|
Post by Pilch on Jun 12, 2019 10:57:31 GMT 1
Find the regular comparison with the men's game frustrating and slightly baffling. I can't say I've heard many people at all talk about how good female cricketers would be against men, or rugby players, or athletes (apart from Caster Semenya, but that is a whole can of worms and a pretty unique situation). Why not just judge them on their own terms - how they compare to each other ie in a World Cup? If you don't find the football worth watching, that's fair enough. I just don't think trying to suggest how they would fare in men's football is at all helpful, needed, or justified. It’s hardly the same though is it Women’s cricket isn’t big in the news Men’s cricket doesn’t have a well known undercard Women’s football is becoming big news And we all know our football and can probably put teams in order of ability from the best in the world to the worst Just wondering where the England women side fits into this isn’t a big deal, But I’d love to know Probably the biggest known sport that women play is tennis and I’ve often heard discussions on who some of the top players might fare well against And golf they have competed together It’s not a taboo subject is it We already have female officials , it won’t be long before a women appears in a male side
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Jun 12, 2019 15:21:29 GMT 1
Find the regular comparison with the men's game frustrating and slightly baffling. I can't say I've heard many people at all talk about how good female cricketers would be against men, or rugby players, or athletes (apart from Caster Semenya, but that is a whole can of worms and a pretty unique situation). Why not just judge them on their own terms - how they compare to each other ie in a World Cup? If you don't find the football worth watching, that's fair enough. I just don't think trying to suggest how they would fare in men's football is at all helpful, needed, or justified. It’s hardly the same though is it Women’s cricket isn’t big in the news Men’s cricket doesn’t have a well known undercard Women’s football is becoming big news And we all know our football and can probably put teams in order of ability from the best in the world to the worst Just wondering where the England women side fits into this isn’t a big deal, But I’d love to know Probably the biggest known sport that women play is tennis and I’ve often heard discussions on who some of the top players might fare well against And golf they have competed together It’s not a taboo subject is it We already have female officials , it won’t be long before a women appears in a male side Women’s football is becoming big news, largely because the BBC have decided to promote it heavily. Is this justified when the top women’s games attract a few thousand at best? I cannot see a women ever appearing in a male side at anything approaching a professional standard because of the insurmountable differences in physicality and speed.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 12, 2019 18:15:07 GMT 1
It’s hardly the same though is it Women’s cricket isn’t big in the news Men’s cricket doesn’t have a well known undercard Women’s football is becoming big news And we all know our football and can probably put teams in order of ability from the best in the world to the worst Just wondering where the England women side fits into this isn’t a big deal, But I’d love to know Probably the biggest known sport that women play is tennis and I’ve often heard discussions on who some of the top players might fare well against And golf they have competed together It’s not a taboo subject is it We already have female officials , it won’t be long before a women appears in a male side Women’s football is becoming big news, largely because the BBC have decided to promote it heavily. Is this justified when the top women’s games attract a few thousand at best? I cannot see a women ever appearing in a male side at anything approaching a professional standard because of the insurmountable differences in physicality and speed. 6.5 million people watched the England v Scotland game . www.theguardian.com/football/2018/sep/07/womens-super-league-football-arsenal-chelsea-doncasterintresting article about the benefits and costs of the professional league and you are right about attendance for the top teams, with Arsenals highest crowd in a league game of just over 3,000 .
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on Jun 12, 2019 19:12:19 GMT 1
There was a piece on Woman’s Hour a few months ago asking why women professional players weren’t paid the same as men. They failed to recognise that the men’s game attracts paying fans and massive sponsorship which the women’s game doesn’t. If Arsenal Women attracts ted crowds of 60,000 per game as the6 get at The Emirates, they there would be equal pay. Having said that, Lewes have decided to pay their women players the same as their men’s team, but while the women are in the top League, Lewes men play in the 7th tier I think,so it’s not comparing like with like. It’s really up to women to support the women’s game to the same extent as men support the men’s game, though there should be a mix of supporters obviously.
|
|
|
Post by quinnster on Jun 12, 2019 20:38:36 GMT 1
We are now becoming the "Men's game", so the beeb snowflakes pushing this womens version into mainstream media, prime time etc, where as we in the EFL don't get anything LIVE. The Beeb MSM have forgotten don't care, yet ya look at the footage of games....playing in almost empty stadiums etc. oh, and please don't forget to pay your license Fee tut tut.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jun 13, 2019 0:18:56 GMT 1
We are now becoming the "Men's game", so the beeb snowflakes pushing this womens version into mainstream media, prime time etc, where as we in the EFL don't get anything LIVE. The Beeb MSM have forgotten don't care, yet ya look at the footage of games....playing in almost empty stadiums etc. oh, and please don't forget to pay your license Fee tut tut. Surely bbc are pushing the women’s game, at least in part, because it is the only live football they can show. They can’t afford the vast sums Sky and BT are putting into men’s football, even though most of it goes into the Premier League, because it would be too much out of their budget. The EFL won’t take what the BBC can afford, they will take what Sky and the Premier League give them
|
|
|
Post by shropshirelad42 on Jun 13, 2019 7:07:14 GMT 1
But surely matches like France Women v Korea Women don't justify taking over BBC 1 for two and a half hours? I think the BBC are trying to raise the media profile of women football and women and disabled sport as a whole, which can only be looked on as a positive, but if anyone doesn't like it then there are plenty of other channels covering sport but of course some of these but not all have to be subscribed.
|
|
|
Post by shropshirelad42 on Jun 13, 2019 7:26:42 GMT 1
Any sport that gets too popular on the BBC will be bought out by Sky or BT methinks !! About time the "beeb" started advertising and then hopefully they could compete for TV rights. And whilst they are at it cut the enormous salaries of these so called "star presenters" on both radio & TV, and the board of governors, and give the not so well off pensioners the free licence.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 13, 2019 7:30:19 GMT 1
There was a piece on Woman’s Hour a few months ago asking why women professional players weren’t paid the same as men. They failed to recognise that the men’s game attracts paying fans and massive sponsorship which the women’s game doesn’t. If Arsenal Women attracts ted crowds of 60,000 per game as the6 get at The Emirates, they there would be equal pay. Having said that, Lewes have decided to pay their women players the same as their men’s team, but while the women are in the top League, Lewes men play in the 7th tier I think,so it’s not comparing like with like. It’s really up to women to support the women’s game to the same extent as men support the men’s game, though there should be a mix of supporters obviously. i enjoy womens football and the quality of the football is improving , but as for wages as you rightly say this about the level of commercial intrest and the numbers of people who pay to go through the turnstile and the income the club generate and has nothing to do with gender pay inaquality .
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 13, 2019 12:25:40 GMT 1
There was a piece on Woman’s Hour a few months ago asking why women professional players weren’t paid the same as men. They failed to recognise that the men’s game attracts paying fans and massive sponsorship which the women’s game doesn’t. If Arsenal Women attracts ted crowds of 60,000 per game as the6 get at The Emirates, they there would be equal pay. Having said that, Lewes have decided to pay their women players the same as their men’s team, but while the women are in the top League, Lewes men play in the 7th tier I think,so it’s not comparing like with like. It’s really up to women to support the women’s game to the same extent as men support the men’s game, though there should be a mix of supporters obviously. The wages paid to the top male footballers have very little connection to the size of the paying fans. If they did, Bournemouth would be unable to compete for players with half the clubs in the Championship.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 13, 2019 12:28:08 GMT 1
We are now becoming the "Men's game", so the beeb snowflakes pushing this womens version into mainstream media, prime time etc, where as we in the EFL don't get anything LIVE. The Beeb MSM have forgotten don't care, yet ya look at the footage of games....playing in almost empty stadiums etc. oh, and please don't forget to pay your license Fee tut tut. I think you deserve the prize for the most bafflingly inappropriate use of the term "snowflakes". That takes some doing, well done. I admire your confidence that a Sunday tea time screening of, say, Shrewsbury v Bristol Rovers would attract a TV audience of 6.5m or more.
|
|
|
Post by LetchworthShrew on Jun 13, 2019 13:00:50 GMT 1
A lot of PL clubs would make a profit playing in empty stadiums. Revenue from ticket sales is small compared to TV money and sponsorship deals
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 13, 2019 17:11:52 GMT 1
A lot of PL clubs would make a profit playing in empty stadiums. Revenue from ticket sales is small compared to TV money and sponsorship deals true i think the viewing figure of the world cup will make some comercial sectors to take notice of the womens game. 1.8 million women play football.
|
|
|
Post by vixenshrew on Jun 13, 2019 18:11:31 GMT 1
Any sport that gets too popular on the BBC will be bought out by Sky or BT methinks !! About time the "beeb" started advertising and then hopefully they could compete for TV rights. And whilst they are at it cut the enormous salaries of these so called "star presenters" on both radio & TV, and the board of governors, and give the not so well off pensioners the free licence. And if they have adverts they shouldn't need to charge anyone licence fee.
|
|
|
Post by South Stand Salopian on Jun 13, 2019 18:31:04 GMT 1
What an enjoyable match on at the moment. Brazil were 2-0 up. Australia nicked one on the stroke of half time but have turned it around and are now 3-2 up after the goal stood after consulting VAR.
Great advert for women’s football.
|
|
|
Post by cheggersdrinkspop on Jun 13, 2019 18:58:02 GMT 1
Great game that and good quality, first time for a while I have been rooting for the Aussies.
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Jun 13, 2019 19:12:38 GMT 1
What an enjoyable match on at the moment. Brazil were 2-0 up. Australia nicked one on the stroke of half time but have turned it around and are now 3-2 up after the goal stood after consulting VAR. Great advert for women’s football. Another shocking example of VAR. How can the Aussie forward have not been interfering with play ?
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 13, 2019 19:21:32 GMT 1
i have watched all the games and the Asutralian fighting comeback to win 3-2 against Brazil after looking dead and buried at0-2 down after 38 minutes was the most entertaing. VAR played a huge part in this game the shirt pulling for the first goal, Australias penalty appeal turned down for a handball in an erlier passage of play before the foul in the box, to the last and most contreversal decsion. an australian player was off side but was ruled to have not to have interfeard with play , even though in my view that influenced the defenders decision to head the ball which ended as an own goal, if the australian player had not been there the defender may have done somthing differently.
the goalkeeper for brazile was was poor as was some of the defending, the substituitions seem to unbalance the team and they did not look so effective. however Marta ice cold penalty taking to score in her fifth world cup and the silky skills of Tamires down the wing i lost count of the time she nutmeged players and just turned them inside out down the wing.
the goal by Australia was crucial as they fought back in the second half and they desrve a lot of credit for not just getting back in the game but also game managed the game after going ahead slowing hte game down , ball retention and just smart football to get a vital win and now all to play for .
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 13, 2019 19:26:47 GMT 1
Find the regular comparison with the men's game frustrating and slightly baffling. I can't say I've heard many people at all talk about how good female cricketers would be against men, or rugby players, or athletes (apart from Caster Semenya, but that is a whole can of worms and a pretty unique situation). Why not just judge them on their own terms - how they compare to each other ie in a World Cup? If you don't find the football worth watching, that's fair enough. I just don't think trying to suggest how they would fare in men's football is at all helpful, needed, or justified. Well said. I don't understand why some always feel the need to compare it with the men's game. Do they watch Serena Williams and think about how Federer would beat her? When Dina Asher-Smith wins a race are they thinking that a top male sprinter would beat her? How pointless.
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 14, 2019 7:10:25 GMT 1
Find the regular comparison with the men's game frustrating and slightly baffling. I can't say I've heard many people at all talk about how good female cricketers would be against men, or rugby players, or athletes (apart from Caster Semenya, but that is a whole can of worms and a pretty unique situation). Why not just judge them on their own terms - how they compare to each other ie in a World Cup? If you don't find the football worth watching, that's fair enough. I just don't think trying to suggest how they would fare in men's football is at all helpful, needed, or justified. Well said. I don't understand why some always feel the need to compare it with the men's game. Do they watch Serena Williams and think about how Federer would beat her? When Dina Asher-Smith wins a race are they thinking that a top male sprinter would beat her? How pointless. i agree
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 14, 2019 10:40:46 GMT 1
Scotlan v japan japan are a team in transition and whilt they look neat on hte ball, they struggled to have any cutting edge in the last third, you would hope Scotland might get somthing from this.
England v Argentina
England have not looked a team who will reach the semies, so they really will need to improve,they look disorganised in the back and have struggled with set pices. going forward the main threat has come down the right wing,i am sure coaches will have noticed this.
Argentina had a very congested midfield with a lot of players behind the ball against Japan and broke with pace in there counter attacks. if England dont have more variety in there attack they might struggle to break Argentina down.
|
|
|
Post by vixenshrew on Jun 14, 2019 12:43:56 GMT 1
Find the regular comparison with the men's game frustrating and slightly baffling. I can't say I've heard many people at all talk about how good female cricketers would be against men, or rugby players, or athletes (apart from Caster Semenya, but that is a whole can of worms and a pretty unique situation). Why not just judge them on their own terms - how they compare to each other ie in a World Cup? If you don't find the football worth watching, that's fair enough. I just don't think trying to suggest how they would fare in men's football is at all helpful, needed, or justified. Well said. I don't understand why some always feel the need to compare it with the men's game. Do they watch Serena Williams and think about how Federer would beat her? When Dina Asher-Smith wins a race are they thinking that a top male sprinter would beat her? How pointless. The thread was put out as a topic of interest that's all. During the closed season when we don't have a lot else to talk about different threads come on and why not? Some people are interested in them, others aren't. So regardless of whether it is pointless or not if your not interested then don't follow the thread - simples!
|
|
|
Post by gtismygod on Jun 14, 2019 13:15:19 GMT 1
Do people actually believe the games are 'good quality' or 'good to watch'? Or do people say it because it's the PC thing to say?
I watched some of last night's game and thought the quality was awful.
Terrible first touches, crosses going out for throw ins... It's crazy to think that these are the best female players on the planet.
The own goal really summed the women's game up. Dopey goalkeeping and awful defending.
They need to play on smaller pitches than the men because the pace is so slow and it makes it really dull to watch. The goalposts should also be smaller because the keepers are much smaller than the men (and also not very good at stopping shots).
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 14, 2019 14:55:43 GMT 1
first 22 minutes rather cagey with both teams canceling each other out, but Scotlands defence swith off and get punished, the goal took hte winbd out of scotlands sails , as Japan started to find the pockets of space. a goal mouth clearence. then another soft goal a nothing long ball the scots defender puts her hand on the japanes player who promptly goes down. penalty 2-0. the cross bar saves scotland. Scotland not able to open up Japan and look pondorus going forward and just not doing enough in the last third. the next goal is Crucial lets hope Scotland can re group.
|
|
|
Post by leonidrogozov on Jun 14, 2019 15:03:29 GMT 1
Well said. I don't understand why some always feel the need to compare it with the men's game. Do they watch Serena Williams and think about how Federer would beat her? When Dina Asher-Smith wins a race are they thinking that a top male sprinter would beat her? How pointless. The thread was put out as a topic of interest that's all. During the closed season when we don't have a lot else to talk about different threads come on and why not? Some people are interested in them, others aren't. So regardless of whether it is pointless or not if your not interested then don't follow the thread - simples! Surely the thread about the Women's World Cup is the correct place to discuss perceptions of women's football?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 14, 2019 15:20:53 GMT 1
Do people actually believe the games are 'good quality' or 'good to watch'? Or do people say it because it's the PC thing to say? Yeah, they do. I enjoy watching it and I think the quality is decent enough. I think you get the PC thing when folk are trying to compare the two, that the women's game is on a par with the men's game in some way. That's simply not true (I mean at the highest levels). But then I don't think that bothers an awful lot of us who just enjoy our football and enjoy watching a game. I don't need football to be played at a certain level to enjoy it...👍
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 14, 2019 15:26:38 GMT 1
Enjoying what I've seen so far anyhow. The French look really good. The Germans too. I didn't get to see the US so not sure what that cricket score means for the tournament (whether that says more about Thailand than the US). And dare I say I thought England looked decent enough in the first half too. Dropped off second half with Scotland picking things up but if they can get that first half display going again we should do alright. Suspect they'll have another difficult task ahead tonight though... Other than that, I do enjoy watching the Norwegians. Very easy on the eye...
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Jun 14, 2019 15:56:53 GMT 1
for 25 minutes in the second half it looked like a training ground game for japan, Scotland loked static and ponderous with only Cuthbert showing any intenisty going forward, the subs had an impact some real tenacity from there number 18 and then a well taken shoot by the second sub, cuthbert hit the post but too little too late from scotland . very disapointing showed japan too much respect and really did not get to grips with the game.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jun 14, 2019 16:12:24 GMT 1
Well said. I don't understand why some always feel the need to compare it with the men's game. Do they watch Serena Williams and think about how Federer would beat her? When Dina Asher-Smith wins a race are they thinking that a top male sprinter would beat her? How pointless. i agree but what is wrong with comparing it ? I've seen it discussed on national tv before now the examples you give are silly, they are not going to beat the top men at their sports , no one is suggesting that I genuinely would like to gauge where the top womens side fit into the rank on the male level
|
|
|
Post by vixenshrew on Jun 14, 2019 19:12:59 GMT 1
The thread was put out as a topic of interest that's all. During the closed season when we don't have a lot else to talk about different threads come on and why not? Some people are interested in them, others aren't. So regardless of whether it is pointless or not if your not interested then don't follow the thread - simples! Surely the thread about the Women's World Cup is the correct place to discuss perceptions of women's football? Yes and?
|
|