England women v Latvia

Regarding the equal pay argument, I think England players such as Harry Kane get £2,000 per game. Latvian internationals I expect receive less. I can’t see how you think a move towards equal pay “will be the end”.
I assume your only talking about international football, I'm talking about the game as a whole. There's no denying its getting pushed more and more, and I have no problem with it, I just don't watch it. But if someone wants to make an argument for it I'm all ears as to how it will be funded.
 
I assume your only talking about international football, I'm talking about the game as a whole. There's no denying its getting pushed more and more, and I have no problem with it, I just don't watch it. But if someone wants to make an argument for it I'm all ears as to how it will be funded.
Yes I was talking about international football as I think the debate about equal pay was centred around that.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that an amateur women’s goalie from Latvia should be paid £200k per week by her club!
 
Yes I was talking about international football as I think the debate about equal pay was centred around that.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that an amateur women’s goalie from Latvia should be paid £200k per week by her club!
To be fair Latvian women goalies probably earn it, even if it is by picking the ball out of the net a lot :)
 
Better scrap conference level football then. What's the point if they only get attendances the same as women's football? Is another way of looking at it.
I think your missing the point, conference (national league) football gets a minute fraction of the coverage the women’s game is getting, even though its of a higher standard and there is more interest in it from the football loving public. Also we don’t see a representative of the National League on every football show on the telly telling us what they think, the reasons are the vast majority wouldn’t know who they were, they really aren’t qualified to pass comment and nobody really cares what they would have to say. However the opposite can be said about the women’s professional game, in the past couple of years it has become grossly over represented in broadcasting on the beeb and particularly Sky Sports.
I understand that in order for the women’s game to grow and progress it requires coverage and there is now a massive disparity in the standard across the board as last nights joke result demonstrate. The media who are pushing this agenda are covering it from an angle celebrating how great the England team are but really it’s just embarrassing for the ‘sport’.
There is definitely a place for women’s professional football and it needs and deserves developing and investment but in my opinion it’s far too much, too soon and the way it’s being rammed down fans throats with people we have never heard of replacing well known male ex professionals on TV shows is just winding people up and receiving a backlash.
 
I think your missing the point, conference (national league) football gets a minute fraction of the coverage the women’s game is getting, even though its of a higher standard and there is more interest in it from the football loving public. Also we don’t see a representative of the National League on every football show on the telly telling us what they think, the reasons are the vast majority wouldn’t know who they were, they really aren’t qualified to pass comment and nobody really cares what they would have to say. However the opposite can be said about the women’s professional game, in the past couple of years it has become grossly over represented in broadcasting on the beeb and particularly Sky Sports.
I understand that in order for the women’s game to grow and progress it requires coverage and there is now a massive disparity in the standard across the board as last nights joke result demonstrate. The media who are pushing this agenda are covering it from an angle celebrating how great the England team are but really it’s just embarrassing for the ‘sport’.
There is definitely a place for women’s professional football and it needs and deserves developing and investment but in my opinion it’s far too much, too soon and the way it’s being rammed down fans throats with people we have never heard of replacing well known male ex professionals on TV shows is just winding people up and receiving a backlash.
Talk me through Dan Walker's football credentials, or Mark Chapman's. I'd say the women pundits know far more about the game from the inside than either of them?
 
Yes I was talking about international football as I think the debate about equal pay was centred around that.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that an amateur women’s goalie from Latvia should be paid £200k per week by her club!
I think your ignoring the point that they are now classed as professional and as such there are already people talking about equality across all sports not just football. That means equal pay for all professionals.
 
What I want to know is : how the hell did the Latvian ladies manage to get into an offside position ??????
I believe one defender didn't realize u switched ends at half time. She was all alone in the England box thinking they had made a blinding start to the 2nd half.
 
I think your ignoring the point that they are now classed as professional and as such there are already people talking about equality across all sports not just football. That means equal pay for all professionals.
Are Blackpools players paid as much as Man City's. Its a complete red herring.

Although it's a team game, each player has their own individually negotiated contract.
 
Are Blackpools players paid as much as Man City's. Its a complete red herring.

Although it's a team game, each player has their own individually negotiated contract.
Pay scale for elite professionals, for example the premier league ladies. I am assuming the international ladies play for their top clubs ?
 
Here's my thoughts.

1) Broadcasters are showing games and promoting them as they believe there's a market for this. It's a commercial decision.
2) Broadcasters are using a whole array of players (male and female) for the same reason. To broaden audiences and to drive commercial appeal. If they divide opinion it's usually even better.
3) How much anyone is paid to do anything is completely subjective to the position of those paying the wages. If someone wants to give Ellen White the same salary as Harry Kane, that's up to them. In the case of womens football, the longevity of such an approach is questionable without increasing the number of paying supporters.
4) The more money and exposure the womens game gets, the more those working in it (directly or indirectly) will have to face criticism of elements that are not considered good. You can't have one without the other. My bugbear with how womens football is presented is that it there's often a glossing over of poor elements of play and an overplaying of 'good' play to the point where every goal is 'unbelievable!!!!' and every save is 'incredible!!!'. It sometimes comes across like a mum praising her kid.
5) Good to see Robbie back, although I'm surprised at his lack of concern for the clear overspending in the womens game.
 
Talk me through Dan Walker's football credentials, or Mark Chapman's. I'd say the women pundits know far more about the game from the inside than either of them?
Dan Walker and Mark Chapman are the anchor / interviewer and not an expert. They should be judged on their credentials as journalists / broadcasters. Although, I don't rate Dan Walker.
 
20 opportunities but not once did they take their shirts off when they scored.

It would have been a lot of bookings mind!
 
I have a few points i feel i need to make regarding this topic.

1. Women's football is a pale comparison to mens football and as such i choose not to watch it. if i wanted to see a 20 - 0 score line i would watch sunday league football after the players have spent the previous night in the local boozer.

2. Equal pay for male/female sport is not going to happen. People will be paid what their market value is worth, does a feather weight boxing champion get paid the same as the Heavyweight champion? No they don't, even though the smaller guys might be technically a better boxer he doesn't have the potential to thrill the crowd with a heavy knockout like the bigger guys and that is what puts bums on seats in that sport.

3. As for promoting minority sports (most women's sports are currently) then why doesn't the BBC/Sky/BT not start pushing Banger racing, speedway, crown green bowls, fishing, Badminton etc as they are all minority sports some probably more deserving of being broadcast over what is currently being shown!

Trying to make everyone equal is a bit like communism and how is that working out?
 
I have a few points i feel i need to make regarding this topic.

1. Women's football is a pale comparison to mens football and as such i choose not to watch it. if i wanted to see a 20 - 0 score line i would watch sunday league football after the players have spent the previous night in the local boozer.

2. Equal pay for male/female sport is not going to happen. People will be paid what their market value is worth, does a feather weight boxing champion get paid the same as the Heavyweight champion? No they don't, even though the smaller guys might be technically a better boxer he doesn't have the potential to thrill the crowd with a heavy knockout like the bigger guys and that is what puts bums on seats in that sport.

3. As for promoting minority sports (most women's sports are currently) then why doesn't the BBC/Sky/BT not start pushing Banger racing, speedway, crown green bowls, fishing, Badminton etc as they are all minority sports some probably more deserving of being broadcast over what is currently being shown!

Trying to make everyone equal is a bit like communism and how is that working out?
No one I trying to make it equal. Male insecurities all over this thread.

The BBC are plugging it because they have sod all other live sport. That's it.
 
Here's my thoughts.

1) Broadcasters are showing games and promoting them as they believe there's a market for this. It's a commercial decision.
2) Broadcasters are using a whole array of players (male and female) for the same reason. To broaden audiences and to drive commercial appeal. If they divide opinion it's usually even better.
3) How much anyone is paid to do anything is completely subjective to the position of those paying the wages. If someone wants to give Ellen White the same salary as Harry Kane, that's up to them. In the case of womens football, the longevity of such an approach is questionable without increasing the number of paying supporters.
4) The more money and exposure the womens game gets, the more those working in it (directly or indirectly) will have to face criticism of elements that are not considered good. You can't have one without the other. My bugbear with how womens football is presented is that it there's often a glossing over of poor elements of play and an overplaying of 'good' play to the point where every goal is 'unbelievable!!!!' and every save is 'incredible!!!'. It sometimes comes across like a mum praising her kid.
5) Good to see Robbie back, although I'm surprised at his lack of concern for the clear overspending in the womens game.
ill add, the BBC have the commercial rights to broadcast therefore they push it up the visibility scale in their sports reporting, this an issue with the way the bbc is organised and the myriad of factors that come into how the BBC is funded and therefore managed. By all accounts based on popularity and commercial interest womens football should be somewhere below national conference, again without doubt there are political factors that push it to the forefront.

saying that there are women in the womens game who are emminently qualified to talk about football in general and male players and ex-players who talk utter shisser being paid huge amounts as so called pundits.

With increased profile the womens game should get better, because there is then an imperative to make it better, for commercial and general interest reasons. It wasnt that long ago when and an England vs Norway game would have been expected to be a massacre and a possible double digit scoreline (in favour of England before anyone comments).

Understanding that, increased visibility of the womens game will have a general detrimenetal effect on other aspects of the game, in the same way that increased champions league and the possibility of a european league would be detrimental. There is only so much viewership and more importantly only so much money for broadcast rights and sponsorship available - the more leagues, sports, games there are the more that overall financial pool has to be spread around.

The fact that elite football is so financially problematic, an additional entrant, high profile womens football, is going to eventually have an effect.

I watched the last womens world cup, and thought the games were pretty good. apart from the one against the USA who just seemed to be the ultimate shithousery team. its like they had been watching the videos of every team managed by, Mick McCarthy, steve evans, neil warnock et al and taken everything they did as a gospel
 
No one I trying to make it equal. Male insecurities all over this thread.

The BBC are plugging it because they have sod all other live sport. That's it.
But Sky and BBC are trying to make it equal Wiz (not pay, the comparison of the sports), despite the fact there is an enormous gulf in standard.

I don't know if you use Twitter - but Sky & BBC have stopped referring to women's teams as 'women's teams'. For example there will regularly be articles / headlines such as 'It's Arsenal vs Tottenham in the North London Derby later', or 'Arsenal sign Lyon forward ...'.

All to do with women's football but they now no longer refer to the fact it is actually women's football. God knows why - my guess would be they're doing it to not offend anyone. But If that's not trying to make it equal then I don't know what is.
 
But Sky and BBC are trying to make it equal Wiz (not pay, the comparison of the sports), despite the fact there is an enormous gulf in standard.

I don't know if you use Twitter - but Sky & BBC have stopped referring to women's teams as 'women's teams'. For example there will regularly be articles / headlines such as 'It's Arsenal vs Tottenham in the North London Derby later', or 'Arsenal sign Lyon forward ...'.

All to do with women's football but they now no longer refer to the fact it is actually women's football. God knows why - my guess would be they're doing it to not offend anyone. But If that's not trying to make it equal then I don't know what is.
I don't disagree about the misleading headlines. Even today, Scottish international dies at 26.

Click on and it's a woman rugby player with 90+ caps. Very sad news and all that, but I've never heard of her.

Even then, I'm not sure there's any demand for equality. It simply doesn't stack up, but coverage of live games doesn't bother me one bit. I don't watch it so it doesn't affect me.
 
Back
Top