Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Hoola Han Solo said:

For someone not interested in women’s football, you don’t half spend a lot of time whingeing about it.

Perhaps because it's on telly a lot lately & I pay a licence fee. I'd be equally annoyed if they devoted as much time to tiddlywinks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

 

I think your assertions are frankly ludicrous.

The only knowledge I have of women's football is what I've seen of it.

I desired to be the best that I could at football. Does that mean I should appear on tv? 

Having pride in your performances, your desire to win, does not entitle you to special treatment. If those were the yardsticks, why not televise every sporting event in the country? How do you decide which deserves to be shown? Why would you choose to watch games where all the measurable performance levels are on a par with a decent schoolboy's team?

The rising popularity of women's football is questionable, as Molly pointed out above & as did. the Guardian article I quoted. It's being pushed by a feminist ideology of women being as good as men (if not better) at anything & everything. There are plenty of people willing to go along with this despite all objective evidence because, one way or another, there's profit in it for them (for the time being).

Which as you say is very little, which means your knowledge is very little. Which your comments demonstrate time and time again. Inverse to this, I have watched/written a lot about women’s football, so by your own measure I must know a lot more about it than you. Or are you claiming that despite not actually having much knowledge you are in a great position to comment on it? 

You have an agenda and you seem to be trying to push reality to fit that - when it clearly doesn’t. 

Women’s football is gaining in popularity, especially televised women’s football. The 6.1m people who watched the England game on Sunday is hard evidence of that. That is a larger TV audience than every televised Norwich game last season combined. Those people obviously wanted to watch the match, despite your derogatory comments about the quality. 

The professionals that play football will, by and large, say they don’t want it compared with men’s football as they know there are differences between the two and women’s football should be enjoyed in its own right. It sounds like it isn’t for you, fair enough, but your insistence that no one actually likes it and it is all some conspiracy that it is even allowed to happen is weird.

I think you should stop worrying about feminism, it isn’t going to impact on your life. Greater gender equality/equity is actually likely to improve everyone’s quality of life through a stronger economy. 

Edited by Bethnal Yellow and Green
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

Perhaps because it's on telly a lot lately & I pay a licence fee. I'd be equally annoyed if they devoted as much time to tiddlywinks.

 

There’s probably s hite you like that others don’t, but I’m sure they wouldn’t be so upset about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say this is a real eye-opener. I thought all those men watching beach-volley ball on TV were just ogling the swimsuit-wearing young women. Turns out they are politically-aware fellow-travellers in thrall to radical feminism. Who knew, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Which as you say is very little, which means your knowledge is very little. Which your comments demonstrate time and time again. Inverse to this, I have watched/written a lot about women’s football, so by your own measure I must know a lot more about it than you. Or are you claiming that despite not actually having much knowledge you are in a great position to comment on it? 

You have an agenda and you seem to be trying to push reality to fit that - when it clearly doesn’t. 

Women’s football is gaining in popularity, especially televised women’s football. The 6.1m people who watched the England game on Sunday is hard evidence of that. That is a larger TV audience than every televised Norwich game last season combined. Those people obviously wanted to watch the match, despite your derogatory comments about the quality. 

The professionals that play football will, by and large, say they don’t want it compared with men’s football as they know there are differences between the two and women’s football should be enjoyed in its own right. It sounds like it isn’t for you, fair enough, but your insistence that no one actually likes it and it is all some conspiracy that it is even allowed to happen is weird.

I think you should stop worrying about feminism, it isn’t going to impact on your life. Greater gender equality/equity is actually likely to improve everyone’s quality of life through a stronger economy. 

If you think women's football is of a higher standard than 99% of men's football that never gets televised then you are seriously deluded.

You wouldn't have to watch me for more than 5 minutes (probably a lot less) to realise I'm not very good. Same applies to women's football (amongst a host of other things).

I have no prejudices about male & female abilities. I never thought women could play drums well, simply because I'd never seen one - until I saw Lenny Kravitz's drummer. And now there's Yoyoko, who at 9 years old can play drums at a top professional level; she's equivalent to a Premiership footballer. Please let me know if you think there are any women capable of playing in a Premiership football team.

In fact let me know when a professional men's football team considers a woman as team member.

And feminism does impact on my life, as it does on everyone's.

What does "women’s football should be enjoyed in its own right" mean exactly? You can apply that to anything.

I think you're the one who's pushing reality to fit an agenda.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Surfer said:

Meanwhile back to the football... expecting the mighty USA to thrash Thailand at least 2-0  😪

I may have misplaced a 1 in front of that 2 😪. Did the US not hear about the mercy rule? 

13-0 shows that comprised of women or men, US sports teams have no sense of class. 

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ron obvious said:

Perhaps because it's on telly a lot lately & I pay a licence fee. I'd be equally annoyed if they devoted as much time to tiddlywinks.

 

Bet you wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, lake district canary said:

Regarding pitch/goal sizes - men and women play on the same size tennis courts and there is no real issue.  The women's game there has developed though  - they are playing tennis with a lot more power than they used to - mainly due to improved techniques, fitness and equipment.

What I think will happen with goalkeepers in the ladies game is that taller girls will be targeted to take on the role - yes, I know taller women are already used in ladies football - I am talking about as the game develops and more girls play the game, there will be more scope for targeting extra tall girls to learn goalkeeping. That way you will see goalkeeping improve over time.

 

Are you saying evolution is simply going to result in taller women for football? 

I think the quotes from the Chelsea Womens Manager are spot on and would make for a better, hopefully more competitive game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ron obvious said:

From wiki:

Cultural feminism is the ideology of a "female nature" or "female essence" that attempts to revalidate what they consider undervalued female attributes.[18] It emphasizes the difference between women and men but considers that difference to be psychological, and to be culturally constructed rather than biologically innate

ah yes, that one strand of thought that supposedly represents all feminist thought 

and is one that if you had a clue about you would not have posted (from you favourite resource),

as your earlier post suggests that in every case men's abilities are better than women's, whereas the above states that there can be other causes - which rather contradicts your guff

'The problem is there's a feminist ideology that says women's abilities are no different to men'.

you would do well to understand your brief before spouting out your bigotry - then not being able to defend it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bill said:

ah yes, that one strand of thought that supposedly represents all feminist thought 

and is one that if you had a clue about you would not have posted (from you favourite resource),

as your earlier post suggests that in every case men's abilities are better than women's, whereas the above states that there can be other causes - which rather contradicts your guff

'The problem is there's a feminist ideology that says women's abilities are no different to men'.

you would do well to understand your brief before spouting out your bigotry - then not being able to defend it

I said The problem is there's a feminist ideology that says women's abilities are no different to men'.

A feminist ideology I said. There are others which do not. Read some Camille Paglia for example.

You're incapable of reasoned debate. I'm done with you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

I said The problem is there's a feminist ideology that says women's abilities are no different to men'.

A feminist ideology I said. There are others which do not. Read some Camille Paglia for example.

You're incapable of reasoned debate. I'm done with you.

I think it is more a case of you being incapable of defending a contradictory, and bigoted, view point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, I quite like women's football, sure, it has different qualities, but I liken it to youth football, it's more open,  there are more errors and a bit of naivety that makes it all the more entertaining. 

From what I've seen (not a great deal admittedly) the standard has improved over recent years and looks likely to continue, power to them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The part I find wrong is the people who make comparisons between the relative pay of mens and womens football in an attempt to suggest they should be equal.  In any sport, the salary of the competitors is a function of the money generated through ticket sales, TV coverage and other commercial activities which has some correlation to the quality of the product on offer.  In every variable above, the top level of the mens game will dwarf that of the womens so imo from a purely economist view, they absolutely should not have salaried artificially inflated for "equality" reasons.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BarclayWazza said:

The part I find wrong is the people who make comparisons between the relative pay of mens and womens football in an attempt to suggest they should be equal.  In any sport, the salary of the competitors is a function of the money generated through ticket sales, TV coverage and other commercial activities which has some correlation to the quality of the product on offer.  In every variable above, the top level of the mens game will dwarf that of the womens so imo from a purely economist view, they absolutely should not have salaried artificially inflated for "equality" reasons.  

Tbf that is quite a niche argument- I've seen people advocating for better pay but I've not seen anyone saying that an Arsenal Women's player should be on Ozil like wages.

This is quite a good interview with Toni Duggan on the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, king canary said:

Tbf that is quite a niche argument- I've seen people advocating for better pay but I've not seen anyone saying that an Arsenal Women's player should be on Ozil like wages.

This is quite a good interview with Toni Duggan on the issue.

I think there is much that can be done to improve the state of the womens game but I think you have to market it as something separate to the mens game rather than something that needs to be made more equal as the two are completely different things that are likely to appeal to different groups.

While I think you need to market the game separately, the first way you're going to improve the quality of the game is to ingratiate their teams more with the mens teams, much like Manchester City. Allow them to use the same training facilities and have the games played in the main grounds, perhaps give tickets away to increase exposure.  

I guess in time it will be seen whether womens football can stand as it's own commercial entity but I dont think it will be helped by trying to equalise it to the mens game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as watching these games is an enjoyable option now that our season is over, the problem is that the pretty constant demonstration of inability to shoot straight, to head or pass the ball where it needs to go, and consistently wrong decision making - even from the top teams - is jarring. That's nothing to do with the difference between men's v's women's physical abilities, more a reflection of the current level of footballing skills. 

That's unfortunate and it'll get better I am sure. Hopefully as the tournament progresses the remaining teams confidence will increase and the standard of play will rise along with that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not dodgy - she made the slightest contact with the ball and then nearly knee capped the opponent. A desperate attempt to get the ball away, but mistimed it. Unintentional, but penalty all day long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually no as she had already played the ball

and if you take another look the French player jumps in with both feet off the ground

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bill said:

actually no as she had already played the ball

and if you take another look the French player jumps in with both feet off the ground

Played the ball?  She skimmed the top of it with a badly mistimed kick.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

Played the ball?  She skimmed the top of it with a badly mistimed kick.

 

Which is playing the ball, hence the ball moving in the same direction as her kick

and the law states

"... against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: "

Which although it is subjective I cannot see any of those three happening there.

Thems the laws, not what happened after she played the ball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bill said:

Which is playing the ball, hence the ball moving in the same direction as her kick

and the law states

"... against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: "

Which although it is subjective I cannot see any of those three happening there.

Thems the laws, not what happened after she played the ball

The french player got there quick enough to cause the defender problems - she jumped in but her feet were on the ground when she got to the ball.  The defender was unsettled and rushed her clearance, resulting in an over the top attempt to kick the ball, slight contact with it, but over the top of it, nevertheless.  Just because she made the slightest touch on it (it barely moves) does not exonerate her.  Unfortunate, but a penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but it comes down to the rule which is

... against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: "

explain where the rule applies there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bill said:

but it comes down to the rule which is

... against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: "

explain where the rule applies there

Well, kicking at the ball and practically missing it could be considered careless.....not to mention clattering into the other player in the process.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that could be considered mistimed at best but not careless., nor reckless as both require a degree of intent.

That supposed intent would have been seen without the need for VAR.

The game is drifting into a 'dangerous place where the result of an action is the determining factor, rather than the intent - as with the new handball rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Make the goals smaller / make adjustments to the women's game. Doesn't have to replicate mens football in its entirety. Focus on the fact that 49.6% of the world are women and market it more to them as something they can enjoy. You never know, women might enjoy going to football more if they're surrounded by other women as opposed to a balding middle-aged man with a gut taking up two seats and scratching his a*se every 2 minutes.

Doesn't have to be an exclusion of men or a "this is just for women now" but surely thats who they should target the sport with - men have their own teams already, it's pretty much ingrained in those of us who like football so women's football will only ever be a 'passing fancy' excluding perhaps the international stuff. However, its possible they could generate a core female fanbase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One advantage of "bigger" goals is they should be able to score often than in the mens' game, and that might be seen as a positive difference - it certainly would here in the US, people are used to high scoring sports. The problem I see at the moment is not that the goalkeepers aren't any good (some are, some are not) but there is a very low probability of a shot going anywhere near on target.

That problem should be solvable before they worry about reducing the size of the goals. Else they may finish up with a lot of 0-0's.

( US v Thailand an exception, but that was also a case of very poor sportsmanship, not unexpected from a US team unfortunately )  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×