Women's Football Thread

[Locotoro]

In light of the success of England's Women's Football team and the rise of the Women's game I thought it would be a good idea to make a thread concerning all things Women's football.

I think it's time that it started getting the respect it deserves. Whilst we can all appreciate when you compare it to the Men's game it is well short on quality however if, like me, you consider it a different sport you can appreciate that it is far more tactical than Men's football and the slower pace and relatively homogeneous physical attributes of the players makes it far more competitive and evenly matched.

Next big match is this weekend's FA Cup final at Wembley between Notts County and Chelsea. I for one will be cheering on Notts County as a family member plays for them.

 

[Locotoro]

Well, quite disappointed with the cup final result and the quality of both team. It would seem that it followed the typical footballing cup final in being a cagey and nervous affair. Particularly disappointed with Notts in that they had the stronger team and yet they failed to test the keeper entirely (bar a goal line clearance).

My family member was distraught after the match and didn't want to talk about it at all. Still, the spread on the Bobby Moore suite cheered us all up so that was nice and the banter my London Cabbie cousin was giving the Chelsea families for having Uber as a training kit sponsor was gold.

On another note an example of the disparity in prize money. Mens FA Cup winners club get £1.8million whereas the women's FA Cup winners get a paltry £5000.

 

[Col_M]

Loco, with all due respect, disparity in the prize money is because one attracts television audiences in 200 countries and the other attracts a hen party in a mini bus.

It's getting some headlines but if you watched any of the World Cup you'd know that it was at a very poor level.

 

[thinktank]

In light of the success of England's Women's Football team and the rise of the Women's game I thought it would be a good idea to make a thread concerning all things Women's football.

I think it's time that it started getting the respect it deserves. Whilst we can all appreciate when you compare it to the Men's game it is well short on quality however if, like me, you consider it a different sport you can appreciate that it is far more tactical than Men's football and the slower pace and relatively homogeneous physical attributes of the players makes it far more competitive and evenly matched.

Next big match is this weekend's FA Cup final at Wembley between Notts County and Chelsea. I for one will be cheering on Notts County as a family member plays for them.

Sorry, dude, that's just rubbish.

What I can appreciate is that you have an emotional attachment to the women's game due to a family member being involved at a high level and can totally understand that. But we have to stop with the fantasy about where the women's game is right now. I don't think it helps.

I'm sure it will keep developing and hope it does. I've never enjoyed women's tennis as much (sometimes more than the men's) since the Williams sisters came through and raised the standard to a whole new level; it will take that sort of shift in women's football, I suspect, and it's going to take time.

But to say it's more tactical and more competitive is just ridiculous. Sorry bud. Love ya still, loco.

 

[DEFchenkOE]

It's a shame the spurs team isn't in the wsl.

 

[Locotoro]

Sorry, dude, that's just rubbish.

What I can appreciate is that you have an emotional attachment to the women's game due to a family member being involved at a high level and can totally understand that. But we have to stop with the fantasy about where the women's game is right now. I don't think it helps.

I'm sure it will keep developing and hope it does. I've never enjoyed women's tennis as much (sometimes more than the men's) since the Williams sisters came through and raised the standard to a whole new level; it will take that sort of shift in women's football, I suspect, and it's going to take time.

But to say it's more tactical and more competitive is just ridiculous. Sorry bud. Love ya still, loco.

After re-reading my post I realise that I didn't make my point correctly. What I meant by that sentence was not that it was more tactical than the men's game, but that tactics are more important in women's football comparative to mens football.
Most of the women are, relatively speaking, on an even keel in terms of physical attributes, and the ones that are a but faster or stronger or tall like the totally average yet lauded as "the female Peter Crouch" Jill Scott really do stand out. So the importance of setting out a team tactically and getting the team to play with strategy is so important because you're unlikely to have a moment of genius from one of your players.

Obviously I accept the emotional attachment that I have but I'll be the first one to say that you can have absolute dog mess of a player competing in the same 11 as players of real ability and this is where women's football is at the minute.

The comment about being more competitive also has the same caveat, I meant it relative to each other. Because you have some real weaknesses in the team they can always be exploited. The Arsenal women's team of about 8 years ago was dominant and won title after title, but the reason for that was because they hoarded all the talent on contracts whereas the other sides would barely get any funding and when you have so few really talented players in England it's easy to buy a team and win a title.

My comment on disparity is still valid though. Whilst the men's game makes so much more money - there's a need to reinvest in the women's game because it doesn't generate that same income. Wembley had a crowd of 30k for the final, a couple of the Team GB matches had the full 80k and yet they hardly see any of that revenue. That's hardly an investment in Women's football.

On the Spurs team, I know a couple of the girls and they really are not WSL quality, I think they would need some serious financial doping (the same way Liverpool and Man City have in the last 3 seasons) for them to get anywhere close.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

After re-reading my post I realise that I didn't make my point correctly. What I meant by that sentence was not that it was more tactical than the men's game, but that tactics are more important in women's football comparative to mens football.
Most of the women are, relatively speaking, on an even keel in terms of physical attributes, and the ones that are a but faster or stronger or tall like the totally average yet lauded as "the female Peter Crouch" Jill Scott really do stand out. So the importance of setting out a team tactically and getting the team to play with strategy is so important because you're unlikely to have a moment of genius from one of your players.

Obviously I accept the emotional attachment that I have but I'll be the first one to say that you can have absolute dog mess of a player competing in the same 11 as players of real ability and this is where women's football is at the minute.

The comment about being more competitive also has the same caveat, I meant it relative to each other. Because you have some real weaknesses in the team they can always be exploited. The Arsenal women's team of about 8 years ago was dominant and won title after title, but the reason for that was because they hoarded all the talent on contracts whereas the other sides would barely get any funding and when you have so few really talented players in England it's easy to buy a team and win a title.

My comment on disparity is still valid though. Whilst the men's game makes so much more money - there's a need to reinvest in the women's game because it doesn't generate that same income. Wembley had a crowd of 30k for the final, a couple of the Team GB matches had the full 80k and yet they hardly see any of that revenue. That's hardly an investment in Women's football.

On the Spurs team, I know a couple of the girls and they really are not WSL quality, I think they would need some serious financial doping (the same way Liverpool and Man City have in the last 3 seasons) for them to get anywhere close.

Still no.

 

[Locotoro]

Still no.

How bloody informative of you.

Why not bless us with your extensive and detailed knowledge

 

[Col_M]

Loco I think this thread show the blackbird interest in Women's football. They are trying to break into a sport that's Ben going for over 100 years with many fans growing up with their tribal behaviours.
Compare that to US where it's flourishing probably because the only female sport played nationwide was Lacrosse.

 

[Locotoro]

Loco I think this thread show the blackbird interest in Women's football. They are trying to break into a sport that's Ben going for over 100 years with many fans growing up with their tribal behaviours.
Compare that to US where it's flourishing probably because the only female sport played nationwide was Lacrosse.

That's an excellent point.

I realise the Women's game in the UK is going to be a slow burner but I'm sure we'll see it improve continuously. The US operates a slightly different payment systems which makes Football a realistic career option. Some the leading players are paid $2 to $3 million a year. However the difference is that this is paid for by the League and not the club. Whereas in England the Clubs pay a salary, probably around £20 to 30k pa and about half the number in the England squad get another 20k on top. It goes to show that one of the better players in England's squad has to work part time as a plasterer in order to keep the money coming in because she isn't one of the lucky few with a central contract.

 

[WalkerboyUK]

Loco I think this thread show the blackbird interest in Women's football. They are trying to break into a sport that's Ben going for over 100 years with many fans growing up with their tribal behaviours.
Compare that to US where it's flourishing probably because the only female sport played nationwide was Lacrosse.

Difficult to compare any sport in the US to how it's done here in the UK.
Most US professional sport comes of the back of an incredibly solid College/University structure, where the stars of the future hone their game. Look at the crazy attendances that they get a college football games!!!
Women's football is on the rise in the US because they truly support it at the lowest level.
That will never be matched over here.

 

[Dirty Ewok]

Difficult to compare any sport in the US to how it's done here in the UK.
Most US professional sport comes of the back of an incredibly solid College/University structure, where the stars of the future hone their game. Look at the crazy attendances that they get a college football games!!!
Women's football is on the rise in the US because they truly support it at the lowest level.
That will never be matched over here.

It's not that clear cut though.

American College football continues to grow in popularity, there are numerous reasons for this not the least of it is the fact that the popularity of the sport as a whole continues to grow (you can often watch High school games on TV now). There are cultural and monetary reasons and people have written massive amounts on the how's and why's of the growth but there is one important thing to take away from all of it.

Just because American college football is popular don't make the mistake in thinking that other college sport are just as popular with audiences in the US. It simply isn't the case.

I am living in a "college town" at the moment with a massive University in town and i can assure you that the attendance at the women's soccer (football) games are not even in the same universe. The pitch that the women play their matches is literally in the shadow of the college football stadium on campus....the University regularly gets 90,000+ people into the football stadium for a game (regardless if it is a shit game or a massive rivalry game), a few yards away the women may get 1,000 for a big match and significantly less for less important match.

I brought my niece to a match last season and i paid $4 for a ticket and she was allowed in for free, there was maybe 300 people there....the team is fairly successful and the school has a student population (not including staff, faculty or locals) of 40,000+. With that type of population you would have thought more people would have shown up just by accident.

Because of the explosion of TV and TV rights i can now turn to the Big10 Network, the Pac12 Network, the SEC network, the Longhorn network etc all of which are dedicated to the sports of these college sports conferences. These channels are DESPERATE for content, I have 12 channels of the PAC-12 network (1 for each school), they show anything they can including a huge amount of women's soccer (football) and there are never big crowds at these matches. There are never big crowds at these matches regardless if you compare them to American Football or women's volleyball....people just don't seem to go to the matches.

So it isn't a case of American's going to support the lowest level of the sport through attendance, because....they aren't.

The US supports the sport at the lowest levels through a LEGAL REQUIREMENT called Title IX that ensures that these women's sports programs are provided funding from the universities. This means that in the US they have been putting money behind the sport (and other women's sports) since 1972 (incidentally the FA was forced to lift a ban on the sport in the UK in 1973) whether they wanted to or not in order to fulfil a legal requirement.

There has been a great deal studied and written about the growth in popularity of women's football but one of the things that stands out in with the growth of the sport in the US, and is likely more visible because of the population difference (there are 158 million women in the US and 63 million total people in the UK), is that there is a market for people to watch the sport and slowly the sport is gaining a following that is starting with women but carrying over to men as well.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

How bloody informative of you.

Why not bless us with your extensive and detailed knowledge

I was trying to figure out why the womens world cup bugged me so much. Then I figured it out, it was the same thing that bugs me every mens world cup and euro that England take part in. The ridiculous disparity in reality and hype. Except this was somehow worse because we had to listen to the "women showing the men how it's done" and "if only the men could show this much commitment" etc etc. nonsense too. It was hype ladled on top of hype.

When the fact is England women only actually beat one team seeded above them, in the final game. There are only about 6 teams in womens world football who can play the game coherently. There are about 50 teams playing the mens game to a standard that England have to compete with, about 180 playing better football than the best womens team. Even the top 10 seeded women's teams int the world would get hammered by some boys U12 teams. The odd player shows decent technique and football nous but the vast majority are genuinely on a par with most village football you'll see blokes play up and down the country on parks in front of 6 geezers and their pet spaniels.

And that would be fine if people were calling it what it is. But they aren't, they are calling it lots of things it isn't. What it is, is technically very poor, tactically rudimentary (my 12yo nephew's (lower league) academy team are technically better and tactically more proficient), creatively bereft and if we didn't have to listen to every talking head in the media, including every bird who's ever played the game who can string a sentence together, telling us how fabulous women's football is, it would be fine, we could watch it and say "hey, the qualities very poor but she's pretty technically proficient" etc but because we are getting this evangelical rubbish rammed down our throats now, it just inflames your hype gland.

We are not allowed to chuckle at it, like we do every other level of football, that would be derogatory and sexist and politically incorrect. When really it's got nothing to with sexism, it's just good old fashioned footballism/football snobbery. If people are playing shit football I want the right to snigger at at, regardless of their sex and I don't want some pundit telling me it's brilliant when it's not regarles of the gender of the pundit or football.

 

[Locotoro]

I was trying to figure out why the womens world cup bugged me so much. Then I figured it out, it was the same thing that bugs me every mens world cup and euro that England take part in. The ridiculous disparity in reality and hype. Except this was somehow worse because we had to listen to the "women showing the men how it's done" and "if only the men could show this much commitment" etc etc. nonsense too. It was hype ladled on top of hype.

When the fact is England women only actually beat one team seeded above them, in the final game. There are only about 6 teams in womens world football who can play the game coherently. There are about 50 teams playing the mens game to a standard that England have to compete with, about 180 playing better football than the best womens team. Even the top 10 seeded women's teams int the world would get hammered by some boys U12 teams. The odd player shows decent technique and football nous but the vast majority are genuinely on a par with most village football you'll see blokes play up and down the country on parks in front of 6 geezers and their pet spaniels.

And that would be fine if people were calling it what it is. But they aren't, they are calling it lots of things it isn't. What it is, is technically very poor, tactically rudimentary (my 12yo nephew's (lower league) academy team are technically better and tactically more proficient), creatively bereft and if we didn't have to listen to every talking head in the media, including every bird who's ever played the game who can string a sentence together, telling us how fabulous women's football is, it would be fine, we could watch it and say "hey, the qualities very poor but she's pretty technically proficient" etc but because we are getting this evangelical rubbish rammed down our throats now, it just inflames your hype gland.

We are not allowed to chuckle at it, like we do every other level of football, that would be derogatory and sexist and politically incorrect. When really it's got nothing to with sexism, it's just good old fashioned footballism/football snobbery. If people are playing shit football I want the right to snigger at at, regardless of their sex and I don't want some pundit telling me it's brilliant when it's not regarles of the gender of the pundit or football.

Ok, so if you had responded in such fashion in the first place you wouldn't have come across the way you did. Do I agree with you? In parts yes and in parts no.

I agree that the Women's game gets a lot of hype. More than the talent deserves but why exactly do you think that is? It's because Women's Football is part of the business of football. The actual sport of Women's Football may not generate enough money to even break even, in fact it's heavily subsidised. But investment in Women's football increases the marketing potential of Football in general and Clubs ability to appeal to both Boys and Girls alike. Whereas previously buying an England shirt with Lineker or Gascoigne on the back would have been a market mainly reserved for males, old and young alike. Parents would get a shirt for the boy and get a my little pony for the girl. Now clubs are tapping into the idea that the little girls also want to have their hero's, their role models on the pitch. A parent with girls can now go a buy a dedicated women's club shirt with a female players name on the back and that little sprite will be more likely to keep supporting the club because her other girl friends do too. It's all part of a bigger marketing strategy and that's why the overhype is necessary. So yes the womens game is overhyped in terms of comparative talent with the men's.

I completely disagree with your assessment of the ability of some of the professionals. Whilst they are no where near the ability of the men, it's clear you've never seen a professional female player up close and you're probably basing it on some bird who played football with the guys after work because she wanted to look sporty. No.

I've watched first hand the Women's England team compete and beat the US U18 men side in unofficial friendlies quite comfortably despite the huge physical disadvantages. I've also seen them push an U20 US Men side to a competitive match, albeit a defeat. So they are far from being as good as your regular Hackney Marshes pub football crowd. Admittedly there are a few cloggers in the women's sport but that is the same as the men too.

On your final point, you've got every right to criticise. You should see me when I go to matches, I get so wound up by some of the God awful play that you wouldn't believe I held these views but that's because I've seen the good aspects of the women's game and it pissed me off when I see some of the tripe that gets trotted out on the pitch.

 

[Gbspurs]

 

[TheGreatOldOne]

I would.

 

[thinktank]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...ten-7-0-by-newcastle-jets-under-15-boys-team/

 

[DEFchenkOE]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...ten-7-0-by-newcastle-jets-under-15-boys-team/

I would say that's pretty much to be expected. As the coach mentions:

"It all relative," he said. "It's no different from [the sort of result you'd expect] from a female tennis player or a female swimmer against a 15- or 16-year-old boy who's maturing and starting to develop physically."

"They have to be looked upon as two separate entities."

Boys/young men will pretty much always be on another level to women in sport that requires physicality. Imagine a 15 year old male boxer against a 21 year old female. The 15 year old male will win pretty much every time.

 

[Locotoro]

I would say that's pretty much to be expected. As the coach mentions:

"It all relative," he said. "It's no different from [the sort of result you'd expect] from a female tennis player or a female swimmer against a 15- or 16-year-old boy who's maturing and starting to develop physically."

"They have to be looked upon as two separate entities."

Boys/young men will pretty much always be on another level to women in sport that requires physicality. Imagine a 15 year old male boxer against a 21 year old female. The 15 year old male will win pretty much every time.

I agree.

But does that mean we should not appreciate the skill or ability if the female boxer in her own right?