http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20962988 It's a little off topic, in quite a boring week I thought I would post about women's football to see where everyone stands on it. Personally after watching the Olympics, it does feel like a different game, but I was surprised about the standard of it. I think it's actually quite good and they probably deserve more than they earn when you think about men's football. I've got a twin sister who was actually very good footballer, she played at Goodison Park in the National Semi finals for our school. A player she played with for a long time captained Aston Villa's youth team and now has a scholarship in America where it is probably most popular and heavily funded. When I was younger as well we used to have a few mixed gender teams in tournaments around Northampton and often the girls were just as good as the boys. So I've seen quite a lot of the standard at grassroots level. Although it was a few years ago. Obviously it's less physical but there is still a lot of skillful women playing, baring in mind as a country we are actually pretty good compared to other nations as well I think we should definitely invest a bit more into it, and it probably deserves more coverage. What's everyone else's take on it?
Ever since the Olympics, whenever England's woman have had a game on TV I've always watched it. I have to say, I like them better than the men's team (Except for a certain John Ruddy) because they actually perform consistently!
totally agree DM. i recall watching them play at carrow road a few years ago. the weather was absolutely horrendous and the football not much better! but technically the game is good - it just lacks the pace of the mens game. at least you get a good, honest game of football...
Agree, I do think 18,000 a year is disgraceful when you look at the men's game and all the money in that. The other thing is whether there will ever be a woman manager in the men's game. I remember Hope Powell nearly getting the Grimsby job. Honestly I would rather have her doing England U21's then Stuart Pearce.
Admittedly my knowledge of the women's game comes from hazy memories of 'Bend it like Beckham', but I'm under the impression that in the USA there is a fairly strong women's set-up, where you can at least earn decent money as a pro, rather than in the UK where the majority of our womens side have second jobs. They should definitely be paid more. I know the men's team donate all their match fees to charity, but I'd be interested to see what the match fee actually is. Whilst I can see clubs favouring the mens game as they make more money from it, it'd be nice to see the women's game treated equally by the FA.
Personally I think women should stay at home, look after the kids, do housework and stay in the kitchen. A nice welcome home with her wearing just a pinny and come to bed eyes too
It's pretty strange, I remember reading that despite it being at his highest standard in America, they don't actually have a national league set up. Think they are relaunching one this year to be fair, but they struggle drawing in consistent crowds. I think that we should try and exploit it, I know it's not the men's team, but if the women's national team won a major tournament it would have a huge effect on crowds I reckon. Similar to the cyclists success this year.
Isn't it £18k on top of what they earn from their clubs? Might be wrong but if so, not bad at all for a part time job and up 12.5% in this economic climate. Comparisons to the men's game are pointless IMHO. There's no real demand for it so there's no money in the sport without intervention from government or the FA. I guess it's a bit of a chicken and egg situation in terms of generating interest through the media and the like but, really, it's a bit crap. Personally I don't think it benefits the sport to play 11-a-side on a full-size pitch with full-size goals.
Yeah but they are pretty much doing the same thing as what England men players are doing? Because they're women they're getting paid less basically. ALOT less as well. Although I do think the women may have less games then the men do a year. I actually don't think that standard is that bad, plus think the demand has grown a bit after the Olympics. It needs even more demand though I agree. No idea how though.
They're different sports though. It's not like men and women are playing together and the women still get less. Regardless of how many games they actually play, their pay should be relative the wealth the sport generates. The goalkeepers let it down, so smaller goals would help, but even accounting for the physical difference, the standard is akin to the upper echelons of non-league at best from what I've seen. As for demand, if people want it more than just the occasional England match then it'll be reflected in booming attendances in the women's league, which isn't the case as far as I know.
But investing more money into it probably enable it to generate more money. I think it's difficult matching it up to a league, as you say it's almost a different sport. Bearing in mind the money that goes into the women's football compared to men's football though, I think it's at a pretty good standard.
I agree with the sentiments of the OP and am also quite happy to watch womens' cricket, too. Fine, they may shorten the boudary ropes by a few yards, but you still have to hit the thing over the bloody thing to score decent runs Some of the athleticism in the fielding is breathtaking - just as much as in the mens game.
Talking of cricket, did anyone see the amazing 'catch' by a wicket keeper in a one day match yesterday? Forgotten who the teams were but the ball got caught in the wicket keeper's helmet! What a way to catch a ball!
I think it's more out of English fans being stubborn and too traditional to not really accept it, which means there will never be be in huge demand.
Gen had tekkers and was like Gattuso at tackling. It's certainly very different to the womens football that used to be in the 90's on Eurosport it was always Doncaster and Arsenal I remember most of them were either stocky or a tad on the large side, the standard was poor. Now you see athletes who have technical skills it has changed as a sport and I thought the womens team in the Olympics were brilliant a lot better then the mens. Oh subject of womens football check out Alex Morgan you definitely would.
I will buck the trend here then..........I can't stand it and unless it has dramatically changed I will probably never get in to it. I am happy to admit it's been a few years (maybe 5 or 6 years) since I last saw a game, a Ladies final I believe where the defenders never challenged a ball coming in to the box! Indeed, real tackles anywhere on the pitch were few and far between. Now given that, why did the winning team (I am sure it was Arsenal) only score 4 times? They should have had a hat-full against the non-existent opposition. Plus - As Watford said, the goalies were terrible also. Overall I found it to be laughable, and based on that they barely deserved the money they were getting at that time as it was far from entertaining in terms of a sporting contest.
i saw the japan vs france semi at the olympics. technically, they are very good - but as mentioned above, the pace was in the main quite slow which made it a little boring. i think the standard will continue to rise
