Hope Powell

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
thereisonlyoneno7 said:
I must admit, I thought I was back in 1975 reading this thread, then I realised I couldn't be because 'man' hadn't invented the internet :)

Seriously, are there people still in 2013 with these views on women? Mankind (I use the general term to mean all humans - not the politically correct one) can do any job or sport as well as all other members of the human race, independent of their origin, gender or sexual orientation. As Fran said 'conditioning' is BS as it is learned. Women that succeed in any area of business or sport or whatever are normally far better than a man in the equivalent role as they have had to overcome the bigotry heard in some of these posts.

I value other people's opinions, but honestly, people...we are in 2013 and educated...do some of you really believe the crap that is being said?!!!
Click to expand...

That isn't true though. As I said before, I'm completely pro-equality. However we have to acknowledge that there are fundamental differences between genders. Men are physically stronger and faster than women, by nature. So no, women will not be able to achieve as highly as men in many sports, such as sprinting for example. The 100m record for men is considerably higher than for women for a reason.

This topic is about managing though, not physical aptitude at sport. For me, the differences between men and women in terms of managing still exist, but are probably less prominent than physical differences. For example, men are less likely to be overrun by emotion, and men are more authoritative on the whole and are hence more likely to command the respect of the dressing room. Obviously there are differences person-to-person; Maggie Thatcher was mentioned earlier and she is certainly more authoritative than the average man.

Women too will obviously have their advantages, such as dealing with players as people better. However, on the whole, it is not a bigoted view to suggest that men have inherent qualities that place them in a better suited position to be football managers than women.
 
A woman could possibly manage a League side in the future,although i suspect it wont be for a long time, and i would be distraught if a woman took over the managers role at St Mary's, but there is no way that a woman could ever make it in the mens professional game as a player, as they wouldnt be able to match the physicality of men.
Imagine the uproar if a woman was allowed to play in the mens game and got caught by a late tackle and got seriously injured.
I think most men would be wary of making a strong tackle on a woman.
Woman are quite capable of doing a lot of jobs in football, as shown by Sian Massey who in my opinion is one of the best assistants in the league, Karen Brady, the Chelsea physio, plus all of the kit washers and tea ladies (joke), but honestly if they want roles as players, managers or coaches they should stick to the womans game.
 
Saint Birdsnest said:
This topic is about managing though, not physical aptitude at sport. For me, the differences between men and women in terms of managing still exist, but are probably less prominent than physical differences. For example, men are less likely to be overrun by emotion, and men are more authoritative on the whole and are hence more likely to command the respect of the dressing room.
. However, on the whole, it is not a bigoted view to suggest that men have inherent qualities that place them in a better suited position to be football managers than women.
Click to expand...

Wow, this is such a generalized, sweeping and naïve statement. "Men are more authoritative on the whole"; "Women too will obviously have their advantages, such as dealing with players as people better". These two comments alone are appalling. I think you need to re-write those with a precursor: "In my experience and the people I have met only...."

For every authoritative man, I'll quote you an equally authoritative woman (you even did yourself). For every woman with good people skills (soft skills is what I think you mean), I'll quote you a hard nosed bitch or a man with equal soft skills for "dealing with people better".

I'm sorry if this post sounds rude SaintBirdsnest, but your post to me shows an underlying bigotry in itself; you just might not realize it's there.
 
Tottonsaint said:
, and i would be distraught if a woman took over the managers role at St Mary's,

but honestly if they want roles as players, managers or coaches they should stick to the womans game.
Click to expand...

OMG. We really have not moved on from the 50s and 60s have we?

Why would you be "distraught" if a woman took over as manager at St.Mary's? I can't think of one reason why I'd be distraught for crying out loud. If she was a good football manager and the club thought she could do the job, great. You'll tell me next your are distraught an Argentinian took over as manager.

Re-read your last comment, it sounds appalling to me.
 
I would guarantee that if a woman got a manager's job in the PL she would be the second coming. No woman would get such a job without being the best manager on the planet. I think it is unlikely, but nothing to fear if it happened.
 
fatletiss said:
Wow, this is such a generalized, sweeping and naïve statement. "Men are more authoritative on the whole"; "Women too will obviously have their advantages, such as dealing with players as people better". These two comments alone are appalling. I think you need to re-write those with a precursor: "In my experience and the people I have met only...."

For every authoritative man, I'll quote you an equally authoritative woman (you even did yourself). For every woman with good people skills (soft skills is what I think you mean), I'll quote you a hard nosed bitch or a man with equal soft skills for "dealing with people better".

I'm sorry if this post sounds rude SaintBirdsnest, but your post to me shows an underlying bigotry in itself; you just might not realize it's there.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your opinion, but I disagree. I just think a lot of people are bending over backwards to support equality, but are stepping too far in that direction. A bit like with the whole racism saga, people try so hard not to be seen as racist that it's now a grey area if you want to describe someone as 'black'.

My statement was only a generalized, sweeping statement if you misinterpret it. I was by no means saying all men are more authoritative than women, and all women have better 'soft skills', I thought I made that clear. I was saying that on the whole, that men are more likely to be more authoritative etc., not always, but as a general rule. There will obviously be exceptions to the rule, but on the whole that's just the way things are.

I think we all accept the physical differences between genders, because clearly men are physically different to women. However I fail to see why so many people are so uptight about acknowledging differences between genders regarding their personalities, such as how authoritative they are.
 
You'll tell me next your are distraught an Argentinian took over as manager.

Dont you love the way people try to twist things. I dont care what nationality the Saints manager is, as long as it isnt a woman, because clearly there are none that are up to the job, and wont be for a very long time, if ever.
 
Tottonsaint said:
You'll tell me next your are distraught an Argentinian took over as manager.

Dont you love the way people try to twist things. I dont care what nationality the Saints manager is, as long as it isnt a woman, because clearly there are none that are up to the job, and wont be for a very long time, if ever.
Click to expand...

Oh hang on, "twisting things". Sounds like you are now. You now say it is because there isn't a woman up to the job ... your statement earlier didn't mention when, just said you'd be distraught if a woman was in charge.

Are you prepared to answer my earlier question? I'll word it out again for you in case you missed it:

If one of the best coaches were a woman, would you be "distraught" if she got the saints job? let's just humor me, shall we and be hypothetical.
 
If she had proved herself to be an excellent manager then no i wouldnt be distraught at all, same as i wouldnt be upset if we hired a black manager, an argentinian or a muslim. Would probably draw the line at a Skate though.<laugh>.
But at the present time,and probably during my lifetime, i would be distraught if a woman was taken on as first team manager.
 
Saint Birdsnest said:
I appreciate your opinion, but I disagree. I just think a lot of people are bending over backwards to support equality, but are stepping too far in that direction. A bit like with the whole racism saga, people try so hard not to be seen as racist that it's now a grey area if you want to describe someone as 'black'.

My statement was only a generalized, sweeping statement if you misinterpret it. I was by no means saying all men are more authoritative than women, and all women have better 'soft skills', I thought I made that clear. I was saying that on the whole, that men are more likely to be more authoritative etc., not always, but as a general rule. There will obviously be exceptions to the rule, but on the whole that's just the way things are.

I think we all accept the physical differences between genders, because clearly men are physically different to women. However I fail to see why so many people are so uptight about acknowledging differences between genders regarding their personalities, such as how authoritative they are.
Click to expand...

It's a good debate Saintbirdsnest and I think I see your point. Couple of points though.

I have no problem referring to someone as "black" or "white'. They are descriptive words and to me don't imply a "view".

You have said that your statement was only sweeping or generalized if it is misinterpreted, yet in the next sentence you say "as a general rule" and "on the whole". I still think that is sweeping.

What is wrong with supporting equality? I would say that supporting it is better than going against it. Equality isn't about having even numbers, it is about the right person for the job based on skill sets and abilities. I also am not uptight about acknowledging differences regarding personalities between genders, because I don't acknowledge that. We have evolved as a race and continue to evolve even as different genders. One could argue that men are evolving into a more varied type with less authoritarian skills and greater soft skills.
 
I think this topic has shown more than enough reasons as to why there will not be a female manager in the Premiership for a long, long time. The fact is, there's too many dinosaurs still walking the Earth, as well as the talent pool in women's coaching not being anywhere near deep enough right now.

'Why England Lose' (which is a fantastic book by the way) theorised a number of reasons for nations to develop as footballing powers and reading them back, they do relate to the development of women in football too. Aside from factors which in this instance do not matter (disease, infant mortality etc.), relevant factors are social acceptance, funding, pool of available people and accessibility. In recent years these have all improved dramatically with regard to women's football, so in theory, there is no reason why a strong female coach could not develop over the next 20-30 years and be accepted in the mens game. The real obstacle, as it turns out from reading the posts on here, would be the number of older people who are fundamentally opposed to having women in leading roles in the mens game.

It's interesting, because there's really no good argument for this not to happen over a long time frame, but I guess traditional mentalities are tough to let go of. As was said previously if a woman gets a top job in the mens game, she will have to be bloody good. Good enough to silence all the many doubters that would be out there.
 
Tottonsaint said:
If she had proved herself to be an excellent manager then no i wouldnt be distraught at all, same as i wouldnt be upset if we hired a black manager, an argentinian or a muslim. Would probably draw the line at a Skate though.<laugh>.
But at the present time,and probably during my lifetime, i would be distraught if a woman was taken on as first team manager.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's cool. If you re-read what you originally posted, it reads as if you wouldn't accept a female manager at the club because she was female. I agree there is no female manager available that I am aware of to do that job today. If there was, I'd have no issues at all.

On the Skate front, we did get Alan ball back.
 
Strewth guys it's Saturday morning and we are getting a bit serious.
Gender alone should not and would not rule out a women as a manager. I truly believe that the fairer sex will break into management in the not too distant future. The biggest thing she will have to over come is the male ego! I think it would be quite a while before they can break into top level management but I have no doubt it can and will happen. There are already a few Female managers in the ladies leagues and not doing so badly either. If people are of the opinion that league Football is going to remain an all male dominated management system.....It is my opinion they are very naïve.......JMO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back