Search Menu

Eden Hazard given three match ban for the ball boy incident

Share

Chelsea midfielder Eden Hazard has been charged by the Football Association with violent conduct for kicking Swansea ball boy Charlie Morgan, during the Capital One Cup semi-final, second leg away to Swansea City on Wednesday.  

eden hazard ballboy Eden Hazard given three match ban for the ball boy incident

Eden Hazard and the ball boy

The 22-year-old faces a three-match ban for his dismissal but the football governing body decided that was clearly insufficient. The FA statement read:

“The FA have charged Chelsea’s Eden Hazard following his side’s League Cup semi-final at Swansea City on 23 January 2013.

“It is alleged that Hazard’s behaviour in relation to a Swansea City ball boy, for which the player was dismissed in the 78th minute, constituted violent conduct whereby the standard punishment that would otherwise apply was clearly insufficient.

“The player has until 6pm on Tuesday 29 January 2013 to respond to the charge.

“The FA will remind all clubs of their responsibilities in ensuring ball boys and other personnel around the pitch act in an appropriate manner at all times and will liaise with competitions accordingly.”

The incident happened when Hazard was trying to retrieve the ball from under the ball boy and bundled him to the ground in the process.

South Wales Police officers spoke to both Hazard and the ball boy and will be taking no further actions in the matter. Hazard’s case will now be handled by an independent commission and the Belgium international could face a four-match ban if he is found guilty.

Chelsea however are planning to support their player and will be contesting the charge in a series of written submissions. Also, the club will present before FA a new footage from the game, which appears to cast doubts whether the player at all made any contacts with Morgan.

Interim manager Rafael Benitez and Hazard both issued public apology and shook hands with the ball boy after the controversial incident took place in an attempt to bring the matter to a close.

Hazard’s suspension will strike a devastating blow to Chelsea, whose squad has been ravaged by injuries and absence of players due to their participation in the African Cup of Nations.

Comments (11)

  1. IMO, there should be a two-way punishment for this incident. If Hazard is banned for “kicking the ball boy”, the ball boy should be banned for time wasting. Ball boys are there to retrieve the ball quickly and to save time, if that Morgan kid can’t do his job right, he shouldn’t be there. Plus this reverse angle shows a slightly different story.

    • I kind of agree with Ahmed’s statement, there should be a two-way punishment. But has 17yr old Charlie Morgan not now learnt his lesson? Sadly, various news articles read he has recieved extreme threats which is unfair on all accounts – I highly doubt any of us Swans fans have sent similar to Hazard!

      CM has almost single handedly tainted the club and what it’s about; passion of football played in a beautiful way. Our highest first team earner earns less than Chelsea’s first team lowest earner but despite that, many of our players are passionate about the club, fans and most of all the game!

      The new view that has come out is clearly inconclusive, it shows that Hazard without doubt kicked the ball, I never believed he didn’t, nor meant to make contact with the boy, but, it genuinely does look like his shin very possibly did make contact and in addition, there is an instantaneous reaction with a ‘body jerk’ when Hazard kicks the ball – without doubt, the lad was mildly winded at the least, after all, he was childishly lying on the ball which his gut would have ‘moulded’ around and when kicked it was still in contact with the lads abdoman!

      My biggest concern from almost the start (once the shock of what we thought we saw wore off) was why Hazard even attempted to kick a ball he couldn’t see? The ref is there for that! Just as they’ve bannished managers in the past, they should be allowed to do the same with ANYBODY involved in the game, and hats off the Chris Foye, he acted appropriately and professionaly throughout. 6 mins were added on at the end so the time wasted was added on!!

      CM is foolish for his individual actions that could rightfully be argued to be the catalyst, but Hazard is even more in the wrong for reacting. Hazard is a highly paid professional (heard it’s about £175k a week) who is in the eye of the public all the time, many aspiring youngsters look up to him, even if he is only 22. CM isn’t (or wasn’t) a public figure what-so-ever!

      I can’t help but wonder if CM’s priviliged position played a part in his arrogance; heir to £42m fortune who’s father owns 25% of the club… just think though, if it hadn’t have snowed, CM wouldn’t of had to stand in for the original ball boy who couldn’t make it due to the weather and none of us would be talking about such an incident.

      I feel the FA should make an example of Hazard as a warning to ALL players that you should not interefer with fools behind the line – NO MATTER WHAT. Any fine(s) should be put into Chelsea’s local community i.e. Hospices, Shelters etc

  2. I wonder wat d FA mean by dat statement (constituted violent conduct) wen he try 2 get d ball 4rm him and In d process he fell down on d ball am sure dis will happen wen swanse city cum 2 stamford brige 2 play.

  3. Hazard has recieved a three match ban and d FA still nt satisfied? I tn d boy should as well recieve his own purnishment becouse he knows what he was doing. There shouldn’t be sentimental about it just because d boy’s father is a shear holder in d club.

  4. In all honesty, FA Ȋ̝̊̅§ been bias, d replay shows i̶̲̥̅̊t̶̲̥̅ that There was no contact between d boy and hazard…the ball boy was wrong and should be punished for sittin on the ball…hazard was unprofessional by allowing his frustration †̥o get over him but he didn’t kick d boy but d ball..
    FA just say Ɣ☺ΰ wanna punish chelsea for their constant sacking of coach

  5. I am not a Chelsea fan by any means. I cannot believe that Mr. Hazard is being held responsible for this incident. All the blame is being pointed the wrong way. The ball “boy” in question is an adult and knew what he was doing. He should be lucky he has a job at all. If anyone is going to be held responsible it should be the Swansea management and organization as a whole. And for the Wales law enforcement to tell Mr. Hazard that the “boy” is not going to be “taking no further actions in the matter”, is a bloody joke. What that “boy did was no different than if a fan came out of the seats and did the same thing. If that was the case I think everyone would be singing a different tune right now. In closing I want to know, when in this age will people be held responsible for their own actions and stop trying to put the blame anywhere except for where it belongs. Everyone should remember, every time you point a finger at something there is always three pointing right back at you!!!!

  6. As much as I agree with the general concesus that Eden behaved in a violent manner, I also think that Swansea must be taken into task about its ball boy. We talk about “Fair Play” every day and for us to realise succcess in that campaign we need to teach young this principle while they are young. That ball behaved badly and he needs to be mad to understand that.

  7. I think d FA shud punish both hazard and the ball boy becos de both deserve it… Hazard is a good player and I L♥vε his agression it means he can do anything for chelsea FC

  8. What Hazard did war out of frustration,he shouldnt be blamed it can happen to anyone,the ball boy should be cautioned.

  9. Hazad did not kick the ballboy anyhow,but ball.the FA shouldn’t have ban Hazad alone,but both two of them

  10. we should have the real version of the scene before taking any measure against hasard. players are very clever, i wonder whether hasard was reponding to a caution recieved from the man ballboy!we are going to require to FA to track carefully the case.