The 'quality' of Womens Football (17 Viewers)

[Skyblueweeman]

Yeah so basically they need to be linked to a big club who can afford to throw loads of money at them.

Loads of money? I've already said it's a fraction of a 'big clubs' overall turnover. There's also a lot more money in the womens game due to TV deals.

It's like you think these womens teams are syphoning money from the mens game.

Sponsors of clubs will pay for the privelege of sponsoring mens and womens teams - it doesn't necessarily mean having a womens team will be detrimental to the mens team.

 

---

[Grendel]

Because clubs are businesses - you know as well as I do that revenues are not solely focused on 11 men on a pitch.

Do you think fans of Forest Green Rovers FC are up in arms with Dale Vince when he spends money on environmental initiatives and not spending that money on bringing in a new player??

he doesn’t that’s a bad example

So it's a publicity stunt?

Or could it be moving with the times?

It’s clubs with gut loads of cash virtue signalling

 

[Nick]

Loads of money? I've already said it's a fraction of a 'big clubs' overall turnover. There's also a lot more money in the womens game due to TV deals.

It's like you think these womens teams are syphoning money from the mens game.

Sponsors of clubs will pay for the privelege of sponsoring mens and womens teams - it doesn't necessarily mean having a womens team will be detrimental to the mens team.

Yes clubs like man city can afford it... That was what I said originally.

Look at how much cov utd women's needed to get through the season. They want to spend money, get money, act like big bend clubs and be equal to men but in reality, nobody really supports them.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Look, genuinely, I don't have more time to give on this one so it'll be my last post on the matter. For avoidance of doubt:

* I don't believe the womens game is an equal of the mens.
* I don't think it ever will be.
* But, I think it'll get better as they continue to bring more money into their game and have better coaching, better facilities, better opportunities, more exposure.
* There's reasons why it's not equal to the mens game - physicality of course - obviously. The ban until the 70s was detrimental as well.
* The womens game should have the chance to grow - even if that means 'invading' your current consumption of sports in the media.

Peace

 

[Evo1883]

I think it would have been better if the teams grew more automatically as opposed to being appendages of the mens teams.

Arsenal ladies don't trace their heritage back to Woolwich Arsenal.

If Arsenal wanted a woman's team they could have starting like Islington WFC or something then it might have been more interesting.

I understand why they did it as it is trying to encourage the supporters of those mens team to take an interest in the women side but completely fresh teams may have had people looking at it form a different angle.

I mean , most teams just represent the city or town they come from don't they ? That's the first step to getting local interest in any sports team really

 

[Evo1883]

Look, genuinely, I don't have more time to give on this one so it'll be my last post on the matter. For avoidance of doubt:

* I don't believe the womens game is an equal of the mens.
* I don't think it ever will be.
* But, I think it'll get better as they continue to bring more money into their game and have better coaching, better facilities, better opportunities, more exposure.
* There's reasons why it's not equal to the mens game - physicality of course - obviously. The ban until the 70s was detrimental as well.
* The womens game should have the chance to grow - even if that means 'invading' your current consumption of sports in the media.

Peace

I agree with you bud

 

[Skyblueweeman]

he doesn’t that’s a bad example


It’s clubs with gut loads of cash virtue signalling

Ok last one - Dale Vince does spend money on green initiatives.

Even today on LinkedIn he admitted to spending £10k (didnt catch the full interview) for environmental protestors. He also owns Ecotricity.

But yeah, he doesn't....

 

[Terry Gibson's perm]

Ok last one - Dale Vince does spend money on green initiatives.

Even today on LinkedIn he admitted to spending £10k (didnt catch the full interview) for environmental protestors. He also owns Ecotricity.

But yeah, he doesn't....

But that is his own money or company money if we want to spend money on ladies football it will come from the club unless Joy puts the money in separately and doesn’t add it to the clubs debt.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

But that is his own money or company money if we want to spend money on ladies football it will come from the club unless Joy puts the money in separately and doesn’t add it to the clubs debt.

Its money he could put into the club.

 

[Grendel]

Ok last one - Dale Vince does spend money on green initiatives.

Even today on LinkedIn he admitted to spending £10k (didnt catch the full interview) for environmental protestors. He also owns Ecotricity.

But yeah, he doesn't....

The club doesn’t so it’s a silly example. He spends money into the club.

 

[Grendel]

Its money he could put into the club.

so if Mercedes’ own a club and it spends money on a racing car it’s money it could put into the club - ok

 

[Moff]

My daughter did a training video for the FA and blue peter with Phil Foden , Gallagher and Smith Rowe last week

What age groups your two in Evo?
I wish them all the best.

I still wish my daughter was playing, she liked it at Leicester until one particular coach ruined it for her. She has a good mate who is doing really well with them, and another old mate with the Blues. I’m hoping she will go back one day, but only if she wants to and enjoys it again.

 

[Evo1883]

What age groups your two in Evo?
I wish them all the best.

I still wish my daughter was playing, she liked it at Leicester until one particular coach ruined it for her. She has a good mate who is doing really well with them, and another old mate with the Blues. I’m hoping she will go back one day, but only if she wants to and enjoys it again.

My eldest has just quit tbh , prefers watching city and i cant really force her to play ... my youngest is u10s .. one of the best sides in the region behind west brom really and not much else

They've also just gone on to the futsal regional finals too

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The answer is simple
Don't try and compare it to the men's game as it's like chalk and cheese
Just enjoy it for what it is and you'll be surprised just how good women's football is.

Yep it’s a different sport and it’s all relative

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

No disproportionate TV deals for top leagues, the one for the WSL gives 75% revenue to top flight and 25% to second tier.

How have they looked at the men's game and thought we'll replicate that? Unless it's literally the same executives making the same decisions.

To exacerbate that the Champions League further entrenches it by paying big prize money to qualifiers and achievers (who happen to be the teams that are already well backed) and solidarity payments to other top flight teams.

Was great when the Doncaster belles beat all before them

 

[Skyblueweeman]

so if Mercedes’ own a club and it spends money on a racing car it’s money it could put into the club - ok

Oh my god...I cant believe im biting but...

Why can't you take something for what it is without comparing it to a shitty example which doesn't prove you're right at all??

Let's make this easy.

Dale Vince has £100 to spend.
Dale spends £90 on a football club called Forest Green Rovers FC
Dale then spends £10 on a variety of environmental causes - his own Ecotricity company, environmental protests, electric car charging ports etc

Now, that £10 of Dales money, could he have also spent that on his FC?

A. Yes, because its his money and he can do what he wants with it?

B. No, because Grendel said something silly about a German can manufacturer and a car.

The difference between me and you G is that I'm more than happy to admit when I'm wrong. I even get that a number of people have different view points to me - so long as its backed up rationally and not because something is just 'shite' or 'makes me think its about mens football when I get a sky notification on my phone'.

I'm 100% leaving this one with you. If you comment after and want Internet brownie points, knock yourself out mate.

 

[Nick]

That's not forest green rovers spending it.

 

[Grendel]

Oh my god...I cant believe im biting but...

Why can't you take something for what it is without comparing it to a shitty example which doesn't prove you're right at all??

Let's make this easy.

Dale Vince has £100 to spend.
Dale spends £90 on a football club called Forest Green Rovers FC
Dale then spends £10 on a variety of environmental causes - his own Ecotricity company, environmental protests, electric car charging ports etc

Now, that £10 of Dales money, could he have also spent that on his FC?

A. Yes, because its his money and he can do what he wants with it?

B. No, because Grendel said something silly about a German can manufacturer and a car.

The difference between me and you G is that I'm more than happy to admit when I'm wrong. I even get that a number of people have different view points to me - so long as its backed up rationally and not because something is just 'shite' or 'makes me think its about mens football when I get a sky notification on my phone'.

I'm 100% leaving this one with you. If you comment after and want Internet brownie points, knock yourself out mate.

most seem to agree with me it’s you that’s blinkered

 

[Skyblueweeman]

That's not forest green rovers spending it.

But if it's the owners money, it could be, no? I don't know how it's hard to understand?

 

[Grendel]

But if it's the owners money, it could be, no? I don't know how it's hard to understand?

no neither does anyone else understand why this is so hard for you

 

[Skyblueweeman]

most seem to agree with me it’s you that’s blinkered

G - we see differently on this, I'm fine with that. Others see differently - again, I'm fine with that. I wouldn't say most either - I'd say more maybe, not most.

Everything I've said is logical and makes sense. I'm anything but blinkered to want womens football to do well. To insinuate otherwise is frankly sexist.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

no neither does anyone else understand why this is so hard for you

 

[Skyblueweeman]

no neither does anyone else understand why this is so hard for you

I mean, it's only Nick that's responded on that point but again, make it out to be something else. True G style.

 

[Grendel]

G - we see differently on this, I'm fine with that. Others see differently - again, I'm fine with that. I wouldn't say most either - I'd say more maybe, not most.

Everything I've said is logical and makes sense. I'm anything but blinkered to want womens football to do well. To insinuate otherwise is frankly sexist.

its you that’s suggesting the women need a few quid from the guys to be able to succeed so it’s not me that’s sexist - everyone should prosper on their own merit - no feminist would want men to help them out

 

[Grendel]

But that is his own money or company money if we want to spend money on ladies football it will come from the club unless Joy puts the money in separately and doesn’t add it to the clubs debt.

only nick

 

[Skyblueweeman]

its you that’s suggesting the women need a few quid from the guys to be able to succeed so it’s not me that’s sexist - everyone should prosper on their own merit - no feminist would want men to help them out

FFS....stop being an idiot and twisting what I said to suit your argument!!

I didn't suggest women need a few quid from the guys to be able to succeed. What I said was that clubs that aren't affiliated to male clubs find it harder financially.

Seriously G, I've noticed that when you look silly, you try and twist things. Disagree all you want, I'm cool with that. Just stop with the twisting of what I said - it's all there for people to see what I said.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

only nick

Fucking hell...Nick and TGP then - hardly the world queuing up to tell me you're right and I'm wrong!!

Oh look, G sensationalising things to try and suit his argument.

Go to bed G.

 

[Grendel]

FFS....stop being an idiot and twisting what I said to suit your argument!!

I didn't suggest women need a few quid from the guys to be able to succeed. What I said was that clubs that aren't affiliated to male clubs find it harder financially.

Seriously G, I've noticed that when you look silly, you try and twist things. Disagree all you want, I'm cool with that. Just stop with the twisting of what I said - it's all there for people to see what I said.

emotional

 

[chiefdave]

The Hundred was supposed to be a great turning point for womens cricket, fta tv and all that. A few days after the tournament finished England women were back playing at small, not sold out ground, and Warwickshire women were playing in front of the proverbial one man and a dog at a club ground yet there are increasing calls for women club crickets to be paid the same as the men, it doesn't stack up.

Season tickets for the women next season were announced today, £22 for adults, £10 for kids for the entire season. You can't pay the same wages as the men on revenues like that.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

The Hundred was supposed to be a great turning point for womens cricket, fta tv and all that. A few days after the tournament finished England women were back playing at small, not sold out ground, and Warwickshire women were playing in front of the proverbial one man and a dog at a club ground yet there are increasing calls for women club crickets to be paid the same as the men, it doesn't stack up.

Season tickets for the women next season were announced today, £22 for adults, £10 for kids for the entire season. You can't pay the same wages as the men on revenues like that.

It’s strange isn’t it how the public decide what they are interested in. Why is tennis different to cricket or football? I think in time with the right promotion there’s no reason why cricket and football won’t be supported in similar numbers for the men and womens games. We can’t see it now but there’s just no reason for it not to be the case

 

[rob9872]

It’s strange isn’t it how the public decide what they are interested in. Why is tennis different to cricket or football? I think in time with the right promotion there’s no reason why cricket and football won’t be supported in similar numbers for the men and womens games. We can’t see it now but there’s just no reason for it not to be the case

You're right but, passion, history, tradition, finance. The gap will close for sure, yet still remain eons away.

 

[Nick]

But if it's the owners money, it could be, no? I don't know how it's hard to understand?

That's not how it works.

 

[chiefdave]

It’s strange isn’t it how the public decide what they are interested in. Why is tennis different to cricket or football? I think in time with the right promotion there’s no reason why cricket and football won’t be supported in similar numbers for the men and womens games. We can’t see it now but there’s just no reason for it not to be the case

There's some cracking womens international cricket but there's simply not the number of players for decent regional competition at the moment. The drop in standard from the Hundred, which is topped up with International players, and the domestic trophies is very noticeable. There's no quick fix for that. There's also a problem that there's a very small number of countries that have decent sides, any other game it totally one sided.

Of course it will improve over time but I think its counter productive to over-hype things and make out the mens and womens game are equal.

 

[Grendel]

It’s strange isn’t it how the public decide what they are interested in. Why is tennis different to cricket or football? I think in time with the right promotion there’s no reason why cricket and football won’t be supported in similar numbers for the men and womens games. We can’t see it now but there’s just no reason for it not to be the case

tennis is only different as the big slams are played together

 

[rob9872]

tennis is only different as the big slams are played together

Perhaps that's the answer if they really want it to be inclusive, the World cups at the same time etc. too. It works with the Paralympics, particularly when here in 2012, incredibly inspiring. That said, I don't mind seeing the household names from that (David Weir, Ellie Simmonds, Jonnie Peacock, Tanni Grey-Thompson etc), but when they ram some unknown on QoS in a typical BBC box-ticking exercise, it cheapens the show. They already messed with a tested format when Tuffers and Dawson started prancing about in the middle and Paddy McGuiness, who I do like, shouldn't be presenting it, but having these on and then asking such niche questions is about as useful as having a footballer from Leamington or Nuneaton on.