• Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Sign in to follow this  
spygirl

9-0

Recommended Posts

It's not really surprising, as clearly the average 15 year old boy is already faster and more powerful than an average fully grown woman, and so they're going to win most of the sprints, headers etc. and thus get more of the ball. However skillful and tactically aware the women are, they're going to struggle to overturn that disadvantage. The same physical advantage applies in tennis, and I daresay many other sports.

But so what? Watching sport is exciting if it's a close competition, the actual standard of the competition is of lesser importance. If you think it's pointless watching women's football because they're not as good as men, then presumably you'd also think that it's pointless to watch any form of car racing that isn't F1, or any boxing match that isn't super heavyweight?

I do agree that paying women the same prize money at Wimbledon when they only pay three set matches is taking the piss a bit. But the answer is to make them play 5 sets, which they'd be perfectly capable of, not to pay them less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rave said:

It's not really surprising, as clearly the average 15 year old boy is already faster and more powerful than an average fully grown woman, and so they're going to win most of the sprints, headers etc. and thus get more of the ball. However skillful and tactically aware the women are, they're going to struggle to overturn that disadvantage. The same physical advantage applies in tennis, and I daresay many other sports.

But so what? Watching sport is exciting if it's a close competition, the actual standard of the competition is of lesser importance. If you think it's pointless watching women's football because they're not as good as men, then presumably you'd also think that it's pointless to watch any form of car racing that isn't F1, or any boxing match that isn't super heavyweight?

I do agree that paying women the same prize money at Wimbledon when they only pay three set matches is taking the piss a bit. But the answer is to make them play 5 sets, which they'd be perfectly capable of, not to pay them less.

Sports people are, in reality, just entertainers. Their income will reflect the demand from people to watch them. There is no sexism. It just is what it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have to disagree, there clearly is some sexism otherwise the story of how the women's team lost to a team of schoolboys wouldn't be considered worthy of comment, in the papers or on here.

Women's football is popular in the states, and it was once very popular in the UK. I agree that there should be a free market in sports entertainment and it should be allowed to succeed or fail on its own merits. Personally, as someone who is not a tennis fan but watches Wimbledon if my wife has it on and I have nothing better to do, I find women's tennis every bit as entertaining as men's, as long as there's not too much of that objectionable grunting every time they hit the ball. I haven't watched much women's football but it seems fine, just played at a necessarily slower pace than the men's game. Expressing surprise or indeed derision at the fact that a team of women can't beat some teenage lads is a bit like being surprised if Amir Khan took on Anthony Joshua in a boxing match and got knocked out in the first round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rave said:

It's not really surprising, as clearly the average 15 year old boy is already faster and more powerful than an average fully grown woman, and so they're going to win most of the sprints, headers etc. and thus get more of the ball. However skillful and tactically aware the women are, they're going to struggle to overturn that disadvantage. The same physical advantage applies in tennis, and I daresay many other sports.

But so what? Watching sport is exciting if it's a close competition, the actual standard of the competition is of lesser importance. If you think it's pointless watching women's football because they're not as good as men, then presumably you'd also think that it's pointless to watch any form of car racing that isn't F1, or any boxing match that isn't super heavyweight?

I do agree that paying women the same prize money at Wimbledon when they only pay three set matches is taking the piss a bit. But the answer is to make them play 5 sets, which they'd be perfectly capable of, not to pay them less.

f1 is just a procession of rich young men driveing around quite fast,and i used to love boxing but when they hated each other ie benn,ubank and watson all 3 could fight.i used to love watching the contrasting styles ie tecnical,southpaw brawler etc.heavy weight is basicly boreing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Rave said:

Well I have to disagree, there clearly is some sexism otherwise the story of how the women's team lost to a team of schoolboys wouldn't be considered worthy of comment, in the papers or on here.

Women's football is popular in the states, and it was once very popular in the UK. I agree that there should be a free market in sports entertainment and it should be allowed to succeed or fail on its own merits. Personally, as someone who is not a tennis fan but watches Wimbledon if my wife has it on and I have nothing better to do, I find women's tennis every bit as entertaining as men's, as long as there's not too much of that objectionable grunting every time they hit the ball. I haven't watched much women's football but it seems fine, just played at a necessarily slower pace than the men's game. Expressing surprise or indeed derision at the fact that a team of women can't beat some teenage lads is a bit like being surprised if Amir Khan took on Anthony Joshua in a boxing match and got knocked out in the first round.

well womens football drew huge crowds donkeys years ago in the uk,id rather watch the real women play if forced to than the women that play it now adays masquarading has men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stokiescum said:

f1 is just a procession of rich young men driveing around quite fast,and i used to love boxing but when they hated each other ie benn,ubank and watson all 3 could fight.i used to love watching the contrasting styles ie tecnical,southpaw brawler etc.heavy weight is basicly boreing.

I wouldn't disagree with any of that. I'd rather watch a one make car racing series than F1, closer racing makes for better entertainment. Women footballers seem to be capable of passing, shooting etc. with comparable skill to men, they just can't run as fast or jump as high. If all the players in the match are subject to the same physical limitation, in this case being female, then there's no reason it can't be an absorbing spectacle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Rave said:

I wouldn't disagree with any of that. I'd rather watch a one make car racing series than F1, closer racing makes for better entertainment. Women footballers seem to be capable of passing, shooting etc. with comparable skill to men, they just can't run as fast or jump as high. If all the players in the match are subject to the same physical limitation, in this case being female, then there's no reason it can't be an absorbing spectacle.

the main reason is they dont dive has much or try to cheat the ref has much ,so much has look at some of the men the kunts are rolling around on the floor after a free kick i used to consider football a contact sport within 30 years i see contact being banned .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, spygirl said:

They want to get some of those "transgender women" on their team, real women don't sound that good at football.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rave said:

Well I have to disagree, there clearly is some sexism otherwise the story of how the women's team lost to a team of schoolboys wouldn't be considered worthy of comment, in the papers or on here.

Women's football is popular in the states, and it was once very popular in the UK. I agree that there should be a free market in sports entertainment and it should be allowed to succeed or fail on its own merits. Personally, as someone who is not a tennis fan but watches Wimbledon if my wife has it on and I have nothing better to do, I find women's tennis every bit as entertaining as men's, as long as there's not too much of that objectionable grunting every time they hit the ball. I haven't watched much women's football but it seems fine, just played at a necessarily slower pace than the men's game. Expressing surprise or indeed derision at the fact that a team of women can't beat some teenage lads is a bit like being surprised if Amir Khan took on Anthony Joshua in a boxing match and got knocked out in the first round.

I agree with most of that - sport is entertainment and its stars get paid based upon the paying customers they are likely to attract so any talk of salary is a nonsense - but I've never read or heard of women's football as a spectator sport bring very popular in the UK or, for that matter, in the US bar the TV audience when they won the women's world cup for the first time and that was mainly the novelty factor and didn't translate into big crowds watching their league games.

I have watched US college women's "soccer" several times and the standard really isn't very good and it isn't just down to size and strength.

I worked the figures before but from memory each year something like twenty British male footballers make it into the premiership.  So less than one per county from a country where pretty much every boy has a decent crack at football.  Best in your school isn't good enough, even best in your county may not be.

There is incredible competition to get into men's football so the skill standard is far higher than that in women's football which is more on a par with, say, men's hockey in terms of the difficulty in a good amateur getting to play at a decent level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rave said:

I do agree that paying women the same prize money at Wimbledon when they only pay three set matches is taking the piss a bit. But the answer is to make them play 5 sets, which they'd be perfectly capable of, not to pay them less.

How are those players earnings funded?  If from advertising revenue, then they should just be paid proportionately to that..  ie,  their value (surely?)

I'm not really a sports fan, but I guess the issue with womens football is women, not men. 

Most men's football ia watched by men.  You need to convince a similar number of women to get obsessed with womens football to the point that the'y pay for special coverage, buy season tickets and purchase stupidly overpriced womens football merchandise.

Or you can try to draw men over to watching womens football..  but for that you'd be better off trying womens topless football on a custard pitch.  That would almost certainly work and would require a lot of skill on behalf of the players..  I doubt it would go down well in the feminist camps though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Libspero said:

Fun? 

Womens football is fun and not to be taken seriously? :-)

I dont see how anything positive for womens football was ever going to be achieved here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, snaga said:

Why was this matched played? Similar matches have been played before with the same outcome.

They get played every so often, there was one just before the world cup, they are probably very good for the women (despite the result) as it gives them a considerable physical challenge so is going to warn them up nicely for their first league game.

Of course if the women had won this then the So-Called BBC would wet itself with excitement and start banging the "women's football catching up with men" drum but that's not really the point of the game IMO.

I'd compare it to when men's teams take their players across an army assault course prior to the start of the season; and if they were doing that competitively against army PT instructors then they would also lose by the equivalent of 9-0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point to this story is that we are constantly told women are just as good as men. This football game shows it clearly isn't true when it comes to football. The result then opens up the idea that if physically men and women are completely different it's possible that mentally they are different as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rave said:

Well I have to disagree, there clearly is some sexism otherwise the story of how the women's team lost to a team of schoolboys wouldn't be considered worthy of comment, in the papers or on here.

In the spirit of equality,  I don’t think a men’s premier league team would get any less grief if they lost to a team of school girls. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Rave said:

It's not really surprising, as clearly the average 15 year old boy is already faster and more powerful than an average fully grown woman, and so they're going to win most of the sprints, headers etc. and thus get more of the ball. However skillful and tactically aware the women are, they're going to struggle to overturn that disadvantage. The same physical advantage applies in tennis, and I daresay many other sports.

But so what? Watching sport is exciting if it's a close competition, the actual standard of the competition is of lesser importance. If you think it's pointless watching women's football because they're not as good as men, then presumably you'd also think that it's pointless to watch any form of car racing that isn't F1, or any boxing match that isn't super heavyweight?

I do agree that paying women the same prize money at Wimbledon when they only pay three set matches is taking the piss a bit. But the answer is to make them play 5 sets, which they'd be perfectly capable of, not to pay them less.

I find men's football boring. F1 tedious, and boxing uninteresting.

It's all pointless really, but I suppose most things are if we're honest. The thing about all those sports, is that while I'm not interested, there is a significant amount of public interest that does justify TV coverage, and even the inclusion of results in mainstream news coverage. I just ignore it.

The issue I have womens football is that I know that nobody else is interested either, and yet I'm having it rammed down my throat. For some reason that annoys me.

xD

Edited by SpectrumFX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rave said:

I wouldn't disagree with any of that. I'd rather watch a one make car racing series than F1, closer racing makes for better entertainment. Women footballers seem to be capable of passing, shooting etc. with comparable skill to men, they just can't run as fast or jump as high. If all the players in the match are subject to the same physical limitation, in this case being female, then there's no reason it can't be an absorbing spectacle.

I object to the MSM fauning over how we SHOULD all watch womens football.  If it was any good, then we would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

8 minutes ago, BLOOLOO said:

I object to the MSM fauning over how we SHOULD all watch womens football.  If it was any good, then we would.

 

Isn't it primarily the usual suspects who have their own threads on this board - BBC and Channel 4 - rather than the whole MSM?  The papers I read correctly treat it as a minority sport which they cover when it's successful but otherwise ignore it.  Similar to athletics.  When Greg Rutherford won the long jump it was the back page headline but they're not going to write about the long jump every week.

Their particular bit of perniciousness is to treat the mens and womens games as a single game so saying things like this piece of garbage from the official Channel 4 account which is only going to turn people away from women's football:

ttp

s:/ Channel 4Verified account @Channel4

Just to clear up a few incorrect reports/articles this morning. Last night wasn’t the first time England have been in a World Cup Semi-Final since 1990. The last time was 2015.

Dh4qRbTW0AA2mYj.jpg

 

1,665 replies . 13,069 retweets 39,241 likes
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Replying to @Channel4

Ridiculous tweet. We also made a world cup final in 2003 but that was a different sport as well. The nation is hurting this morning. Why do people like you have to exist?

22 replies . 46 retweets 1,888 likes
 
 
 
 
  •  
 

It’s the left mate, that don’t know anything apart from being woke and self-flagellation. Jon Snow was probably supporting Croatia last night.

24 replies . 12 retweets 510 likes
 
 
 
 

/twitter.com/Channe/status/1017297049572737029 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rave said:

I wouldn't disagree with any of that. I'd rather watch a one make car racing series than F1, closer racing makes for better entertainment. Women footballers seem to be capable of passing, shooting etc. with comparable skill to men, they just can't run as fast or jump as high. If all the players in the match are subject to the same physical limitation, in this case being female, then there's no reason it can't be an absorbing spectacle.

The same argument can be made at any level in the league structure. There’s no reason why a premiership match should be more of an even match than Woking vs Kidderminster, yet it draws crowds of less than 2000, while Arsenal v Chelsea may draw millions of viewers.

Most sports fans want to watch the absolute pinnacle of the sport, not just random bods who happen to be evenly matched. Super heavyweight IS by far the most popular boxing category, and title fights draw the biggest crowds. F1 IS the biggest draw in motor racing.

The result isn’t newsworthy, the story is the subsequent Twitter spat (quelle surprise, they should rename the news “what happened on Twitter today”). No one objects to women’s football, they just resent the relentless messaging that women’s sport is just as good as men’s sport, when a fucking blind man can see it’s not.

Edited by Hail the Tripod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.