Swansea City Ballboy Flashes Skills on YouTube (Video)
Charlie Morgan became an instant celebrity Wednesday. Now his backstory is coming out.
If you missed it, Morgan was the ballboy who received a kick to the ribs from Chelsea's Eden Hazard during a Carling Cup semifinal match against Swansea City on Wednesday night in Wales. The match ended 0-0, and Swansea advanced to the final with a 2-0 aggregate win.
But the story was all about Hazard and the ballboy.
Morgan, 17, refused to give up the ball to Hazard late in the second half, falling on it to shield it from the Chelsea man. The Belgian midfielder then kicked at Morgan and retrieved the ball for a goal kick.
Referee Chris Foy showed Hazard a red card. From there, the story has become stranger by the moment.
The day of the match, Morgan tweeted—jokingly?—about time-wasting:
Inevitably, Morgan also has a video on YouTube. Thanks to the guys at 101 Great Goals, we can see what kind of skills Morgan has with a ball at his feet.
See for yourself in the clip below. Morgan's 15 minutes of fame provide the material for our Set Piece Video of the Day for this Thursday. Enjoy. Fast forward to the 1:05 mark—it turns out Morgan has some skills.
After the match, Hazard apologized—and as he tells it, so did the ballboy.
"The boy put his whole body onto the ball and I was just trying to kick the ball and I think I kicked the ball and not the boy. I apologise," Hazard said (via ChelseaFC.com).
He added: "The ball boy came in the changing room and we had a quick chat and I apologised and the boy apologised as well, and it is over. Sorry."
We all know better than that. This story is far from over.
Professional Footballers' Association chairman Peter Taylor has said Hazard should not have "taken the law into his own hands" (via BBC Sport). But former Chelsea winger Pat Nevin has said the ballboy's "behaviour was disgraceful" (via The Guardian).
So let the debate begin once more. Whose side are you on? Hazard's or the ballboy's?
(h/t 101 Great Goals)
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?