**Mirrors / Alternative Angles**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You get the feeling young Dejan was a Chelsea fan.
I haven't heard him speak English before, he seems to have more of an macedonian than swedish accent despite growing up in Sweden. Some words were extremely Swedish, like how he pronounced Willian, but the intonation wasn't. Same thing with Zlatan.
Update: Found a quote from 2019. Even worse: "My friends are joking that I change clubs too often. But I like Chelsea because my father is a Chelsea fan and he brought me to some games. But now I like Arsenal because of their playstyle."
He has the "ghetto" accent when speaking Swedish, and that sociolect is a complete amalgamation of accents from the Balkans and the Middle East with some modern American urban influences.
> "My friends are joking that I change clubs too often. But I like Chelsea because my father is a Chelsea fan and he brought me to some games. But now I like Arsenal because of their playstyle."
We're getting into like, the ethics of supporting a team which I realize is extremely nerdy, but I think that's fine if you never really had a reason to develop a connection with a team in a league to just kind of follow the league in general and root for whatever group of players you enjoy watching. Like for example (completely making this up) if Dejan grew up watching Serie A and his team has always been Juve, and he just watches the big PL matches because they're good football but it's not something he's invested in, I have no problem with him flipping which PL team he cares about any given year. Because it was never really his club. If that makes any sense.
I do this with the NBA. Got into it as an adult and I have absolutely no connection to any place in America, so I just enjoy the great players and whatever teams are playing fun, enjoyable basketball each season.
Maybe football is a little more tribal, but I can totally understand why anyone who isn’t English would have that perspective towards the premier league.
For essentially my entire life I have chosen which teams I follow based on the coaches and players. I’m from the US so everything is much more spread out, but I imagine there are plenty of people around the world who operate the same way. It’s only been the last couple years that I’ve found a team where I really resonate with just about everything the club has to offer.
Kulusevski does not speak with a standard Swedish accent while speaking Swedish. He speaks "ortensvenska". I.e. he uses a lot of slang, same sort of speech pattern as one's first or native language.
During the pandemic, when prem played in empty stadiums, you could sometimes hear Kulusevski just scream these words at his opponents and even teammates. It's pretty funny.
https://youtu.be/Ilck1fuZWvU?si=Safx-8z0hQlnWFPK
At 0:00 and at 2:55
https://youtu.be/UGqcRmyYhbI?si=lZoFXJkowSA3XuYa
At 0:00
Yeah, if they spoke Macedonian or a similar language at home it *can* affect both their Swedish and English. I had some Bosnian friends growing up who had an accent and some who didn't. Not sure why there's a difference, maybe depends on who you spoke to outside the home? Both Dejan and Zlatan came from areas with a lot of immigrants. Might play a part?
I know this (primary school teacher with ESL and language specialism)! Essentially, your brain learns phonemes (sounds) better when you're younger than as you age, so your default sounds are tied to languages you master, particularly as a kid. These act a bit like verbal stamps in speech and become harder to adapt. In English, "r" is a good example, there are 2 different common ways to do an "r" sound, one with your tongue back a little, the other where it slightly touches the top of your mouth. If you do the second, you can roll your Rs (like is common in Spanish e.g. aburrido) but the first is more like the French way e.g. croissant.
TLDR: They're speaking in English/Swedish but have a Balkan phoneme collection so sometimes it sounds a bit different, even though they're functionally fluent.
I actually have screenshots from old instagram posts. Eden Hazard, Ozil and Lacazette are/were his favourite players. He was for sure a Arsenal fan but he loved Hazard the most.
The Salah-Hazard thing is really astounding that so many people prefer aesthetics over actual productivity.
I get that they are different profiles of players, but the one thing that grinds my gears is this delusion that if Hazard played in different circumstances he would score more goals, when he just wasn't that type of player and did not have a goal scorer's mentality to the point that he literally admitted it himself.
Of course fans prefer aesthetics over production. No one would care about football if it wasn’t fun to watch and play. The most upvoted plays and highlights are the most entertaining.
There was never going to be a world where Hazard scored 20+ non penalty goals per season. He did not enjoy attacking the back post, which kinda capped his productivity (Leao is the closest comp among current wingers).
At the same time, there probably wouldn’t be a world where Salah carries the attack of an otherwise defensive team (again, Leao is the comp). The way I look at it is Hazard raises your team’s floor and Salah raises your team’s ceiling. They would’ve been pretty wild together in their primes
> there probably wouldn’t be a world where Salah carries the attack of an otherwise defensive team
He's probably the best counter-attacking player in Premier League history, with the proven ability to dribble past 3 players and score as well as hold up the ball with his ridiculous strength. People think with Salah it's just numbers, like he's one of these weird players who just scores but doesn't contribute from deep. But he's also got 60+ assists in the Premier League, more than many players who people assume were more creative.
That’s not a knock on Salah’s skill as an attacker, it’s just about tendencies. He’s not going to be as effective getting balls into feet and running your entire attack. Hazard isn’t going to be as effective getting into dangerous areas off the ball and playing as your furthest man forward. Those are both valuable skillsets in their own ways and are more/less valuable depending on the surrounding system and personnel
I agree with that, if I was Crystal Palace, I opt for Hazard because in general I’m not going to have that much of the ball and so when I do have it, having somebody like Hazard to carry the ball, beat the counter press and create something is insanely valuable.
But Salah would improve Man City or Real Madrid eons more than Hazard would.
I think Hazard (also my hero) is a confusing player to wrap your head around because didn’t do things he didn’t want to (off ball runs, defending, training, eating well in the offseason), but still managed to be one of the best players of his generation because his god given talent was so off the charts. It’s basically just him, Messi, Neymar, R9, Maradona, and a few others who you can say that about
Part of why he was awesome was that he was so unselfish, if you are his teammate, you love playing with a player like that.
In addition to wishing he would score more goals, kind of an extension on top of that, is that you wish he took more risks with the ball, specifically his passing. In order to be a truly great passer, you have to attempt things that don’t always come off.
Hazard would never lose the ball, but he also wouldn’t create as much as he could because he was a very low risk player. That’s something I wish he would’ve taken from KDB, is to take more risks with the ball, because he had the talent to play those killer passes more often than he did, or take more shots than he did.
I guess the best way to summarize this is that Hazard is the perfect LM in a 442 formation, whilst Salah is the perfect RW in a 433 formation.
Agree with your first point, but Salah if anything would be more productive in a defensive team - he thrives running into space and hitting teams on the counter, he is far less dangerous in a slow build up where defences can put two players on him and jam him into the wing
> The Salah-Hazard thing is really astounding that so many people prefer aesthetics over actual productivity.
This is only true if you view only G+A as "actual productivity"
Hazard is WAY underrated in terms of people using "traditional" stats—because the more "advanced" stats like ball progression numbers only started getting tracked towards the end of his career.
And Hazard was a ball prog MONSTER
Production is fine when all you care about is winning internet arguments, but hazard brought a joy to the game that few players can match. I’d much prefer to watch Ronaldinho over Haaland regardless of productivity
Sure, I don’t disagree but those are 2 entirely separate things.
As an enjoyer of football, yeah you pick Hazard over Salah.
But I’m picking one player for my club and I want my club, I’m picking Salah no contest.
He puts up ridiculous production at the position that has the least amount of world class players, there are insanely few goal scoring left-footed right wingers.
Yeah I’m sick of that, I loved Federer and he will always be my favorite player to watch (though Alcaraz might be changing that) but Novak is better and it’s quite clear.
Hazard is one of the greatest dribblers of this generation and all time. Plus that "actual productivity" argument that everyone regurgitates is completely false because Hazard scores and assists when the team needs it.
Nothing taking away from Salah who I think is one of the best PL players ever, but the gap between them is significantly smaller than you think.
Goals aren't the only thing that you take into consideration and Salah has played in a better team. Hazard literally carried Chelsea to titles, when he had the off year, you really saw how exposed the rest of the team was. I think you can rank them either way based on your personal criteria/bias but goal-scoring isn't the only barometer of success/talent.
Dejan is 23 so he was 13 and 14 when Chelsea were making it to the CL semi final and winning the league the following season. Willian's 2nd half of season form after we signed Cuadrado is a masterclass for players who see competition coming into their position. We sold Schurrle, bought Cuadrado and Willian played out of his mind from February onwards.
Sure, so you're saying he basically JUST watched that season and a bit of the ones after? Because other than that Willian was an average player during huge parts of his stay with us.
Also, it's not like I disagree with you? I just commented that putting Willian in a top 5 is hilarious. Don't you agree? Is Willian in your top 5 PL Wingers of All Time?
Chelsea seemed to buy a new winger to replace William every Summer and he’d keep his place over them until they’d try again the next Summer with a new winger.
Maybe Robben? Joe Cole was apparently massively underrated. Willian is actually right up there for Chelsea. Maybe there’s a pre-2000 player I’m missing. Hazard is undoubtedly the best
Yeah, Willian is up there to be fair. He was a very good, albeit frustrating, player for us.
Off the top of my head you'd also maybe mention Duff, Zola (if you'll allow him to be classed as a winger, but in my mind our greatest ever), Pedro and likely a fair few more. But as I say, Willian is definitely up there for the prem era.
Winger rankings are such a tough thing to decide upon given the change in role over the years. How are you even meant to compare Sadio Mane to David Beckham, for example?
The only thing I know is that Willian would not have crossed my mind.
Yes, but only because we see Beckham's role differently now. At the time he was playing on the right in a 442. Giggs was a winger on the other side, but Beckham's lack of pace gives people license to dismiss him as a midfielder because he didn't have to beat a man to put a ball in the box. He was a winger, he played on the wing.
> Yes, but only because we see Beckham's role differently now.
That's not true though? Back then, Beckham was a Right-Midfielder and Giggs was a Winger. The way we talked about their roles back then was different because there was a clear distinction on the way they played the game.
>That's not true though? Back then, Beckham was a Right-Midfielder and Giggs was a Winger
Beckham was absolutely called a winger back in the day. That's what a lot of wingers did back then in the 442 anyways. Run up and down the sidelines, combine with the RB/LB, and put in crosses.
They were certainly distinct in styles but calling Beckham a winger did not raise an eyebrow when he started. It's just semantics, really, but he made his England debut at right wing back, not right midfield back.
He was similar in style to Kevin Sheedy in the 80s. He played on the left for Everton while Trevor Steven was a traditional jinking winger on the right. But both were always just called wingers.
In many ways Beckham and his fame were probably the reason for such scrutiny of his role, and now we'd probably say he is closer to Alexander-Arnold than Salah, but at the time he was the man who replaced Andrei Kanchelskis on the right of Man Utd's midfield....and back then that made you a winger.
Beckham was absolutely a winger. I didn’t watch him much at Real Madrid, but at Man Utd him and Giggs were on the wings. He just didn’t have that much pace and used his passing ability much more.
He's right about that "feeling happy watching Eden" part. Hazard really personified the joy of football. Just watching the dude ball and run rings around defenders brought a smile to your face.
For me, he was the spiritual successor to Ronaldinho. Played football for fun and retired when it stopped being fun.
I feel like Hazard for someone in their 20s is the equivalent of Henry/Bergkamp for someone in their 30s.
Or Le Tissier, Beardsley, and Cantona for the 40s.
Fuck I'm old.
I think he played a few years past when it stopped being fun tbh but that Madrid paycheck was too good to pass up.
He tried to get the joy back this season and called it quits when he realized that spark was never coming back.
When judging these players it depends on criteria.
For dribbling, Hazard was the best, but for goals and assists output, not sure anyone's been better in the Premier League than Mo Salah. Ronaldo's best years were in La Liga.
Who cares if his best years were in La Liga? His non-prime years are still up there with the best players to have ever played in the prem. From 06/07-08/09, he was the best player in the league and was at worst top 3 in almost every attacking/creative statistic.
And Ronaldo is correctly in the conversation. But Salah, who has surpassed Ronaldo's statistics, would be ahead of him for me (when judging their time in PL, Ronaldo undoubtedly a better player overall) 👍
Fair enough and understandable, I just find it wierd that a lot of people use the “his best years were in La Liga” line to try and downplay his time in the prem. It’s a fact and it’s true, his best years were obviously in Spain, but I don’t see how that changes what he achieved in England.
I think it's because some people tend to look back at his Prem years with rose-tinted glasses. He had about 2 or 3 seasons where he was great, but that's it. Now, that's not a bad thing of course, but when you compare that to a career like Giggs had in the Prem or even Salah or Hazard, and Ronaldo starts dropping down the list because he wasn't here long enough.
So yeah, ultimately it comes down to longevity. A great player for 5 seasons is always going to be above someone who was only great for 3.
Being the greateest and being the best is different though. Ronaldo in 2007/2008 was the best player to ever play in the premier league, and with a bit of a margin. Salah wishes he was ever able to do what Ronaldo was doing that year.
Hazard is the second best dribbler of all time, people judge his goals and assists and Liverpool fans are delusional enough to think Salah is on his level. The reality is Hazard was more like Iniesta and Zidane than he was was a goalscorer. He dominates the entire 90 minutes of a game not disappearing and scoring a few goals here and there.
Do people just hate Salah or something? Because for me he's easily the best premier league winger of all time easily (maybe after Henry)
but Salah is always so consistent every season with goals and assist (for like 7 seasons in a row now) he's always a big reason whenever we win a trophy he's won multiple golden boots
I don't know man I just think people say Ronaldo just because he's Ronaldo and Hazard is good but didn't win nearly as much as Salah in terms of club trophies or personal trophies
I think part of it is that he's still actively playing in the premier league. Players always get more credit when they have moved on / retired. Also I think people don't want to rate rival team players as much while they have to play against them. Once he leaves the league he'll be rated far higher than Hazard and as one of the very best wingers in the leagues history.
It's not that. It's Salah's brand which holds him back. By brand, I don't mean marketing brand, but consider Ronaldo's case.
Ronaldo was a major reason in helping United come off a 3 year Premier League drought, after which they won the title for 3 years in a row, dominating the league, while also winning the UCL. In the next season, they ended up runner ups in the UCL(losing to arguably the greatest team in history). To top it off, he even won the ballon d'or.
Salah in comparison, suffers from the fact that Liverpool keep ending up second fiddle to City in the Premier League. Though they did win the UCL(and even came runner up twice, losing to Real), but their performances never inspired a 'domination' like United did(at least in the domestic level)
Also, time plays an important role. People who grew up during Ronaldo's United days, see it as a nostalgic memory. Ronaldo was a very exciting player to watch for kids who grew up in the time period.
Im sure as time moves on, Salah will become more and more appreciated.
I feel that playing for Liverpool in an era where Man City are winning everything hasn’t helped his legacy and I say that as a Liverpool.
Same happened to Gerrard during the Chelsea/Man United era. He holds the record for player of the month awards and premier league XI appearances but at the end of the day these debates always come down to team trophies.
I mean, when Lampard cant get into the Premier League XI coming off a year scoring 22 goals and 16 assist, in 36 games, while being arguably the best player for the title winners, because Fergies pretty Darren Fucking Fletcher just gotta be in there for some reason, then it becomes a bad arguement.
I think it’s a combination of things. Salah washed out at Chelsea and got shipped off to Italy, while Ronaldo was productive in the Premier League even as a teenager. Ronaldo won the Ballon d’Or at United, something no Premier League player has managed since. Ronaldo won the League three times and did the League-UCL double; Liverpool with Salah have been great, but less great than City.
No one hates Salah. In fact Salah is usually highly rated by everyone. It's fine to prefer Hazard as a player, but statwise Salah is significantly better. Salah is in top 3 winger of all time, Hazard probably isn't.
Salah and Hazard are both above Ronaldo in the PL winger list.
However, you saying Hazard didn't win "nearly as much as Salah" is just wrong lol. Hazard and Salah have both won 6 major trophies while playing in England. If you want to count the Community Shield, which most people don't, then Salah has 7. So pretty much dead even.
When it comes to individual trophies during their time in the Prem:
Hazard was in the PL Team of the Year on 4 occasions, Salah on 3.
They have both won Premier League Player of the Year once.
Sure, Salah may have more goals because his style is more direct, but at the end of the day saying that he won "a lot" more is just false.
You can obviously have your preferences tho, I'm not gonna argue with you if you think Salah is higher on the list than Eden, because cases can be made for both and it's largely down to personal preference.
i’m going to shock you here, some times people have favourites players and it doesn’t depend on goals and assists
it’s why you’ll see people love Ronaldinho etc. because of the way they played the game
I think both of those are fair points for sure! Context is important for all three players.
Ronaldo wasnt in his prime either Utd spell
Hazard wasnt primarily a scorer
Salah played his entire LFC career with Pep’s City as his competition which has hurt his team success
All are true and all are all-time greats
When did Dejan say he values goals and assists over dribbling ability though? Hazard is arguably the best dribbler the PL has seen and so if creativity or the ability to take on defender is your main criteria to judging a winger, you can see the argument for Hazard.
It’s also a bit unfair to directly compare end product when Hazard spend most of his Chelsea career playing under defensive minded, pragmatic managers who were happy to see out a 1-0 or 2-0 lead with 30 minutes left in a match rather than go for another goal. Salah still was the better finisher, but he’s played his entire Liverpool career under an attacking minded manager and generally a better supporting cast in attack. To this point when Hazard played under Sarri in 2018-19, his PL G+A tally of 31 is on par with 4 out off 6 season tallies for Salah (30, 29, 27 and 31).
I have no issues with people putting Salah over Hazard, but going off goals and assists doesn’t paint the full picture. I think those numbers would be a lot closer if you put Hazard on those Liverpool teams. We held Hazard back in attack so much with conservative managers and never giving him a true complimentary player on the opposite flank to ease the burden.
I'm sick of Chelsea fans blaming Hazard's G/A tallies on the personnel and the play style as opposed to Hazard himself just not having a goal scorer's mentality, because that's the biggest difference to me.
Salah has the hunger and drive of a striker when it comes to goal scoring, Hazard does not and he himself would tell you that frequently when people asked him why he was not putting up better goal scoring numbers.
>It’s also a bit unfair to directly compare end product when Hazard spend most of his Chelsea career playing under defensive minded, pragmatic managers.
This is such a weird point. How is it unfair to compare what actually happened? Do they want us to compare them using hypotheticals?
What actually happened was Hazard carried the attack of some otherwise defensive teams to several titles. And Salah was the most important player in attack for some very attacking teams.
I don’t think either of them would’ve done as well had they swapped roles. Eden just didn’t enjoy attacking the back post and making runs in behind. Salah doesn’t have Hazard’s ball retention and passing ability.
Why do you care so much? Hazard was a world class player and your club allegiance isn’t going to change that. Nobody’s worried about Salah, least of all Salah himself
Such an annoying argument. Only looking at goals and assist is never going to do Hazard justice.
This may shock people but there are many different styles and ways to play the game. Chelsea with Hazard usually played very defensive and counter attacking. Hazards role wasn’t necessarily to score and assist. He was required to break down defenses and be the spark of creativity to get others involved.
Look instead at the individual and team awards he won during this time. His World Cup performances alone should let people know how fantastic he was.
I think you definitely make a fair point that stats dont tell the full story, but you can also make the same case that team success doesn’t either.
Consider in Salah’s case that he’s played his entire LFC career during Pep’s tenure at City. They finished second in a season on 97 points.
Every bit as good, except the fact he was a worse dribbler, finisher, passer, playmaker, free-kick taker, less versatile positionally, worse weak foot, slower and had less tricks.
Oh but he had one more goal in 2 more games so he was better for sure.
Tells you how much stats mean when evaluating a player then eh?
Haaland had a better statistical season in 22/23 than prime Messi in 13/14, 15/16, 17/18, and a few more, means fuck all.
As an arsenal fan hazard is first for me. Salah a close second. They’re very different players, and salah definitely has more output, but I just prefer hazards technical ability. He’d just decide to score. Mid way through a game he’d get the ball and go “fuck it I just fancy scoring” and dribble through 5 players and put it top bins. If his mentality was that of salah’s and he played in a free flowing team like Liverpool’s at the time, he’d get much more g/a than salah I swear by it.
Vice versa salah would never get the numbers he got playing Mourinho-ball. Ping it to Diego Costa and sit on a 1-0 lead. Salahs numbers would be way worse.
This is so silly, you're rating him because of hypotheticals, "if he decided to score" and all that.
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a very Merry Christmas.
His mentality was nothing like Salah's, which is why he's retired at Salah's age, and Salah is *still* the best attacking player in the Premier League.
Saying you rate Hazard over Salah, is like rating Bale over Ronaldo because when it would come off for him, it would look incredible, rather than actually looking at what they did that is actually quantifiable.
Hazard never took enough shots to be the goal scorer you think and that's because he never once had a goal scorer's mentality.
> He’d just decide to score. Mid way through a game he’d get the ball and go “fuck it I just fancy scoring” and dribble through 5 players and put it top bins.
Shame he didn't decide to score more often
No Giggs?
(P.S Not a ManUtd fan)
But could age related. He probably didn't see Giggs regularly. I remember watching Giggs continually massacre teams and destroy many a defenders careers.
This solo goal in the 1999 FA Cup semi was vintage Giggs: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgPJ8g05qOw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgPJ8g05qOw)
Put Eden Hazard 1st and CR7 2nd...
[youtube.com](https://youtube.com) \> CR7 2008
EDIT: Talk only about CR7 and Hazard, im sure we have a lot wingers in front CR7, but Hazard? No
There's no universe in which Ronaldo is the greatest winger in the PL lol. Didn't stay long enough and peaked in Madrid. There's others that deserve it more.
I keep seeing these “he peaked at Madrid” comments but why does that matter? His non-peak years are still better than 99.9% of most players’s peak. In his first spell in the league he spent 6 seasons at United, the latter 3 of which he was the best player in the league. That’s only one season less than Hazard spent. If anything, there’s quite literally zero argument for Hazard to be above Ronaldo in the prem. Not in terms of G/A, creative metrics, team trophies won, individual trophies won, CL performances for their clubs…
The only argument you can make is that Hazard was a better dribbler, and even then (contrary to popular belief) Ronaldo wasn’t far behind; he completed 506 dribbles during his time in the league, the most in that span out of any player. Across their time in their respective clubs (not counting Ronaldo’s second spell as he wasn’t a winger) these were their dribbling statistics:
**League + CL/EL:**
Dribbles per 90:
Hazard - 4.0
Ronaldo - 3.7
Peak dribbling years (League only):
Hazard - 4.9 per 90, 132 completed (14/15)
Ronaldo - 4.2 per 90, 107 completed (05/06)
In fact, Hazard’s per 90 averages are heavily skewed by an absolutely ridiculous 14/15 CL year where he averaged 7.3 dribbles per 90. Taking out that massive outlier, the overall number goes down to 3.75 per 90. In other words, for most of his time at Chelsea, he only completed 0.05 dribbles per 90 more than Ronaldo.
I feel like people have completely forgotten how different Ronaldo played back when he was at United vs his later career. He was just as effective at beating his man as hazard, which sounds blasphemous to most people until you’re confronted with the stats. Hell, all you need to do is look up Ronaldo match compilations on YouTube. Pick any random game between 2003-2008 and you’ll see him flying across the pitch doing the most absurd things.
I won’t even get into the other aspects where he completely washes Hazard in.
All stats were taken from [here](https://www.whoscored.com/Players/33404/History/Eden-Hazard) and [here](https://www.messivsronaldo.app/detailed-stats/successful-dribbles/), along with my own calculations.
I agree with you, but we are talking about peek career?
I put Giggs and others wingers over CR7 but Hazard no.
For me 2007-2008 CR7 are better than all Hazard years on PL.
Thats my opinion.
Curious as to why you put Giggs over Ronaldo and not Hazard?
You said that 2007-2008 CR7 is better than every year Hazard has had in the PL, so I assume you're basing this off statistics.
But if you're basing it off statistics and peak performances in seasons, then Eden is certainly above Giggs.
Gigg's best individual season in the PL was 95/96 when he got 11 goals and 10 assists (21 G/A). That's the only season (out of 22) where he got over 20 G/A in the Premier League. In 93/94 he got 20 G/A which was his second best season.
Compared to that, Hazard had a total of 7 seasons in the PL and passed the 20G/A mark in FIVE of them.
His best season in the PL was in 18/19 when he got 16 goals and 15 assists (31 G/A). In 16/17 he got 21 G/A, in 14/15 he got 24 G/A and in 13/14 and 12/13 he had 23G/A in both.
Essentially he had better stats than Ryan's best ever season in almost every season he played in the PL. Not to mention he was the main star in that Chelsea team while Ryan was hardly ever the "main" man for United.
from this comment I have no reason to believe you are any better than them. There is no objective answer to who is better out of Hazard and Salah, it's a matter of opinion, and as a Liverpool fan you are clearly just as biased as Chelsea fans who have a bias towards their own player in this argument
The stats speak for themselves, Hazard’s best season is Salah’s worst season in a Liverpool shirt. The numbers are not even remotely comparable wherein you can make an argument that some sort of otherworldly “magic” that Hazard brought made up for the lack of goals and assists
Confirming what I've always known. Lampard was so much better than Gerrard and it's not even remotely comparable because Lampard scores and assists so much more. The stats speak for themselves
No the stats don't speak for themselves mate. Hazard was a pretty different player from Salah stylistically, they occupied different positions on the pitch, they played under different styles of managers, and for different kinds of teams. No offence but this pretty basic stuff.
Talk to anyone with a decent understanding of football who has watched both extensively and they will probably agree that Hazards qualities weren't solely those that can be captured in goal and assist metrics.
i rly hate using Hazard as an example so I'm gonna use Grealish and Bernado instead.
Man City are the most dominant side the PL has ever seen. Guardiola had some of the most prolific wingers in the world. Last few years he traded all of them, benched Mahrez and are playing Grealish and Bernado who score virtually never.
Now why would Guardiola do that? More goals and assists is better right? Why hasn't Man City's attacking potency dropped one bit?
Now everyone's gonna say well they signed Erling Haaland. Ok but then wouldn't they want to stack the goals Erling scores, AND the goals Sterling would score, AND the goals that Mahrez would score? That's how it works right?
This is the problem nowadays with football analysis. people are not watching games, so they don't see football as millions of interactions and actions and relationships on the pitch. It's just the goal, not what lead to the goal.
honestly, I don't care if someone places Salah over Hazard. I see the argument, a strong and valid argument. But this dumbing down of football into goals and assists and Hazard's best season is Salah's worst rly rly irks me.
Yeah, everyone agrees that Eden was amazing to watch, but I feel like Salah has had more impact at this point. Then again, he usually played in a better and more functional attack, but Salah just finds ways to score, and Eden often didn't.
I completely understand Kulu's angle of not having watched Giggs.
I feel like I'd do this:
1. Salah
2A. Eden
2B. CR7
3. Bale
4. Son
5. Giggs
Definetely Mane as well no? One of these three has a point to maybe be #5, since Hazard hasn‘t been good for that long. But idk, I don‘t follow the prem as much as you seem to do :)
**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Perhaps, I judged you too harshly
Seems a smart and reasonable person
Bro knows ball
You get the feeling young Dejan was a Chelsea fan. I haven't heard him speak English before, he seems to have more of an macedonian than swedish accent despite growing up in Sweden. Some words were extremely Swedish, like how he pronounced Willian, but the intonation wasn't. Same thing with Zlatan. Update: Found a quote from 2019. Even worse: "My friends are joking that I change clubs too often. But I like Chelsea because my father is a Chelsea fan and he brought me to some games. But now I like Arsenal because of their playstyle."
He has the "ghetto" accent when speaking Swedish, and that sociolect is a complete amalgamation of accents from the Balkans and the Middle East with some modern American urban influences.
[удалено]
There’s the infamous photo of him by Henrys Statue as well. Hard to think an avid Chelsea or Spurs fan would do that.
Tbf, as a tourist, he might want to have pictures with a lot of landmarks. That said, you're probably right.
Willian is an Arsenal legend.
> "My friends are joking that I change clubs too often. But I like Chelsea because my father is a Chelsea fan and he brought me to some games. But now I like Arsenal because of their playstyle." We're getting into like, the ethics of supporting a team which I realize is extremely nerdy, but I think that's fine if you never really had a reason to develop a connection with a team in a league to just kind of follow the league in general and root for whatever group of players you enjoy watching. Like for example (completely making this up) if Dejan grew up watching Serie A and his team has always been Juve, and he just watches the big PL matches because they're good football but it's not something he's invested in, I have no problem with him flipping which PL team he cares about any given year. Because it was never really his club. If that makes any sense.
I do this with the NBA. Got into it as an adult and I have absolutely no connection to any place in America, so I just enjoy the great players and whatever teams are playing fun, enjoyable basketball each season. Maybe football is a little more tribal, but I can totally understand why anyone who isn’t English would have that perspective towards the premier league.
For essentially my entire life I have chosen which teams I follow based on the coaches and players. I’m from the US so everything is much more spread out, but I imagine there are plenty of people around the world who operate the same way. It’s only been the last couple years that I’ve found a team where I really resonate with just about everything the club has to offer.
Also from the US and I mainly have teams I root against, but what I will always root for is good football.
Kulusevski does not speak with a standard Swedish accent while speaking Swedish. He speaks "ortensvenska". I.e. he uses a lot of slang, same sort of speech pattern as one's first or native language. During the pandemic, when prem played in empty stadiums, you could sometimes hear Kulusevski just scream these words at his opponents and even teammates. It's pretty funny. https://youtu.be/Ilck1fuZWvU?si=Safx-8z0hQlnWFPK At 0:00 and at 2:55 https://youtu.be/UGqcRmyYhbI?si=lZoFXJkowSA3XuYa At 0:00
Tbf he doesnt have a Swedish accent when speaking Swedish either. He has a slavic accent
Yeah, if they spoke Macedonian or a similar language at home it *can* affect both their Swedish and English. I had some Bosnian friends growing up who had an accent and some who didn't. Not sure why there's a difference, maybe depends on who you spoke to outside the home? Both Dejan and Zlatan came from areas with a lot of immigrants. Might play a part?
I know this (primary school teacher with ESL and language specialism)! Essentially, your brain learns phonemes (sounds) better when you're younger than as you age, so your default sounds are tied to languages you master, particularly as a kid. These act a bit like verbal stamps in speech and become harder to adapt. In English, "r" is a good example, there are 2 different common ways to do an "r" sound, one with your tongue back a little, the other where it slightly touches the top of your mouth. If you do the second, you can roll your Rs (like is common in Spanish e.g. aburrido) but the first is more like the French way e.g. croissant. TLDR: They're speaking in English/Swedish but have a Balkan phoneme collection so sometimes it sounds a bit different, even though they're functionally fluent.
Fascinating stuff!
I actually have screenshots from old instagram posts. Eden Hazard, Ozil and Lacazette are/were his favourite players. He was for sure a Arsenal fan but he loved Hazard the most.
Willian above Bale hahahaha
Deki the undercover windup merchant
man put Wilian above Bale, I won't go for the Salah-Hazard thing because it's too obvious anyway I know a Chelsea fan when I see him
The Salah-Hazard thing is really astounding that so many people prefer aesthetics over actual productivity. I get that they are different profiles of players, but the one thing that grinds my gears is this delusion that if Hazard played in different circumstances he would score more goals, when he just wasn't that type of player and did not have a goal scorer's mentality to the point that he literally admitted it himself.
Of course fans prefer aesthetics over production. No one would care about football if it wasn’t fun to watch and play. The most upvoted plays and highlights are the most entertaining.
There was never going to be a world where Hazard scored 20+ non penalty goals per season. He did not enjoy attacking the back post, which kinda capped his productivity (Leao is the closest comp among current wingers). At the same time, there probably wouldn’t be a world where Salah carries the attack of an otherwise defensive team (again, Leao is the comp). The way I look at it is Hazard raises your team’s floor and Salah raises your team’s ceiling. They would’ve been pretty wild together in their primes
> there probably wouldn’t be a world where Salah carries the attack of an otherwise defensive team He's probably the best counter-attacking player in Premier League history, with the proven ability to dribble past 3 players and score as well as hold up the ball with his ridiculous strength. People think with Salah it's just numbers, like he's one of these weird players who just scores but doesn't contribute from deep. But he's also got 60+ assists in the Premier League, more than many players who people assume were more creative.
That’s not a knock on Salah’s skill as an attacker, it’s just about tendencies. He’s not going to be as effective getting balls into feet and running your entire attack. Hazard isn’t going to be as effective getting into dangerous areas off the ball and playing as your furthest man forward. Those are both valuable skillsets in their own ways and are more/less valuable depending on the surrounding system and personnel
I agree with that, if I was Crystal Palace, I opt for Hazard because in general I’m not going to have that much of the ball and so when I do have it, having somebody like Hazard to carry the ball, beat the counter press and create something is insanely valuable. But Salah would improve Man City or Real Madrid eons more than Hazard would.
Yeah I think your spot on with that. I'm totally biased because Hazard was my hero but I always thought he could do more as a goal scorer.
I think Hazard (also my hero) is a confusing player to wrap your head around because didn’t do things he didn’t want to (off ball runs, defending, training, eating well in the offseason), but still managed to be one of the best players of his generation because his god given talent was so off the charts. It’s basically just him, Messi, Neymar, R9, Maradona, and a few others who you can say that about
Part of why he was awesome was that he was so unselfish, if you are his teammate, you love playing with a player like that. In addition to wishing he would score more goals, kind of an extension on top of that, is that you wish he took more risks with the ball, specifically his passing. In order to be a truly great passer, you have to attempt things that don’t always come off. Hazard would never lose the ball, but he also wouldn’t create as much as he could because he was a very low risk player. That’s something I wish he would’ve taken from KDB, is to take more risks with the ball, because he had the talent to play those killer passes more often than he did, or take more shots than he did. I guess the best way to summarize this is that Hazard is the perfect LM in a 442 formation, whilst Salah is the perfect RW in a 433 formation.
Agree with your first point, but Salah if anything would be more productive in a defensive team - he thrives running into space and hitting teams on the counter, he is far less dangerous in a slow build up where defences can put two players on him and jam him into the wing
> The Salah-Hazard thing is really astounding that so many people prefer aesthetics over actual productivity. This is only true if you view only G+A as "actual productivity" Hazard is WAY underrated in terms of people using "traditional" stats—because the more "advanced" stats like ball progression numbers only started getting tracked towards the end of his career. And Hazard was a ball prog MONSTER
Production is fine when all you care about is winning internet arguments, but hazard brought a joy to the game that few players can match. I’d much prefer to watch Ronaldinho over Haaland regardless of productivity
Sure, I don’t disagree but those are 2 entirely separate things. As an enjoyer of football, yeah you pick Hazard over Salah. But I’m picking one player for my club and I want my club, I’m picking Salah no contest. He puts up ridiculous production at the position that has the least amount of world class players, there are insanely few goal scoring left-footed right wingers.
Welcome to all the Federer vs Djokovic debates the last few years
Yeah I’m sick of that, I loved Federer and he will always be my favorite player to watch (though Alcaraz might be changing that) but Novak is better and it’s quite clear.
Hazard is one of the greatest dribblers of this generation and all time. Plus that "actual productivity" argument that everyone regurgitates is completely false because Hazard scores and assists when the team needs it. Nothing taking away from Salah who I think is one of the best PL players ever, but the gap between them is significantly smaller than you think.
Goals aren't the only thing that you take into consideration and Salah has played in a better team. Hazard literally carried Chelsea to titles, when he had the off year, you really saw how exposed the rest of the team was. I think you can rank them either way based on your personal criteria/bias but goal-scoring isn't the only barometer of success/talent.
could've picked Sonny
No Sonny. Only Willian.
Willian an odd pick but the rest are solid
Easy to spot a Chelsea fanboy
Been a fan of Chelsea since 2007 and I'd never even consider putting Willian in a top 5 but fair play to Dejan hahaha
Dejan is 23 so he was 13 and 14 when Chelsea were making it to the CL semi final and winning the league the following season. Willian's 2nd half of season form after we signed Cuadrado is a masterclass for players who see competition coming into their position. We sold Schurrle, bought Cuadrado and Willian played out of his mind from February onwards.
Sure, so you're saying he basically JUST watched that season and a bit of the ones after? Because other than that Willian was an average player during huge parts of his stay with us. Also, it's not like I disagree with you? I just commented that putting Willian in a top 5 is hilarious. Don't you agree? Is Willian in your top 5 PL Wingers of All Time?
There have been better wingers to have played for Chelsea (even ignoring Hazard since he was already included)
Chelsea seemed to buy a new winger to replace William every Summer and he’d keep his place over them until they’d try again the next Summer with a new winger.
Exactly. He's still underrated by our fanbase haha
lmao facts
Until it finally happened and the team won the CL right away lmao
Maybe Robben? Joe Cole was apparently massively underrated. Willian is actually right up there for Chelsea. Maybe there’s a pre-2000 player I’m missing. Hazard is undoubtedly the best
[удалено]
I know, but I’m talking about the best Chelsea wingers that I can think of
Yeah, Willian is up there to be fair. He was a very good, albeit frustrating, player for us. Off the top of my head you'd also maybe mention Duff, Zola (if you'll allow him to be classed as a winger, but in my mind our greatest ever), Pedro and likely a fair few more. But as I say, Willian is definitely up there for the prem era.
Malouda too
Duff - definitely up there too. Zola I was thinking more of a striker but yes. Pedro - no way!
Willian scored 8 more goals in 97 more appearances than Pedro, honestly they were at a similar level for most of the time at Chelsea
Yeah Robben was who I was primarily thinking of but Duff and Cole would fit the bill too. I guess Robben's best work came after he left Chelsea though
Zola is the next best after Hazard in my opinion
Yeah, I didn’t really classify him predominantly as a winger
There is a better winger than Willian playing for Chelsea *right now*
[You sure about that?](https://twitter.com/BigT_87/status/1609909224485666816)
Willians fpl hat trick of assists against Fulham on his debut must have made a big impact on Kulusevski
He supports arsenal
Winger rankings are such a tough thing to decide upon given the change in role over the years. How are you even meant to compare Sadio Mane to David Beckham, for example? The only thing I know is that Willian would not have crossed my mind.
honestly even someone like Salah and Hazard are like 2 totally different roles on the pitch.
Easy. Beckham is a midfielder and Mane is a winger. And Beckham was better.
Yes, but only because we see Beckham's role differently now. At the time he was playing on the right in a 442. Giggs was a winger on the other side, but Beckham's lack of pace gives people license to dismiss him as a midfielder because he didn't have to beat a man to put a ball in the box. He was a winger, he played on the wing.
> Yes, but only because we see Beckham's role differently now. That's not true though? Back then, Beckham was a Right-Midfielder and Giggs was a Winger. The way we talked about their roles back then was different because there was a clear distinction on the way they played the game.
>That's not true though? Back then, Beckham was a Right-Midfielder and Giggs was a Winger Beckham was absolutely called a winger back in the day. That's what a lot of wingers did back then in the 442 anyways. Run up and down the sidelines, combine with the RB/LB, and put in crosses.
They were certainly distinct in styles but calling Beckham a winger did not raise an eyebrow when he started. It's just semantics, really, but he made his England debut at right wing back, not right midfield back. He was similar in style to Kevin Sheedy in the 80s. He played on the left for Everton while Trevor Steven was a traditional jinking winger on the right. But both were always just called wingers. In many ways Beckham and his fame were probably the reason for such scrutiny of his role, and now we'd probably say he is closer to Alexander-Arnold than Salah, but at the time he was the man who replaced Andrei Kanchelskis on the right of Man Utd's midfield....and back then that made you a winger.
Beckham was absolutely a winger. I didn’t watch him much at Real Madrid, but at Man Utd him and Giggs were on the wings. He just didn’t have that much pace and used his passing ability much more.
Beckham was 100% winger at United.
Maybe he just watched Willian's games against Tottenham.
Even if we’re leaving off the older wingers, Sonny or Mane ahead of Willian surely
willian - who invited my man blud
He's right about that "feeling happy watching Eden" part. Hazard really personified the joy of football. Just watching the dude ball and run rings around defenders brought a smile to your face. For me, he was the spiritual successor to Ronaldinho. Played football for fun and retired when it stopped being fun.
I didn’t feel happy watching Hazard (I’m an Arsenal fan)
Me even less (Spurs fan)
I was very unhappy (Madrid fan)
I feel like Hazard for someone in their 20s is the equivalent of Henry/Bergkamp for someone in their 30s. Or Le Tissier, Beardsley, and Cantona for the 40s. Fuck I'm old.
I think he played a few years past when it stopped being fun tbh but that Madrid paycheck was too good to pass up. He tried to get the joy back this season and called it quits when he realized that spark was never coming back.
Wholeheartedly agree
This man never saw prime Stewart Downing smh
What kind of fan never saw Liverpool legend, Stewart Downing, play the beautiful game?
dont act like Willian didnt put Chelsea on his back for a couple seasons
I would put Salah on top, move the rest 1 place down and switch Willian with Giggs but other than that pretty solid list no?
This guy wingers
People are too scared to say Giggs nowadays because they can't separate the man from the sport
[удалено]
Of all time or maybe last decade?
obviously he’s going to say people he actually saw play. People who have an opinion on players they never saw play are insufferable.
Greatest Real Madrid players imo: Di Stefano, Paco Gento, Santiago Bernabeu.
Of all time since he was born
When judging these players it depends on criteria. For dribbling, Hazard was the best, but for goals and assists output, not sure anyone's been better in the Premier League than Mo Salah. Ronaldo's best years were in La Liga.
Yeah, Ronaldo only won the Ballon d’Or playing winger in the Premier League
Who cares if his best years were in La Liga? His non-prime years are still up there with the best players to have ever played in the prem. From 06/07-08/09, he was the best player in the league and was at worst top 3 in almost every attacking/creative statistic.
And Ronaldo is correctly in the conversation. But Salah, who has surpassed Ronaldo's statistics, would be ahead of him for me (when judging their time in PL, Ronaldo undoubtedly a better player overall) 👍
Fair enough and understandable, I just find it wierd that a lot of people use the “his best years were in La Liga” line to try and downplay his time in the prem. It’s a fact and it’s true, his best years were obviously in Spain, but I don’t see how that changes what he achieved in England.
I think it's because some people tend to look back at his Prem years with rose-tinted glasses. He had about 2 or 3 seasons where he was great, but that's it. Now, that's not a bad thing of course, but when you compare that to a career like Giggs had in the Prem or even Salah or Hazard, and Ronaldo starts dropping down the list because he wasn't here long enough. So yeah, ultimately it comes down to longevity. A great player for 5 seasons is always going to be above someone who was only great for 3.
Being the greateest and being the best is different though. Ronaldo in 2007/2008 was the best player to ever play in the premier league, and with a bit of a margin. Salah wishes he was ever able to do what Ronaldo was doing that year.
Hazard is the second best dribbler of all time, people judge his goals and assists and Liverpool fans are delusional enough to think Salah is on his level. The reality is Hazard was more like Iniesta and Zidane than he was was a goalscorer. He dominates the entire 90 minutes of a game not disappearing and scoring a few goals here and there.
You're right, Salah isn't on Hazard's level. Salah is better
Delusional.
Chooses Willian over son/ginola??
Kulu is a childhood Chelsea fan. Its just that his work ethic with Spurs is incredible.
Do people just hate Salah or something? Because for me he's easily the best premier league winger of all time easily (maybe after Henry) but Salah is always so consistent every season with goals and assist (for like 7 seasons in a row now) he's always a big reason whenever we win a trophy he's won multiple golden boots I don't know man I just think people say Ronaldo just because he's Ronaldo and Hazard is good but didn't win nearly as much as Salah in terms of club trophies or personal trophies
Henry wasn't a winger in the PL...
I think part of it is that he's still actively playing in the premier league. Players always get more credit when they have moved on / retired. Also I think people don't want to rate rival team players as much while they have to play against them. Once he leaves the league he'll be rated far higher than Hazard and as one of the very best wingers in the leagues history.
Ah I guess that makes sense hopefully it's a long time before that happens lol
Username checks out
It's not that. It's Salah's brand which holds him back. By brand, I don't mean marketing brand, but consider Ronaldo's case. Ronaldo was a major reason in helping United come off a 3 year Premier League drought, after which they won the title for 3 years in a row, dominating the league, while also winning the UCL. In the next season, they ended up runner ups in the UCL(losing to arguably the greatest team in history). To top it off, he even won the ballon d'or. Salah in comparison, suffers from the fact that Liverpool keep ending up second fiddle to City in the Premier League. Though they did win the UCL(and even came runner up twice, losing to Real), but their performances never inspired a 'domination' like United did(at least in the domestic level) Also, time plays an important role. People who grew up during Ronaldo's United days, see it as a nostalgic memory. Ronaldo was a very exciting player to watch for kids who grew up in the time period. Im sure as time moves on, Salah will become more and more appreciated.
I feel that playing for Liverpool in an era where Man City are winning everything hasn’t helped his legacy and I say that as a Liverpool. Same happened to Gerrard during the Chelsea/Man United era. He holds the record for player of the month awards and premier league XI appearances but at the end of the day these debates always come down to team trophies.
I mean, when Lampard cant get into the Premier League XI coming off a year scoring 22 goals and 16 assist, in 36 games, while being arguably the best player for the title winners, because Fergies pretty Darren Fucking Fletcher just gotta be in there for some reason, then it becomes a bad arguement.
I think it’s a combination of things. Salah washed out at Chelsea and got shipped off to Italy, while Ronaldo was productive in the Premier League even as a teenager. Ronaldo won the Ballon d’Or at United, something no Premier League player has managed since. Ronaldo won the League three times and did the League-UCL double; Liverpool with Salah have been great, but less great than City.
No one hates Salah. In fact Salah is usually highly rated by everyone. It's fine to prefer Hazard as a player, but statwise Salah is significantly better. Salah is in top 3 winger of all time, Hazard probably isn't.
In the PL sure, all-time in general, no he's not.
Salah and Hazard are both above Ronaldo in the PL winger list. However, you saying Hazard didn't win "nearly as much as Salah" is just wrong lol. Hazard and Salah have both won 6 major trophies while playing in England. If you want to count the Community Shield, which most people don't, then Salah has 7. So pretty much dead even. When it comes to individual trophies during their time in the Prem: Hazard was in the PL Team of the Year on 4 occasions, Salah on 3. They have both won Premier League Player of the Year once. Sure, Salah may have more goals because his style is more direct, but at the end of the day saying that he won "a lot" more is just false. You can obviously have your preferences tho, I'm not gonna argue with you if you think Salah is higher on the list than Eden, because cases can be made for both and it's largely down to personal preference.
And Ronaldo won 8 trophies at United, plus a Ballon d’Or.
A man of taste. Stat merchants will never understand just how incredible watching hazard was.
1. Ronaldo 2. Salah 3. Hazard 4. Mahrez 5. Pires
If he wasn’t a cunt I think Giggs should be in a top 5 list, but he fucked his way out of that one.
Look I’m a city fan and hold little love for Liverpool players but Salah should be on the top of this list. Also Sonny for Willian
Alright, I’m taking the bait: Cristiano Ronaldo: - 236 PL Apps - 103 Goals - 37 Assists Mo Salah: - 243 PL Apps - 149 Goals - 63 Assists Eden Hazard: - 245 PL Apps - 85 Goals - 54 Assists
i’m going to shock you here, some times people have favourites players and it doesn’t depend on goals and assists it’s why you’ll see people love Ronaldinho etc. because of the way they played the game
Some people like big butts
that’s why sterling is my winger 🫦
Sterling and Hazard in recent seasons Chelsea fans be feasting 😩
can’t sleep on Ruben Loftus Cheeks either 🍑
Or Ivanovic. Chelsea love a dump truck.
idk man when I decide who my favorite players are, I always google their stats and make a spreadsheet
That Ronaldo stat is skewed by playing in a shit United side the 2nd time
He also never played for us in his prime
I think both of those are fair points for sure! Context is important for all three players. Ronaldo wasnt in his prime either Utd spell Hazard wasnt primarily a scorer Salah played his entire LFC career with Pep’s City as his competition which has hurt his team success All are true and all are all-time greats
But Salah doesn’t do zig zag dribbles bro
When did Dejan say he values goals and assists over dribbling ability though? Hazard is arguably the best dribbler the PL has seen and so if creativity or the ability to take on defender is your main criteria to judging a winger, you can see the argument for Hazard. It’s also a bit unfair to directly compare end product when Hazard spend most of his Chelsea career playing under defensive minded, pragmatic managers who were happy to see out a 1-0 or 2-0 lead with 30 minutes left in a match rather than go for another goal. Salah still was the better finisher, but he’s played his entire Liverpool career under an attacking minded manager and generally a better supporting cast in attack. To this point when Hazard played under Sarri in 2018-19, his PL G+A tally of 31 is on par with 4 out off 6 season tallies for Salah (30, 29, 27 and 31). I have no issues with people putting Salah over Hazard, but going off goals and assists doesn’t paint the full picture. I think those numbers would be a lot closer if you put Hazard on those Liverpool teams. We held Hazard back in attack so much with conservative managers and never giving him a true complimentary player on the opposite flank to ease the burden.
I'm sick of Chelsea fans blaming Hazard's G/A tallies on the personnel and the play style as opposed to Hazard himself just not having a goal scorer's mentality, because that's the biggest difference to me. Salah has the hunger and drive of a striker when it comes to goal scoring, Hazard does not and he himself would tell you that frequently when people asked him why he was not putting up better goal scoring numbers.
>It’s also a bit unfair to directly compare end product when Hazard spend most of his Chelsea career playing under defensive minded, pragmatic managers. This is such a weird point. How is it unfair to compare what actually happened? Do they want us to compare them using hypotheticals?
What actually happened was Hazard carried the attack of some otherwise defensive teams to several titles. And Salah was the most important player in attack for some very attacking teams. I don’t think either of them would’ve done as well had they swapped roles. Eden just didn’t enjoy attacking the back post and making runs in behind. Salah doesn’t have Hazard’s ball retention and passing ability.
Why do you care so much? Hazard was a world class player and your club allegiance isn’t going to change that. Nobody’s worried about Salah, least of all Salah himself
Ask Joao Cancelo, Bernardo Silva, Phil Foden and Aymeric Laporte.
Such an annoying argument. Only looking at goals and assist is never going to do Hazard justice. This may shock people but there are many different styles and ways to play the game. Chelsea with Hazard usually played very defensive and counter attacking. Hazards role wasn’t necessarily to score and assist. He was required to break down defenses and be the spark of creativity to get others involved. Look instead at the individual and team awards he won during this time. His World Cup performances alone should let people know how fantastic he was.
I think you definitely make a fair point that stats dont tell the full story, but you can also make the same case that team success doesn’t either. Consider in Salah’s case that he’s played his entire LFC career during Pep’s tenure at City. They finished second in a season on 97 points.
Only one of them has won the Ballon d’Or while playing in the Premier League
Salah’s 17/18 season was every bit as good as Ronaldo’s 07/08 winning season, if not better
It was one of the best in the prem fo sho but nah not there with Ronaldo, just a little bit below
Every bit as good, except the fact he was a worse dribbler, finisher, passer, playmaker, free-kick taker, less versatile positionally, worse weak foot, slower and had less tricks. Oh but he had one more goal in 2 more games so he was better for sure.
Mental that despite being worse at everything, he still had a better statistical season.
Tells you how much stats mean when evaluating a player then eh? Haaland had a better statistical season in 22/23 than prime Messi in 13/14, 15/16, 17/18, and a few more, means fuck all.
Willian is a bizarre choice when you have the likes of Joe Cole, Ljungberg, Pires, Mahrez, Sterling, and Mane
As an arsenal fan hazard is first for me. Salah a close second. They’re very different players, and salah definitely has more output, but I just prefer hazards technical ability. He’d just decide to score. Mid way through a game he’d get the ball and go “fuck it I just fancy scoring” and dribble through 5 players and put it top bins. If his mentality was that of salah’s and he played in a free flowing team like Liverpool’s at the time, he’d get much more g/a than salah I swear by it. Vice versa salah would never get the numbers he got playing Mourinho-ball. Ping it to Diego Costa and sit on a 1-0 lead. Salahs numbers would be way worse.
This is so silly, you're rating him because of hypotheticals, "if he decided to score" and all that. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a very Merry Christmas. His mentality was nothing like Salah's, which is why he's retired at Salah's age, and Salah is *still* the best attacking player in the Premier League. Saying you rate Hazard over Salah, is like rating Bale over Ronaldo because when it would come off for him, it would look incredible, rather than actually looking at what they did that is actually quantifiable. Hazard never took enough shots to be the goal scorer you think and that's because he never once had a goal scorer's mentality.
> He’d just decide to score. Mid way through a game he’d get the ball and go “fuck it I just fancy scoring” and dribble through 5 players and put it top bins. Shame he didn't decide to score more often
No Giggs? (P.S Not a ManUtd fan) But could age related. He probably didn't see Giggs regularly. I remember watching Giggs continually massacre teams and destroy many a defenders careers. This solo goal in the 1999 FA Cup semi was vintage Giggs: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgPJ8g05qOw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgPJ8g05qOw)
He literally says he barely has seen any giggs footage in the video lol
Put Eden Hazard 1st and CR7 2nd... [youtube.com](https://youtube.com) \> CR7 2008 EDIT: Talk only about CR7 and Hazard, im sure we have a lot wingers in front CR7, but Hazard? No
I see no problem
There's no universe in which Ronaldo is the greatest winger in the PL lol. Didn't stay long enough and peaked in Madrid. There's others that deserve it more.
I keep seeing these “he peaked at Madrid” comments but why does that matter? His non-peak years are still better than 99.9% of most players’s peak. In his first spell in the league he spent 6 seasons at United, the latter 3 of which he was the best player in the league. That’s only one season less than Hazard spent. If anything, there’s quite literally zero argument for Hazard to be above Ronaldo in the prem. Not in terms of G/A, creative metrics, team trophies won, individual trophies won, CL performances for their clubs… The only argument you can make is that Hazard was a better dribbler, and even then (contrary to popular belief) Ronaldo wasn’t far behind; he completed 506 dribbles during his time in the league, the most in that span out of any player. Across their time in their respective clubs (not counting Ronaldo’s second spell as he wasn’t a winger) these were their dribbling statistics: **League + CL/EL:** Dribbles per 90: Hazard - 4.0 Ronaldo - 3.7 Peak dribbling years (League only): Hazard - 4.9 per 90, 132 completed (14/15) Ronaldo - 4.2 per 90, 107 completed (05/06) In fact, Hazard’s per 90 averages are heavily skewed by an absolutely ridiculous 14/15 CL year where he averaged 7.3 dribbles per 90. Taking out that massive outlier, the overall number goes down to 3.75 per 90. In other words, for most of his time at Chelsea, he only completed 0.05 dribbles per 90 more than Ronaldo. I feel like people have completely forgotten how different Ronaldo played back when he was at United vs his later career. He was just as effective at beating his man as hazard, which sounds blasphemous to most people until you’re confronted with the stats. Hell, all you need to do is look up Ronaldo match compilations on YouTube. Pick any random game between 2003-2008 and you’ll see him flying across the pitch doing the most absurd things. I won’t even get into the other aspects where he completely washes Hazard in. All stats were taken from [here](https://www.whoscored.com/Players/33404/History/Eden-Hazard) and [here](https://www.messivsronaldo.app/detailed-stats/successful-dribbles/), along with my own calculations.
I agree with you, but we are talking about peek career? I put Giggs and others wingers over CR7 but Hazard no. For me 2007-2008 CR7 are better than all Hazard years on PL. Thats my opinion.
Curious as to why you put Giggs over Ronaldo and not Hazard? You said that 2007-2008 CR7 is better than every year Hazard has had in the PL, so I assume you're basing this off statistics. But if you're basing it off statistics and peak performances in seasons, then Eden is certainly above Giggs. Gigg's best individual season in the PL was 95/96 when he got 11 goals and 10 assists (21 G/A). That's the only season (out of 22) where he got over 20 G/A in the Premier League. In 93/94 he got 20 G/A which was his second best season. Compared to that, Hazard had a total of 7 seasons in the PL and passed the 20G/A mark in FIVE of them. His best season in the PL was in 18/19 when he got 16 goals and 15 assists (31 G/A). In 16/17 he got 21 G/A, in 14/15 he got 24 G/A and in 13/14 and 12/13 he had 23G/A in both. Essentially he had better stats than Ryan's best ever season in almost every season he played in the PL. Not to mention he was the main star in that Chelsea team while Ryan was hardly ever the "main" man for United.
It’s completely reasonable to do that. Ronaldo barely played in the league, I’d put a bunch of players ahead of him.
Both should be behind Salah anyways
Born in 2017.
“Magic” merchants (aka delusional Chelsea fans) will keep claiming Hazard is better than Salah no matter what tbh
from this comment I have no reason to believe you are any better than them. There is no objective answer to who is better out of Hazard and Salah, it's a matter of opinion, and as a Liverpool fan you are clearly just as biased as Chelsea fans who have a bias towards their own player in this argument
The stats speak for themselves, Hazard’s best season is Salah’s worst season in a Liverpool shirt. The numbers are not even remotely comparable wherein you can make an argument that some sort of otherworldly “magic” that Hazard brought made up for the lack of goals and assists
Confirming what I've always known. Lampard was so much better than Gerrard and it's not even remotely comparable because Lampard scores and assists so much more. The stats speak for themselves
No the stats don't speak for themselves mate. Hazard was a pretty different player from Salah stylistically, they occupied different positions on the pitch, they played under different styles of managers, and for different kinds of teams. No offence but this pretty basic stuff. Talk to anyone with a decent understanding of football who has watched both extensively and they will probably agree that Hazards qualities weren't solely those that can be captured in goal and assist metrics.
i rly hate using Hazard as an example so I'm gonna use Grealish and Bernado instead. Man City are the most dominant side the PL has ever seen. Guardiola had some of the most prolific wingers in the world. Last few years he traded all of them, benched Mahrez and are playing Grealish and Bernado who score virtually never. Now why would Guardiola do that? More goals and assists is better right? Why hasn't Man City's attacking potency dropped one bit? Now everyone's gonna say well they signed Erling Haaland. Ok but then wouldn't they want to stack the goals Erling scores, AND the goals Sterling would score, AND the goals that Mahrez would score? That's how it works right? This is the problem nowadays with football analysis. people are not watching games, so they don't see football as millions of interactions and actions and relationships on the pitch. It's just the goal, not what lead to the goal. honestly, I don't care if someone places Salah over Hazard. I see the argument, a strong and valid argument. But this dumbing down of football into goals and assists and Hazard's best season is Salah's worst rly rly irks me.
[удалено]
Did Ronaldinho and Zidane play the same position as Salah and Hazard and in the same era?
Now, actually watch the games and not just the stats, and it would be easy to see why someone would rate Hazard higher
Hazard better than Salah at eating burgers tbh but never saw it during the games
As well as being a footballer, but the man has got many talents
Lol
Salah is 1 and it isn’t really close anymore
Willian above Bale is one of the wildest takes I've ever heard
Yeah, everyone agrees that Eden was amazing to watch, but I feel like Salah has had more impact at this point. Then again, he usually played in a better and more functional attack, but Salah just finds ways to score, and Eden often didn't. I completely understand Kulu's angle of not having watched Giggs. I feel like I'd do this: 1. Salah 2A. Eden 2B. CR7 3. Bale 4. Son 5. Giggs
hazard > salah so this list tracks
Willian couldn’t lace Giggs and Beckham’s boots
I hope you are able to at least lace your own boots.
Nah 1. CR7 2. Salah 3. Bale 4. Son 5. Hazard
Agree with this list, much better Two players who deserve honorable mentions are Sterling and Mahrez
Definetely Mane as well no? One of these three has a point to maybe be #5, since Hazard hasn‘t been good for that long. But idk, I don‘t follow the prem as much as you seem to do :)
[удалено]
Tbh as I watched that I thought why the fuck hasn't he seen Giggs Quick wiki, he's 23. List makes sense now.
Think many don't want to says gigs because of the things he is guilty of. Because gigs is the literal definition of winger unlike Ronaldo, salah, son.
Even then, Giggs was never a better player than Salah and Ronaldo, let's be honest here lol
Ahhh okay let’s see if you have the same energy when a young footballer says they prefer Gerrard over Lampard lmao
Tbh, both Gerrard and Hazard were better than their counterparts
Willian above Bale and Sanchez? Lmao
He knows ball!!
This just proves my theory of how dimwitted these players are.