Woman’s sport - I will get slated here!

They don't take it seriously themselves though. Why does a girl PL team play at Bury or wherever instead of the main ground?

Answer is it's tokenism.
How seriously would you take men's football if it effectively hadn't existed for 50 years.

Imagine.

1921-1971

No Matthews or Morty. No 1966, No Alan Ball. No Jimmy Armfield. No Pele. No Best, Law, Charlton. No Munich, no triumphant win for the Busby Babes in 68. No Jock Stein and the Lisbon Lions. No Dixie Dean rattling 60 goals in 1928, no school of science at Goodison, no Don Revie at Leeds, No Billy Wright and Wolves. No clown prince of football at Sunderland, No Tom Finney running through the water leaving spray in his wake. No Hungary beating England in 53, no massive groaning terraces after the war, filled with record crowds. No Ray Charlnley or Ray Pointer.

All of that is long before I was born and all of that is part of why football is what it is. It's a game built on history and tradition. It's passed through generations. My dad supported Blackpool, he took me, I took my son. I can quote the above off the top of my head, even though I was born in 79. When I was a kid, there was no women's football to speak of. Thus as an adult, I have no interest. That's why it's on now. It's not for you, it's an attempt to build a new market for football, that will pay off in 20 years time.

That's the FAs job. That's business. Identify an untapped market and exploit it.

You can't simply wave away the fact the women's game was cut off at the knees at the point it was becoming popular.

Why was it cut off at the knees? Cos the chairmen of clubs were expressing unrest at the fact women's games were attracting *bigger crowds* than men's games and this they banned it from being played at any FA affiliated stadium.

Comparing the two games is almost literally like comparing two runners, when runner a) gets level, runner b) kneecaps them then runs round the track for 20 laps whilst runner a) lies prone.

Then ask why runner a doesn't 'take it seriously' or why people don't support runner a)

There's nowt 'woke' in the above. It just is what it is.

Now, to the case of 'woke' sky. Sky is Murdoch company that is woke to one thing and one thing only - cash.

What it is doing is trying to address it's aging and falling subscriber base. Bemoaning the pundits changing is like bemoaning pop music changing. The tastes of the next generation (at least in the perception of sky) are different. They don't want a load of aging white men saying "back in the 80s, it was a man's game" any more than they want Jefferson Airplane on radio 1. Sky and indeed the FA itself are very aware that football supporters are aging, the average age of spectators is way higher than once it was and they're desperately trying to rebrand the game as something younger, more in tune with a broader audience because the more people who watch, the more money they make.

It's notable that there aren't many, (if any) less er... classically aesthetically pleasing female pundits. This isn't a woke revolution. It's just Sky etc trying to reach more people to future proof their investment.

What the fuck does Murdoch give a shit about 'wokedom' for? He's got literally no moral values at all. He'll do what he perceives makes money.

Me. I don't really care. Pundits are shit anyway mostly and I don't have sky. I'd happily have stopped the clock and Peter Jones on the radio and Barry Davies on the telly and kept it there forever cos that's what I liked. But time waits for no man (or woman, or gender neutral individual who prefers not to identify as human lol)
 
I'm not a fan of women's sport so I just ignore it. As for having it on Sky sports news and it shouldn't be there because you don't care about it, just don't pay attention to that bit. I dont like golf, so I don't pay attention to it. There's plenty out there that don't like Rugby, so they don't pay attention to it. Go make a brew whilst they're reviewing that bit. Just because you aren't interested in it doesn't mean that other people aren't. It's really not that deep for you to get annoyed about it. Also when it comes to women commentators, I would take Alex Scott over Micheal Owen any day, that guy bores the piss out of me.
 
Last edited:
Why is it now nearly the same priority as mens?

Just watching Sky Sports News and Spurs are on the vid printer twice, with no description of which is mens and womans.

Woman are shite in the sports I care about - Cricket, Football and Rugby Union.

....and by the way I do not want someone who has not played at the mens highest level commentating or being a pundit on top end mens sport.

Come on sky, let me pay for just mens sport - and I wonder what percentage of my subscription you will still want?

I think the answer will say it all.

Tin hat on to all wokes out there.
I think womens sport is very important but I would not pay to watch it.
 
Why is it now nearly the same priority as mens?

Just watching Sky Sports News and Spurs are on the vid printer twice, with no description of which is mens and womans.

Woman are shite in the sports I care about - Cricket, Football and Rugby Union.

....and by the way I do not want someone who has not played at the mens highest level commentating or being a pundit on top end mens sport.

Come on sky, let me pay for just mens sport - and I wonder what percentage of my subscription you will still want?

I think the answer will say it all.

Tin hat on to all wokes out there.
[/QUOTE

seasideone

I'm thinking you might be needing that tin hat and that you will be getting a telling off from those with the same opinions as you on the matter but not willing to say what you have.

It's not up for debate, it's up to the moderator(s).
 
For a while I used to watch Tipping Point. There are two men and two women all answering questions on various random topics and competing against each other . When a single competitor finally wins through to the final stage they are given a range of topics and they can choose the level of difficulty they wish to answer questions on for each topic.Almost without exception if the final contestant was a woman and the topic was sport they would say " ooooh that`s not my favourite topic " and usually avoid the more difficult questions even though they have a choice of only 3 possible answers to select an answer from.

This confirms the impression I have that the great majority of women but not all,have very little interest in or knowledge of sport.
 
I have 2 nieces, aged 12 and 16. The elder one plays netball every week and watchs netball with her mum on Sky every week.
The younger one plays football ever week and watches the women's games with her dad on BT sport every week.
Both of them want to do their sports professionally when they're older.
As some above said, just because you aren't interested in women's sports doesn't mean everyone else isn't.
Let's face facts, the price of Sky and BT wouldn't change if women's sports disappeared so what real impact does it have on your life? None at all, just moaning to moan as per usual.
 
Last edited:
For a while I used to watch Tipping Point. There are two men and two women all answering questions on various random topics and competing against each other . When a single competitor finally wins through to the final stage they are given a range of topics and they can choose the level of difficulty they wish to answer questions on for each topic.Almost without exception if the final contestant was a woman and the topic was sport they would say " ooooh that`s not my favourite topic " and usually avoid the more difficult questions even though they have a choice of only 3 possible answers to select an answer from.

This confirms the impression I have that the great majority of women but not all,have very little interest in or knowledge of sport.

The 64 million dollar question (wasn't that a game show?) is

Is that because they are women or because most sports we play now we're established in a different era where they were very much run by men for men and continued to be so for a very long time. It's not so long ago that women were literally banned from certain parts of sports courses, pavilions and clubhouses.

I'm not that into girlie nights either. Never really felt welcome as heterosexual bloke. Not my strongest topic...
 
Tbf to the women's game, it has been treated appallingly badly historically. At one point it was drawing huge crowds and then it was banned.

It never had a chance to grow to be equal to the men's game and thus, having had that effective sidelining for a long, long time, how is it ever going to become important, how are girls ever going to see 'footballer' as a valid thing to aspire to, without some positive promotion?

It's worth reading about. Dick Kerr's ladies and all that. The FA saw it as a real threat to the men's game so they got rid of it. That's literally what happened.
Indeed its a real good read.Tremendous crowds!!!
 
I have 2 nieces, aged 12 and 16. The elder one plays netball every week and watchs netball with her mum on Sky every week.
The younger one plays football ever week and watches the women's games with her dad on BT sport every week.
Both of them want to do their sports professionally when they're older.
As some above said, just because you aren't interested in women's sports doesn't mean everyone else isn't.
Let's face facts, the price of Sky and BT wouldn't charge if women's sports disappeared so what real impact does it have on your life? None at all, just moaning to moan as per usual.

That's a very good point that Kyle.

Getting young girls involved in physical exercise and enjoying the many benefits (health, bonding, etc, etc) of participating in sport is a good thing.

I won't pretend that I am particularly interested in womens sport, I am not totally disinterested in womens sport but it is being overly represented/exposed and subsidised etc, etc but increase in participation is great whether they go on to be professionals or not.

I am not sure that the over exposure of womens professional sport is the best way of increasing participation levels among young females but it won't do it any harm.
 
I bet dominios is more popular than netball, so should Sky Sports News show the old pub classic aswell?
If there is an audience for, why not?
As long as people are paying money and watching it then who cares?
Nearly 300,000 women a week play netball in the UK, more than play football, so it's obviously a popular sport with women.
You seem to really care about what everyone else is watching and interested in.
 
Last edited:
This afternoon's edition of Ageing white blokes talking shite was brought to you in association with our sponsors, Mysoginists-R-Us. And remember, their two-for-one offer on your very own take-home Stepford Wife finishes next weekend.
Another sad example on here of if you are incapable of arguing your case just dish out plenty of abuse to those who can and have done.
 
That's a very good point that Kyle.

Getting young girls involved in physical exercise and enjoying the many benefits (health, bonding, etc, etc) of participating in sport is a good thing.

I won't pretend that I am particularly interested in womens sport, I am not totally disinterested in womens sport but it is being overly represented/exposed and subsidised etc, etc but increase in participation is great whether they go on to be professionals or not.

I am not sure that the over exposure of womens professional sport is the best way of increasing participation levels among young females but it won't do it any harm.

No sport on sky is over exposed. It's the opposite. It's being shown to a small and dwindling subscriber base. Hence them trying to find new ways to attract people to it.

What do you mean by it's 'over subsidised' - how? By whom? There's no woman's footballers who earn even a fraction of what the males earn.

In fact, many of the top division players are either part time or paid so poorly that they wish they were part time.

Man City have put a lot into their woman's team, many of the other bigger clubs barely acknowledge they exist.

What subsidies do you mean?
 
This afternoon's edition of Ageing white blokes talking shite was brought to you in association with our sponsors, Mysoginists-R-Us. And remember, their two-for-one offer on your very own take-home Stepford Wife finishes next weekend.
This obviously will be superseded by Woke weekly presented by Bland X our new gender neutral presenter.
We'll be sure to broadcast everything that won't offend.
Remember we may not be good at our jobs but you can watch in relaxation knowing EVERYONE gets a chance.
 
If there is an audience for, why not?
As long as people are paying money and watching it then who cares?
Nearly 300,000 women a week play netball in the UK, more than play football, so it's obviously a popular sport with women.
You seem to really care about what everyone else is watching and interested in.
I once went out with a girl who was absolutely obsessed with netball. Since then, I've never understood why it's not more evident in the wider world. She opened my eyes to this world of extreme dedication to a sport that is literally never in the papers. I don't think I've seen a netball game mentioned on the sports pages in my life yet her and her mates (loads of them) played and loved it every bit as much as I love football.

Possibly there's something in the fact that women have becomes conditioned to see sport as participatory as opposed to a spectator thing. I don't know.

I'm getting all winsome at the memory of said girl now. She was lovely. Far too good for me.
 
I bet dominios is more popular than netball, so should Sky Sports News show the old pub classic aswell?
Would make a change from the shite they go on about. Dunno how people can watch football 'news' every day. It's just stretching fuck all over time. How many press conferences can a human watch?

Dominoes is pretty good imo.
 
I have 2 nieces, aged 12 and 16. The elder one plays netball every week and watchs netball with her mum on Sky every week.
The younger one plays football ever week and watches the women's games with her dad on BT sport every week.
Both of them want to do their sports professionally when they're older.
As some above said, just because you aren't interested in women's sports doesn't mean everyone else isn't.
Let's face facts, the price of Sky and BT wouldn't change if women's sports disappeared so what real impact does it have on your life? None at all, just moaning to moan as per usual.
Kyle, can you tell me why the mens game in netball is NOT recognised by the INF
( international netball federation )?
 
This obviously will be superseded by Woke weekly presented by Bland X our new gender neutral presenter.
We'll be sure to broadcast everything that won't offend.
Remember we may not be good at our jobs but you can watch in relaxation knowing EVERYONE gets a chance.
Except the woman that got banned when the *real proper football men* were threatened by them in 1921. They don't get a chance. Not do any of the women who wanted to play football for the next 50 years.

But the real victim here is Matt Le Tissier because the world is going to the dogs now and it was all better in the old days.

Fuck this woke shite.

It's capitalism and the world changing. The young drive the world. The 60s were 'woke' punks were 'woke' the ravers were 'woke' and so on. It's just change. Everything from those generations is coopted into capitalism. This is all this is.

Woke/not woke, who gives a fuck? It's a bullshit culture war seeded by people who just want us to bicker with each other instead of thinking about anything worth thinking about.
 
I once went out with a girl who was absolutely obsessed with netball. Since then, I've never understood why it's not more evident in the wider world. She opened my eyes to this world of extreme dedication to a sport that is literally never in the papers. I don't think I've seen a netball game mentioned on the sports pages in my life yet her and her mates (loads of them) played and loved it every bit as much as I love football.

Possibly there's something in the fact that women have becomes conditioned to see sport as participatory as opposed to a spectator thing. I don't know.

I'm getting all winsome at the memory of said girl now. She was lovely. Far too good for me.
My niece is in the Blackpool league and it wasn't untill I took her for a few weeks that I realised how popular it is.
Blackpool alone has 4 leagues with I think it's 10 teams in each league.
The courts at Stanley Park are full every Tuesday and Wednesday night.
She plays for Wyre as well and travels all over the country with them. It's mad how popular it actually is, yet up until recently it was never on TV.
 
My niece is in the Blackpool league and it wasn't untill I took her for a few weeks that I realised how popular it is.
Blackpool alone has 4 leagues with I think it's 10 teams in each league.
The courts at Stanley Park are full every Tuesday and Wednesday night.
She plays for Wyre as well and travels all over the country with them. It's mad how popular it actually is, yet up until recently it was never on TV.
Exactly. It's like a secret world!
 
Except the woman that got banned when the *real proper football men* were threatened by them in 1921. They don't get a chance. Not do any of the women who wanted to play football for the next 50 years.

But the real victim here is Matt Le Tissier because the world is going to the dogs now and it was all better in the old days.

Fuck this woke shite.

It's capitalism and the world changing. The young drive the world. The 60s were 'woke' punks were 'woke' the ravers were 'woke' and so on. It's just change. Everything from those generations is coopted into capitalism. This is all this is.

Woke/not woke, who gives a fuck? It's a bullshit culture war seeded by people who just want us to bicker with each other instead of thinking about anything worth thinking about.
I may have wandered a little on this thread and I generally enjoy the majority of your posts as you seem level headed.
So as Robbie has failed to reply to my earlier question I'll ask you.

Do you think a person should be placed in a job purely based on their gender, colour, religion or sexuality?
 
If I'm paying a hefty subscription to Sky to watch sport, I expect to watch the best quality sport available. I'm not paying just for Sky to be seen to be ticking all the boxes. Their whole approach has changed considerably in the last year or so and not for the better.
But again, that's your opinion. Some people may thing that having women's sport on there makes the channels better. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean that other people don't.
 
If I'm paying a hefty subscription to Sky to watch sport, I expect to watch the best quality sport available. I'm not paying just for Sky to be seen to be ticking all the boxes. Their whole approach has changed considerably in the last year or so and not for the better.
Don't pay then. Sky will go tits up,someone else will get the rights to the sports you want. Voila.

You owe sky no loyalty.
 
I was just watching BBC News and at the end of the sport they had the Women’s football scores so I asked my wife if she knew who was top of that league. She didn’t and said if it was the only thing on TV she wouldn’t watch a women’s club match. She is a Wolves fan so there’s no accounting for taste.
 
I may have wandered a little on this thread and I generally enjoy the majority of your posts as you seem level headed.
So as Robbie has failed to reply to my earlier question I'll ask you.

Do you think a person should be placed in a job purely based on their gender, colour, religion or sexuality?
There are jobs in which those characteristics matter (a rape counseling service for example) Sports pundit is not one of them no.

Can I ask a question back?

How does sky address it's aging and slowly dwindling subscriber base?
 
No sport on sky is over exposed. It's the opposite. It's being shown to a small and dwindling subscriber base. Hence them trying to find new ways to attract people to it.

What do you mean by it's 'over subsidised' - how? By whom? There's no woman's footballers who earn even a fraction of what the males earn.

In fact, many of the top division players are either part time or paid so poorly that they wish they were part time.

Man City have put a lot into their woman's team, many of the other bigger clubs barely acknowledge they exist.

What subsidies do you mean?

td53

A fair point regarding Sky/subscriptions in general and there is no doubt that sports would have far bigger viewing figured on terrestrial TV.

I think that is very sad but rather inevitable and often the fault of the sports themselves for selling out to the highest bidder - lot's of issue could be debated here but parked for now and certainly moving away from womens sport.

Reading your point again it was more about the dwindling subscriber bases of the subscription channels, to be honest I think that covering womens sport is more about inclusion and appearing to do the right thing than to regenerate their channel and increases subscriptions as customers clamber to watch womens sport.

To be honest, I am surprised that you question my references to subsidies.

Let's take womens professional football for example, you are right when you say the female players earn far less than the men but there would not even be a professional womens game in the UK without the massive subsidies they receive directly from the male professional game.

In time that might not be the case and an increase in the popularity of the womens game may see it stand on its own two feet but if you were to remove the subsidies from the womens game in the UK, all the players would be part-time - I imagine the better players could stay professional but would have to move overseas to do so.

Football is not the only female sport in the UK that relies on subsidies.
 
I don’t have a problem with women’s sport, I do have a problem with them wanting to be paid the same as men, and they even believe they are worth it. Can you imagine the Lionesses playing a team like Gillingham who like to bully teams , they would be slaughtered, and they are supposed to be at the top of the women’s game .
 
I don’t have a problem with women’s sport, I do have a problem with them wanting to be paid the same as men, and they even believe they are worth it. Can you imagine the Lionesses playing a team like Gillingham who like to bully teams , they would be slaughtered, and they are supposed to be at the top of the women’s game .
Women being paid the same as men is ridiculous, that I will 100% agree with.
 
There are jobs in which those characteristics matter (a rape counseling service for example) Sports pundit is not one of them no.

Can I ask a question back?

How does sky address it's aging and slowly dwindling subscriber base?

td53

That's a good question but possibly one for another thread - I don't mean you can't ask it on here, you know what I mean.

If Sky have a dwindling subscriber base and especially among younger customers as you say then I'd suggest there are several other factors to consider and many far more important then womens sport.

A big problem would be with piracy, especially among their technically savvy customers - or should that be ex customers or never going to be without changes customers.
 
td53

A fair point regarding Sky/subscriptions in general and there is no doubt that sports would have far bigger viewing figured on terrestrial TV.

I think that is very sad but rather inevitable and often the fault of the sports themselves for selling out to the highest bidder - lot's of issue could be debated here but parked for now and certainly moving away from womens sport.

Reading your point again it was more about the dwindling subscriber bases of the subscription channels, to be honest I think that covering womens sport is more about inclusion and appearing to do the right thing than to regenerate their channel and increases subscriptions as customers clamber to watch womens sport.

To be honest, I am surprised that you question my references to subsidies.

Let's take womens professional football for example, you are right when you say the female players earn far less than the men but there would not even be a professional womens game in the UK without the massive subsidies they receive directly from the male professional game.

In time that might not be the case and an increase in the popularity of the womens game may see it stand on its own two feet but if you were to remove the subsidies from the womens game in the UK, all the players would be part-time - I imagine the better players could stay professional but would have to move overseas to do so.

Football is not the only female sport in the UK that relies on subsidies.
But when the men's game literally banned the woman's game, it seems the paltry subsidies are the least the men's game can do!

It's not simply a case of 'its not popular'

It was popular - then it was banned. You're asking why can't the crippled (wo)man compete with the man who crippled him and saying it's wrong he should pay some reparation for that imo.

I agree v much about your point about sports selling out for sky money. I used to love watchimg rugby league but not to the point of paying for sky. Now I couldn't give a shit about it.

Cricket has suffered a lot from under exposure. I actually wonder if men's football eventually will suffer the same.
 
td53

That's a good question but possibly one for another thread - I don't mean you can't ask it on here, you know what I mean.

If Sky have a dwindling subscriber base and especially among younger customers as you say then I'd suggest there are several other factors to consider and many far more important then womens sport.

A big problem would be with piracy, especially among their technically savvy customers - or should that be ex customers or never going to be without changes customers.
Fair enough. My point is more that it can't change the sports themselves (i.e. it can't interfere with the actual football matches) but it can revamp the way they are presented and change the line ups of presenters etc.
 
There are jobs in which those characteristics matter (a rape counseling service for example) Sports pundit is not one of them no.

Can I ask a question back?

How does sky address it's aging and slowly dwindling subscriber base?
The one thing they could do is reduce the cost so it's more affordable.
They could stop trying to over hype everything they cover (mainly football)
In my view it's become very Americanised, tickertape news across the bottom , news, tables and stats down the sides!!
They have also tried to cater for everyone and you just cannot do it.
I love my golf but try watching the channel if there isnt an event on, its repeat after repeat.

Instead of trying all this razamataz try to simplify it all.

Now here's the thing you want to hear.......
If a presenter is a woman to appeal to a wider audience (whatever that means) then so be it but PLEASE let them be able to do the bloody job.

Someone earlier was digging out Shearer and to a degree I agree. I've found out of the new crop of pundits that Jermain Jennas stands head and shoulders above the rest.
I understand that the world moves on but I cannot accept some decisions to employ people for what they are rather than who they are.
 
Women being paid the same as men is ridiculous, that I will 100% agree with.

Yes, when womens sport generates more than the men, I think they should be paid more.

In MOST cases - I know it's not all - womens sport is subsidised by the male version.

In these cases, the women still complain that they are not earning the same as their male equivalents even though their earnings are being subsidised by those males.

I am struggling to think of that many male sports who receive subsidies from their female equivalents ?
 
Fair enough. My point is more that it can't change the sports themselves (i.e. it can't interfere with the actual football matches) but it can revamp the way they are presented and change the line ups of presenters etc.

td53

Absolutely.

You have made good fair points on all your posts and I'm not trying to say you are wrong and I am right.

I just think the coverage of womens sport/inclusion of female punters is more to do with being seen to do things right.

Your latest point here is certainly a good one and Sky certainly look to make changes and continually review things.

There are benefits of increased coverage of womens sport, I just don't like the way they are being forced on us.
 
Back
Top