• Home
  • Tag: Mohannad

Hazard scores 100th goal for Chelsea

first_imgEden Hazard has scored his 100th goal for Chelsea, finding the net in Wednesday’s Premier League meeting with Watford.After going scoreless against Leicester, Hazard struck just before half-time at Vicarage Road to send the Blues ahead. Mateo Kovacic picked up a loose ball in midfield and knocked through to the forward, who rounded Ben Foster and finished with ease to mark his century. Article continues below Editors’ Picks ‘There is no creativity’ – Can Solskjaer get Man Utd scoring freely again? ‘Everyone legged it on to the pitch!’ – How Foden went from Man City superfan to future superstar Emery out of jail – for now – as brilliant Pepe papers over Arsenal’s cracks What is Manchester United’s ownership situation and how would Kevin Glazer’s sale of shares affect the club? Chelsea’s advantage proved short-lived, however, as Roberto Pereyra hit back almost instantly to level matters prior to the break.But Hazard popped up in the second half to restore the lead, netting a penalty to make it 2-1 on the night and 101 for Chelsea’s star.The Belgian remains 10th on the all-time list of the Blues’ top scorers, with Frank Lampard out in front with 211, nine ahead of Bobby Tambling.Of Hazard’s 101 goals for the club, 79 of them have come in the Premier League, with eight having been scored in the Champions League, seven in the League Cup, five in the FA Cup and one in both the Europa League and UEFA Super Cup.Bournemouth, Newcastle and West Brom are Hazard’s favourite opponents in terms the opposition he has the best goalscoring record again during his time at Stamford Bridge, with seven having arrived against each of those sides.Cesc Fabregas is the Chelsea team-mate with the most assists for Hazard – the Spaniard having set-up the forward seven times during his time with the club.Hazard will climb to ninth in the standings of the Blues’ all-time leading scorers if and when he scores 109 for the club, with George Hilsdon having netted 108 during his spell as a Chelsea player in the early 1900s.Eden Hazard Chelsea 100The former Lille man joined Chelsea back in 2012, and has made a total of 322 appearances for the Blues across all competitions.There has been speculation over his future at the club, however, with a move to Real Madrid having long been mooted as a possibility, with the Belgian himself having admitted his desire to play for the Liga giants .He has, however, also suggested that he could remain at Stamford Bridge for the long-term, with Maurizio Sarri’s side keen to tie the 27-year-old down to a new deal – his current contract expires in June 2020.Hazard has been deployed in a false nine position by Sarri in recent times and has now scored in three of his last four games for the club. Check out Goal’s Premier League 2019-20 fantasy football podcast for game tips, debate and rivalries.last_img read more

Freeland says Canada needs more military hard power as US looks inward

by Mike Blanchfield, The Canadian Press Posted Jun 6, 2017 8:28 am MDT Last Updated Jun 6, 2017 at 2:40 pm MDT AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to RedditRedditShare to 電子郵件Email Freeland says Canada needs more military ‘hard power’ as U.S. looks inward Minister of Foreign Affairs Chrystia Freeland is congratulated by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and party members after delivering a speech in the House of Commons on Canada’s Foreign Policy in Ottawa on Tuesday, June 6, 2017. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick OTTAWA – Canada’s new foreign policy will involve spending billions on “hard power” military capability because the country can’t rely on an American ally that has turned inward, says Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland.In a major foreign policy speech in the House of Commons today, Freeland didn’t mention Donald Trump by name, but made an unabashed pitch for the international rules-based order that the U.S. president’s America First policy is attacking.The speech was meant to foreshadow the release of Wednesday’s defence policy review, when Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan is expected to make the case for billions in new military spending.“To put it plainly: Canadian diplomacy and development sometimes require the backing of hard power,” Freeland said.“Principled use of force, together with our allies and governed by international law, is a part of our history and must be a part of our future.”Finance Minister Bill Morneau hinted in an interview that future defence budgets could become noticeably fatter after his department spent “a huge amount of time” working on the defence review.“What minister Freeland was saying is that we recognize the importance of our commitment to our military,” Morneau said.“We understand the nature of the challenges that we’re facing right now with terrorism and broader public safety issues, so as we put forward our investments, that’s the context.”Freeland said Canada doesn’t need an inward-looking “Canada First” foreign policy, but given that the U.S. is now questioning the worth of its global leadership, it is more important than ever for Canada to plot its own course in the world.Her emphasis on hard military power is a tougher expression of the country’s international interests than Canadians are used to hearing. In the 1990s, her Liberal predecessor, Lloyd Axworthy championed a “soft power” agenda that focused on protecting civilians in armed conflict at a time when the government of the day was cutting defence spending.“The accent on hard power is interesting,” said Fen Hampson, head of the global security program at the Centre for International Governance Innovation. “The Liberals have traditionally been soft power champions and she is saying that Canada needs both.”Freeland said that notwithstanding the “incredibly good relationship” with the U.S., Canada cannot simply depend on American military protection.“To rely solely on the U.S. security umbrella would make us a client state,” she said.“Such a dependence would not be in Canada’s interest.”The speech affirmed Canada’s support for multilateralism and rules-based international systems, human rights, gender equality, fighting climate change and spreading economic benefits more widely.She said Canada played a major role in shaping the global order after the Second World War because the country — including her own family — suffered heavy losses in two world wars.The U.S. has been an indispensable nation in leading the world since then, she said, but that is changing and Canada has to adapt.“It would be naive or hypocritical to claim before this House that all Americans today agree,” she said.“Indeed many of the voters in last year’s presidential election cast their ballots, animated in part by a desire shrug off the burden of world leadership. To say this is not controversial: it is simply a fact.”She reiterated the government’s disappointment in the U.S. decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change.“International relationships that had seemed immutable for 70 years are being called into question,” she said.“And new shared human imperatives — the fight against climate change first among them — call for renewed uncommon resolve.She also addressed the protectionism — again without mentioning Trump by name — that has taken root in the U.S. and elsewhere, suggesting that stance is on the wrong side of history.“Beggar-thy-neighbour policies hit middle powers soonest and hardest,” she said. “This is the implacable lesson of the 1930s and the Great Depression.”Freeland said after the speech she spoke Monday to U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to explain the context of her remarks about his country.Paul Heinbecker, Canada’s UN ambassador when the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, said Freeland’s speech contained enough complimentary reminders about the sacrifices of the U.S. as a world leader to placate the Americans.Even so, recent history has shown Canada has the ability to disagree with the U.S., he said.Heinbecker said he advised the Liberal government to stay out of the Iraq campaign, “and there were some people in Ottawa who said, ‘Oh my, we can’t disagree with Washington on something as important as a war.’“It turned out not only could you, we did. And there were no consequences, virtually.”— with files from Andy Blatchford read more