Raj Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 Is it all over???..Thank fook!!!(not that I watched any!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 also another thing pissing me off about this is that it has been constantly reported as us winning the bronze medal. since when was that a thing? bronze medalists at the world cup? isn't it just the world cup winners and then everyone else is a loser? since when did we have gold, silver and bronze at the world cup? or have i just been so disinterested by the time we get to this stage of most tournaments that i haven't noticed teams "winning bronze" at the world cup? Yeah they have a third placed play off, I refuse to believe you didnt know that though haha. The media would probably mention it if that blokes got that far. Inbetween mentioning how crap we are at peno's of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScouseFox Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 Yeah they have a third placed play off, I refuse to believe you didnt know that though haha. The media would probably mention it if that blokes got that far. Inbetween mentioning how crap we are at peno's of course. no i knew they had a third placed play off haha, i just didn't know that they were announced as "bronze medal winners" like the olympics. thought they just, er, came third. i read a report (might've been bbc, might've been some place else) that didn't say america won the world cup, it said they won the gold medal, whilst japan won silver and england won bronze. whereas any other world cup i've ever watched has just had a winner and then 31 other teams who didn't win. and the winner was the "world cup winners", not gold medalists. probably just trying to make the fact we lost sound a lot better than it was so we can pretend to care about women's footy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 no i knew they had a third placed play off haha, i just didn't know that they were announced as "bronze medal winners" like the olympics. thought they just, er, came third. i read a report (might've been bbc, might've been some place else) that didn't say america won the world cup, it said they won the gold medal, whilst japan won silver and england won bronze. whereas any other world cup i've ever watched has just had a winner and then 31 other teams who didn't win. and the winner was the "world cup winners", not gold medalists. probably just trying to make the fact we lost sound a lot better than it was so we can pretend to care about women's footy. Oh right, weird. Yeah I see what you mean. I just assumed they were calling it bronze as that is generally related to third place. Bronze for Lucy Bronze and all that jazz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Horse's Mouth Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-33411415 PC gone absolutely beserk. How in the **** can that be considered sexist? how deplorable to suggest Laura Bassett is a hero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoneDog Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 Saw this ridiculous line in plenty of reports lately - "They achieved the best performance by a senior England side since the 1966 World Cup winning team." Unreal baloney, and plenty of media fools are trying to compare the incomparable. What they should have said was - "They achieved the best performance so far in English ladies football. Congratulations. Maybe one day you could compete with a lads Sunday League team". Honestly I can't believe my ears and eyes just lately. What the hell has happened to the world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Horse's Mouth Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 giving them fair dos is fine, but this is quite frankly disgusting. The quality is dreadful, to even compare it to 1966, Bobby Moore is turning in his grave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballwipe Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 Why do we insist on merging the women's footballing achievements with the mens? We didn't do that with the Rugby World Cup, we didn't do that with the Cricket team. We don't do it when the 100m winner is about 2 seconds slower than the men. What's so special about shoehorning football into the same pigeonhole as the guys. They are totally different entities. The England ladies team did fantastic and I hope it maximises the female game in this country, the more people inspired by it the better. But comparing the women's team to the men is simply unfair on the women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 The tweet translates into "the women football team go back home to their families as heroes". If you find that patronising or sexist then you've got a serious problem. I used to think the phrase 'political correctness gone mad' was a bit of a cheeky over-statement, but honestly this last year it's been off the charts. This one baffled and I can't help but think people are now desperate to find fault and make horrible assumptions about everything. For pete's sake it was a tweet, 144 characters doesn't leave much room for qualifiers or expanded context. I read it and assumed that at worst it was alluding to the fact that most of these players are not full-time professionals, they came into the tournament as 'ordinary people' with 'ordinary lives', and now a few weeks later they're going home as sporting heroes. The england team and the entire womens world cup has been trading on the story of how they're ordinary people overcoming the odds to accomplish extraordinary things. This tweet was probably the least patronising thing in the last 6 weeks. And I could easily see them doing similar for the mens team "Our lions go back to being fathers, husbands and sons today - but they've taken on a new title, heroes." That would hardly seem unusual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireFox Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 And I could easily see them doing similar for the mens team "Our lions go back to being fathers, husbands and sons today - but they've taken on a new title, heroes." That would hardly seem unusual. That would seem pretty ****ing unusual to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Horse's Mouth Posted 7 July 2015 Share Posted 7 July 2015 It would be pretty ****ing unusual, I find the term lionesses kinda condescending too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 That would seem pretty ****ing unusual to me. Even if it was in the same context? having had an article written about them returning home to their families? It's harder to imagine but mostly because we don't really respect our mens team very much - not as footballers and not as people. But back when Becks was still playing there probably wasn't a single article about him that didn't mention the fact that he was a dad, and 'gosh isn't incredible that he takes an interest in his kids and his family.' Which is absolutely fine, brilliant, very nice things to say and not a bit patronising. There must be millions of headlines and tweets about sports stars that include non-sport information such as the person's age, nationality, appearance, cultural upbringing etc. and it's just included coz that's part of who they are, and those little details complement the picture being painted. And now that I think of it, I can almost guarantee this sort of headline has been used when reporting on soldiers (male and female) coming home from war. And I don't think that takes away from any of the other skills or accomplishments they have in their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 It would be pretty ****ing unusual, I find the term lionesses kinda condescending too. I don't get how lioness is condescending in and of itself. It could be misused that way, sure enough, but that's true of every single reference to a person's nationality, race, age, gender, personality etc etc. They're distinguishers, but unless they're used in a deliberately negative way, I don't think they should automatically be condemned. To me 'lioness' and 'lion' are the same thing, just one is female and the other is male, doesn't make one better or worse than the other. No more than I would think referring to the u14 players as 'young lions' or 'cubs' would be condescending or ageism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Strange that people think if the mens team had lost they would have been abused. I remember the last time the mens team lost in the semi finals of the world cup they were welcomed back as heroes. I guess some people just want to be negative about womens football. I think it's more about what they show and what expectations were. The 'golden generation' who went out in the quarter finals played boring negative football that was way below what we expected and they went out a whimper time after time, we then had to endure pictures of them laughing and smoking £50 notes after the exit in one of them. The team of 90' was the most likeable England team in my lifetime, showed amazing character on numerous occasions to come through desperate situations (Platt goal ET, 2-1 down with 8 minutes to go to Cameroon) and then they took the solid tournament favourites and best team in the World to penalties, add to that a crying Gazza and you've got a country in love with a football team. But I suppose it's far easier to just put it down to the fact people want to be negative about women though, an argument for the unthinking. Saw this ridiculous line in plenty of reports lately - "They achieved the best performance by a senior England side since the 1966 World Cup winning team." Unreal baloney, and plenty of media fools are trying to compare the incomparable. What they should have said was - "They achieved the best performance so far in English ladies football. Congratulations. Maybe one day you could compete with a lads Sunday League team". Honestly I can't believe my ears and eyes just lately. What the hell has happened to the world? It's been happening for years, any sort of logic and common sense is being thrown out the World and we are just expected to close our eyes and run with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 8 July 2015 Share Posted 8 July 2015 Women's World Cup breaks TV records 7 July 2015 From the sectionEntertainment & Arts USA are the first nation to win three Women's World Cups The Women's World Cup final has become the most-watched football game ever in the United States. Sunday's match, in which the US beat Japan 5-2, was seen by a record 25.4 million viewers, according to Nielsen ratings data. It shatters the previous record, set during the 2014 Brazil World Cup, when 18.2 million tuned in to see the USA play Portugal. The audience peaked at 30.9 million between 01:30 and 01:45 BST. Viewers saw Carli Lloyd score an incredible 13-minute hat-trick, as the United States trounced Japan to win their third Women's World Cup title, following victories in 1991 and 1999. The latter was seen by 18 million viewers, the previous highest audience for a women's match. Jump media player Media player help Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue. Media captionWomen's World Cup 2015 final highlights: USA 5-2 Japan Sunday's game, which was held in Vancouver, beat big-brand shows like Big Brother on CBS and Celebrity Family Feud on ABC; while broadcaster Fox Sports saw 14.6 million people stick around for its post-match analysis. In the UK, conversely, the culmination of the tournament saw a steep drop in audience figures. Just 500,000 viewers - or 13% of the total television audience - stayed up to watch the final. Four days earlier, England's quarter-final match was seen by an average audience of 1.7 million, with a 32% share of the audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.