Women's football does it have a future?
Discussion
It sounds as if it's struggling and doesn't have the appeal to remain a full time professional league. Notts County just went bust the other day.
The average crowd for a top league English game is only just over 1000.
As much as they try to pretend the quality is high it just isn't. There has been a few games between women's teams and young boy's teams and even the kids have been convincingly better.
Everything has it's place, but it's never going to be a high profile league in this country.
The average crowd for a top league English game is only just over 1000.
As much as they try to pretend the quality is high it just isn't. There has been a few games between women's teams and young boy's teams and even the kids have been convincingly better.
Everything has it's place, but it's never going to be a high profile league in this country.
Birmingham played Sunderland at the weekend in the opening Super League 1 fixture. Attendance: 442.
1255 people went to watch Boston United play AFC Flyde in the 6th tier of the men's game.
So whilst it is admirable that they are pushing women's sport and participation, it's media coverage is hugely disproportionate to it's popularity.
I don't know why you'd go to watch it just because women are playing. It's a vastly inferior product. The same reason that Corby Town in the 7th tier only get 473 fans and Liverpool get 50,000.
1255 people went to watch Boston United play AFC Flyde in the 6th tier of the men's game.
So whilst it is admirable that they are pushing women's sport and participation, it's media coverage is hugely disproportionate to it's popularity.
I don't know why you'd go to watch it just because women are playing. It's a vastly inferior product. The same reason that Corby Town in the 7th tier only get 473 fans and Liverpool get 50,000.
Just reading the sport
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39684430
Liverpool women forgot to take their football kit and had to be loaned Yeovil's away kits.
Sounds super professional.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39684430
Liverpool women forgot to take their football kit and had to be loaned Yeovil's away kits.
Sounds super professional.
Driver101 said:
Just reading the sport
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39684430
Liverpool women forgot to take their football kit and had to be loaned Yeovil's away kits.
Sounds super professional.
Has happened in the men's professional game as well a few times. If I remember correctly my lot Blackpool turned up at Chesterfield without any shorts.http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39684430
Liverpool women forgot to take their football kit and had to be loaned Yeovil's away kits.
Sounds super professional.
The bottom line is that Men will go in their hundreds of thousands to watch Men's professional football over any given weekend. Women will absolutely not do likewise even if they have nothing else to do. Putting aside "the beautiful game" aspect of footy, it also incorporates an aggressive, tribal rivalry that women will never buy into in more than cursory numbers. There are always exceptions to this but it just doesn't appeal to women like it does to men and never will - they have different priorities when it comes to their spare time. When was the last time you came home to find the women in your household huddled round the TV watching a game?
One of the issues it has is that the gap between the men and the women is much wider than many other sports. A female sprinter isn't that much slower than a man, and the world's best women athletes are better than most amateur men. Serena Williams could walk into any tennis club and thrash the male pro at that club.
But a university 1st 11 would beat the England women's football team pretty easily.
But if you get past that and take it for what it is, I'm happy to watch it. The skill level isn't too bad and the commitment and determination to win is great. I played low level football for years but i never came close to doing this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/football/video-10...
But a university 1st 11 would beat the England women's football team pretty easily.
But if you get past that and take it for what it is, I'm happy to watch it. The skill level isn't too bad and the commitment and determination to win is great. I played low level football for years but i never came close to doing this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/football/video-10...
It's garbage. Which is fine, as long as it's not being forced on us. Like on the BBC site, where they no longer title it 'women's' football, it's just in there with the real stuff.
So sometimes you'll see 'England beat France to qualify for X' and you click it without thinking and it turns out to be some rubbish about women.
Give it a separate page whereanyone nobody who actually wants to read about it can. And as for putting it on telly...
So sometimes you'll see 'England beat France to qualify for X' and you click it without thinking and it turns out to be some rubbish about women.
Give it a separate page where
It does have a future, but like anything it does take time to develop and that will take a few years yet. The main purpose is to get girls interested in playing football which the recent performance of the England team will certainly do.
It will never become as big as men's football but it correct the BBC should push it. Big issue at the moment is increasing the professional element of the game with limited sponsorship.
It will never become as big as men's football but it correct the BBC should push it. Big issue at the moment is increasing the professional element of the game with limited sponsorship.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Serena Williams could walk into any tennis club and thrash the male pro at that club.
maybe, maybe nothttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_...
My daughter plays football for her school and in a club within the Surrey Womens & Girls League. As others have said, the standard is, and is likely always to be, lower than the same age group amongst boys teams, but the competitiveness is fantastic. The FA experimented this year by letting some Academy-level girls teams compete within a traditionally boys league, the aim being to get the girls far more used to the physical side of the game, to learn better technique, faster decision making etc. The experience has been very successful and there have been several boys teams going home having been "beaten by a bunch of girls" and it's initiatives such as this that will help improve the standard of the women's football "product" in years to come.
I've just been looking at tickets for the final of the Women's Euros this summer in Holland. Seats on the half way line are 40Euro. For those with an interest in watching it that's an absolute bargain. We're also off to the Women's FA Cup final at Wembley in a couple of weeks, £15 per adult and kids for free. There won't be any household names but plenty of international quality players should deliver an entertaining afternoon. It costs me the same to watch Bromley FC play in the National Conference, but Bromley may one day have a trainee in their academy that sells for a £100k, and it's this player-development that most lower and non-league clubs rely on to survive, unless they have a benefactor with deep pockets.
To the OP: Women's football absolutely has a future. But it will continue to rely on an army of volunteer coaches, physios, etc at the top-level for many years to come and, unfortunately for my daughter, it will be several generations before more than a handful of teams can afford to have professional women players, and even then they will probably still be a loss making part of the business, but considered to add some value for increased brand awareness, their work in the community, etc.
PS: the Liverpool kit thing was the worst-possible timing, with the club only having announced a new shirt sponsor earlier in the week!
I've just been looking at tickets for the final of the Women's Euros this summer in Holland. Seats on the half way line are 40Euro. For those with an interest in watching it that's an absolute bargain. We're also off to the Women's FA Cup final at Wembley in a couple of weeks, £15 per adult and kids for free. There won't be any household names but plenty of international quality players should deliver an entertaining afternoon. It costs me the same to watch Bromley FC play in the National Conference, but Bromley may one day have a trainee in their academy that sells for a £100k, and it's this player-development that most lower and non-league clubs rely on to survive, unless they have a benefactor with deep pockets.
To the OP: Women's football absolutely has a future. But it will continue to rely on an army of volunteer coaches, physios, etc at the top-level for many years to come and, unfortunately for my daughter, it will be several generations before more than a handful of teams can afford to have professional women players, and even then they will probably still be a loss making part of the business, but considered to add some value for increased brand awareness, their work in the community, etc.
PS: the Liverpool kit thing was the worst-possible timing, with the club only having announced a new shirt sponsor earlier in the week!
TwigtheWonderkid said:
One of the issues it has is that the gap between the men and the women is much wider than many other sports. A female sprinter isn't that much slower than a man, and the world's best women athletes are better than most amateur men. Serena Williams could walk into any tennis club and thrash the male pro at that club.
But a university 1st 11 would beat the England women's football team pretty easily.
But if you get past that and take it for what it is, I'm happy to watch it. The skill level isn't too bad and the commitment and determination to win is great. I played low level football for years but i never came close to doing this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/football/video-10...
I agree. With athletics, cycling etc. it is women competing against other women and the difference in speed while watching isn't particularly noticeable compared to men. If they were competing against each other it would be a total shower.But a university 1st 11 would beat the England women's football team pretty easily.
But if you get past that and take it for what it is, I'm happy to watch it. The skill level isn't too bad and the commitment and determination to win is great. I played low level football for years but i never came close to doing this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/football/video-10...
Nearly all football shown on TV is at a high level, and due to the way the game plays women's footie doesn't look good in comparison. When watching the women's world cup it was clear that they couldn't kick the ball with both power and control. The long passing game just isn't there. I think it would probably help if they played on a smaller pitch, so at least the keeper can kick it to the half-way line with some direction on it.
Don't get me wrong, I think women's football should be promoted (like all sports), but throwing in women's events when I'm looking to watch something else is a bit annoying.
Challo said:
It will never become as big as men's football but it correct the BBC should push it.
Since when was it the BBC's job to promote minority sports?That's the role of the FA. Or more accurately the role of a back room of the FA where a couple of job sharing temps pass the wimmin's fitba plan back and forth between them.
technodup said:
Challo said:
It will never become as big as men's football but it correct the BBC should push it.
Since when was it the BBC's job to promote minority sports?That's the role of the FA. Or more accurately the role of a back room of the FA where a couple of job sharing temps pass the wimmin's fitba plan back and forth between them.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff