The Lionesses - England Football Team

[kris450]

Randy Winkman said:

smn159 said:

Kes Arevo said:

Some prick on sky news bemoaning how the team are white, and blonde haired, and not representative enough.

Prick. Just fk off, prick.

For ref...

https://twitter.com/KonstantinKisin/status/1693545...

Edited by Kes Arevo on Monday 21st August 13:01

it's a legitimate question to ask why the representation at elite level women's football is not more reflective of the population, so not quite sure what your issue is with it.

I agree. It's a fair question. Also might help us get an even better team.

Have to admit that I don't necessarily find it a fair question.

A football team has 11 different/specific positions. Surly the idea is to fill those positions with the 11 best relevant players, irrespective of race, sexual orientation, religious beliefs etc etc etc...

From what I can tell, if England had managed to go to the tournament with a full squad (no injuries suffered beforehand) then I reckon our best starting line up would be 10 white ladies. The eleventh would be Lauren James. Isn't it that simple ?

Now I'll fully admit I don't watch a great deal of the WSL and perhaps there were better players of differing skin colours that should have been in the squad. If thats the case then fair enough, I'm on board with the idea of looking into it. But it generally seems that most people thought we took the best squad we could at the time.

I just can't seem to see the logic in almost forcing a manager/coach to pick players who may be of, shall we say lesser footballing quality, purely to tick some boxes.

If its about getting and attracting more diversity at the youth level, which can eventually feed the adult game, then perhaps that should be looked at (again I'll admit I've no idea if thats actually the case), but at the senior top end level you pick the best as far as I'm concerned.

[smn159]

kris450 said:

Randy Winkman said:

smn159 said:

Kes Arevo said:

Some prick on sky news bemoaning how the team are white, and blonde haired, and not representative enough.

Prick. Just fk off, prick.

For ref...

https://twitter.com/KonstantinKisin/status/1693545...

Edited by Kes Arevo on Monday 21st August 13:01

it's a legitimate question to ask why the representation at elite level women's football is not more reflective of the population, so not quite sure what your issue is with it.

I agree. It's a fair question. Also might help us get an even better team.

Have to admit that I don't necessarily find it a fair question.

A football team has 11 different/specific positions. Surly the idea is to fill those positions with the 11 best relevant players, irrespective of race, sexual orientation, religious beliefs etc etc etc...

From what I can tell, if England had managed to go to the tournament with a full squad (no injuries suffered beforehand) then I reckon our best starting line up would be 10 white ladies. The eleventh would be Lauren James. Isn't it that simple ?

Now I'll fully admit I don't watch a great deal of the WSL and perhaps there were better players of differing skin colours that should have been in the squad. If thats the case then fair enough, I'm on board with the idea of looking into it. But it generally seems that most people thought we took the best squad we could at the time.

I just can't seem to see the logic in almost forcing a manager/coach to pick players who may be of, shall we say lesser footballing quality, purely to tick some boxes.

If its about getting and attracting more diversity at the youth level, which can eventually feed the adult game, then perhaps that should be looked at (again I'll admit I've no idea if thats actually the case), but at the senior top end level you pick the best as far as I'm concerned.

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

[coldel]

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

[cuprabob]

coldel said:

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

What about Alex Scott, Eniola Aluko? I know they have now retired but they both got plenty of England caps and Lauren James is not a white blonde unless I need to go to Specsavers.

I agree though their needs to be more diversity at grass roots level.

Edited by cuprabob on Monday 21st August 15:28

[Randy Winkman]

cuprabob said:

coldel said:

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

What about Alex Scott, Eniola Aluko? I know they have now retired but they both got plenty of England caps and Lauren James is not a white blonde unless I need to go to Specsavers.

Not sure anyone is saying there are none at all. But how does women's football compare with men's football in this respect?

[S600BSB]

smn159 said:

Kes Arevo said:

Some prick on sky news bemoaning how the team are white, and blonde haired, and not representative enough.

Prick. Just fk off, prick.

For ref...

https://twitter.com/KonstantinKisin/status/1693545...

Edited by Kes Arevo on Monday 21st August 13:01

it's a legitimate question to ask why the representation at elite level women's football is not more reflective of the population, so not quite sure what your issue is with it.

Absolutely. The FA and the coaches have previously acknowledged that this is an issue that needs addressing.

[TikTak]

Randy Winkman said:

cuprabob said:

coldel said:

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

What about Alex Scott, Eniola Aluko? I know they have now retired but they both got plenty of England caps and Lauren James is not a white blonde unless I need to go to Specsavers.

Not sure anyone is saying there are none at all. But how does women's football compare with men's football in this respect?

It's a lot lower than the men's game but as with all these things it's a complex matter. Not to say it shouldn't be looked at but no one thing is going to fix it. The men's game % of minority players is actually way higher than the % of UK population they represent.

The women's game is what, 70 years behind the men's game? How diverse was the men's game back then for instance? Is comparing it against the current men's game fair or accurate in any representation?

Women currently just don't try to get into sport as frequently as men, in itself for a variety of reasons. Some of these will be race/sex based from a young age but as the game progresses this will reduce.

The game is getting visibly bigger tournament to tournament but the difference in players race between 2 tournaments is not going to change as drastically and will take 10 or 15 years to see the impact of what the Lionesses are currently achieving.

On the flip side there is also a disproportionately high representation of the LBGTQ+ community, unlike the men's game.

They could probably learn a lot from each other eh?

[SWoll]

coldel said:

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

You're automatically assuming that there isn't diversity in the talent pool. Any actual evidence that is the case?

If you have a look into the racial diversity of England (not just London) and think about the numerous significant cultures for which football is not a sport of interest for either men or women, what do you believe the England women's football team should look like in order to be acceptably diverse an representative?

[coldel]

SWoll said:

coldel said:

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

You're automatically assuming that there isn't diversity in the talent pool. Any actual evidence that is the case?

A quick google will answer this for you, and its a very safe assumption from the first page that came up

The issue really is that womens football isnt as racially diverse as mens, and it appears from the numbers its miles apart. So whats causing it, why is it happening, and what course corrects are needed are the next steps.

[Skyedriver]

Caught a bit of BBC Breakfast this morning, (Dreadful prog but that's another story) they were interviewing young girls who have joined football clubs around the midlands area I think and there were a lot of them who I would class as black or of a different colour/religion so the diversification is coming.

[selym]

coldel said:

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

How do you know what the breakdown of available players looks like? Are we saying that because the first team are mainly blonde and white that the pool of players to pick from is also mostly white? I'm concerned that we are creating an issue based on a tiny sample size.

[jazzybees]

WPA said:

From the BBC

I totally agree with this.
I think by us/ England saying “It’s coming home”.
It’s tell the opposite side, we think we have already won.
The arrogance of the English.
It gives the opposition so much more incentive to beat us.
It gee’s them up so much.
They don’t need a pep talk by their manager.
They are already geared up to bust a gut to beat us.

[AndrewT1275]

The song is not about what you think it's about.

[jazzybees]

AndrewT1275 said:

The song is not about what you think it's about.

Yes, I know what you are saying.
But I think it now as taken on a different meaning.
It’s used during tournaments. (World Cup. Euros)
When it’s sung or stated.
It means the Cup is coming home.
It means we are going to beat, whoever we are playing. ( which is great, we want to be positive).
But I think it gives the opposite side a great big boost/incentive to play out of their skins to beat us.
In fact, I’m sure the Italian team said as much, when they beat us in the final of the last Euros.

[Randy Winkman]

selym said:

coldel said:

smn159 said:

Absolutely on a match by match basis it's about picking the best players from the ones that are available. The question is more as you suggest in your last paragraph, is there anything stopping diversity at grass roots level that can then feed into the top levels to make sure that we're picking the best talent from the widest available pool?

Yep this is the point. The issue has nothing to do with the notion that Wiegman or any of the England staff are not picking non-white non-blonde players, the issue is why is the pool they are picking from are mostly white blonde players. What is happening in the funnel much lower down that is not allowing racial diversity in the talent pool.

Its a fair question.

How do you know what the breakdown of available players looks like? Are we saying that because the first team are mainly blonde and white that the pool of players to pick from is also mostly white? I'm concerned that we are creating an issue based on a tiny sample size.

I believe it's already been pointed out that the pool of players in the women's game has not been representative. And the evidence of outcomes when compared to men's football or (for instance) women's athletics also asks questions.

[selym]

Randy Winkman said:

I believe it's already been pointed out that the pool of players in the women's game has not been representative. And the evidence of outcomes when compared to men's football or (for instance) women's athletics also asks questions.

I'd be interested to see the studies into this. Any links?

Edit: a quick look suggests that just under 10% of the elite football pool are from diverse ethnic backgrounds and there is an 18% representation in the nation. To be honest without looking at similar statistics I don't know if that is about right, sub-par or evidence of a lack of inclusivity.

Edited by selym on Monday 21st August 20:52

[Jeanboi]

Still well chuffed for Mary Earps.
Golden Glove well deserved.

[Driver101]

selym said:

Randy Winkman said:

I believe it's already been pointed out that the pool of players in the women's game has not been representative. And the evidence of outcomes when compared to men's football or (for instance) women's athletics also asks questions.

I'd be interested to see the studies into this. Any links?

Edit: a quick look suggests that just under 10% of the elite football pool are from diverse ethnic backgrounds and there is an 18% representation in the nation. To be honest without looking at similar statistics I don't know if that is about right, sub-par or evidence of a lack of inclusivity.

Edited by selym on Monday 21st August 20:52

When 44% of players in the EPL are black less than 10% in the women's game does look oddly low.

[Skyedriver]

cuprabob said:

What about Alex Scott, Eniola Aluko? I know they have now retired but they both got plenty of England caps and Lauren James is not a white blonde unless I need to go to Specsavers.

I agree though their needs to be more diversity at grass roots level.

Edited by cuprabob on Monday 21st August 15:28

And Jess Carter, possibly the best defender on the first team.

[Murph7355]

Driver101 said:

When 44% of players in the EPL are black less than 10% in the women's game does look oddly low.

When "representative"/"representation" is mentioned, in what context?

Is it of the UK population? Or is it now being used in relation to the men's game? If so, why?