on both him and his sport.

The FA's Olympic headache

As summer ends, and the memory fades like sunburn, there are those already predicting gloom. They are the same people, who predicted washout, cock-up, grid lock and overkill, and they will be just as wrong. It was the best summer ever, precisely because we feared the worst.

The above was a quote from Ben Macintyre which was featured in The Sunday Times. It perfectly encapsulates the summer of sport that the nation has just witnessed and why we, as a nation, should be justly proud to be British.

This has been the beauty of hosting the Olympics and Paralympics. We have seen the best of the country and a unified sense of patriotism which is so often reluctantly shown for fear of causing offence.

It has "opened our minds to what people can do and to what can be achieved by sheer talent and determination", as Lord Coe so exquisitely put it. We have seen sport and disability in a way we could not have imagined.

It has made the governing bodies of national sports, most notably The Football Association, pledge to learn from the Olympics and sustain the Olympic spirit. This, though, is where Macintyre's prediction of gloom and being wrong feels slightly out of touch.

Whilst parallels can be drawn between football and the Olympics on the simple basis that they are both sports and forms of entertainment, there is a fundamental flaw affecting this sustained mantra of Olympic fever.

That fundamental flaw is, quite simply, The FA.

This weekend will serve as a reminder to all of the ineptitude of an organisation that has been treading on egg shells for far too long.

On Saturday afternoon, Queens Park Rangers welcome Chelsea to Loftus Road in the Premier League. It will become yet another fixture between the two sides in which a handshake, or not, will take prominence over the actual result in what is fast becoming a Punch and Judy type sideshow between the sides.

For the minority unfamiliar with previous events, John Terry the Chelsea and former England captain, was accused of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand, the QPR defender, during a league meeting between the two teams almost 12 months ago.

In July of this year, after a very public court case in which details published only helped tarnish the sport, Terry was cleared of racism against Ferdinand. Less than two weeks later, having relinquished any form of disciplinary action until the legal dispute had run its course, The FA charged Terry with using abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour towards Ferdinand. Terry predictably denied the charge and requested a private hearing.

With Terry and Ferdinand both reportedly winning their races to be fit for the match, one can't help but think that The FA are crossing their fingers in the hope an injury to one, or both, will spare their blushes.

It is fast approaching a year since that incident took place and, in that time, the sport has never been allowed to move on from this sorry saga yet The FA have appeared alarmingly apprehensive in trying to bring this matter to a justified conclusion.

Their laissez-faire approach to issues that are both damaging and distracting to the sport make their gestures to 'learn from the Olympics' seem extremely empty.

So while our Olympians and Paralympians, our 'games-makers' and armed forces and the Great British public have helped make London 2012 "the best Olympic Games ever" and a platform for other sports to build upon, an afternoon at Loftus Road will highlight the stark reality of how far football has to go to reach the standards set.

A blessing in disguise

According to many news wires, Scott Sinclair was expected to complete a £6.2m move from Swansea City to Manchester City at some stage this week.

However, reports today suggest that a move has stalled. What a blessing this could be for the career of the young winger.

Should the move be completed, Manchester City would become his tenth club, including loans, at the age of 23 but it would potentially signal the end to his dreams of becoming an England regular.  

Having been at the Liberty Stadium for just over two years, enjoying promotion from the Championship in his first season and a superb debut season with the Swans in the Premier League, it seems as though Sinclair has found the right club.

A player with undoubted ability and attacking flair like Sinclair will always attract interest from top clubs, so it is no great surprise that Manchester City are trying to prise him away from Michael Laudrup's side.

The proposed transfer would represent a huge moment in the 23 year-old's fledgling career, potentially a defining moment.

A move to the current Premier League champions would give Sinclair the opportunity to realistically compete for trophies on all fronts and compete in the UEFA Champions League, as well as the obvious increase in financial reward.

The attractions, whether they are financially motivated or not, are there for all to see and appreciate. The question, and it is a serious one, is how realistic his chances of playing regular first team football would be at Eastlands.

Roberto Mancini, the Manchester City manager, has already spoken of the need to find a replacement for Adam Johnson having let the England international complete a transfer to Sunderland last week.

By virtue of Johnson's lack of first team football, Mancini's comments suggest that Sinclair would arguably be the latest player to be warming the bench for the Citizens.

Sinclair wouldn't be the first or last player to be attracted to a bigger stage. It is a recurring theme, like a moth to flame, that has affected and continues to affect many a career.

Yet the reported breakdown of this deal is surely a blessing in disguise.

At Swansea, he is a first team regular which instantly enhances his chances of breaking into the England squad. Some may argue that it is the very fact that he plays for Swansea that is preventing his progression to the international scene. It is a double-edged sword, but with Roy Hodgson now the manager of the national team, consistent performers for club will most probably be rewarded with a call-up, regardless of the stature of the club.

Whilst Sinclair may be ruing the fact that a move to the champions could desert him, it is something that he could well be thankful for in years to come.