Women's Football

[StanSP]

Just now, ParkerPen said:

I suppose its a chicken and egg situation to some degree, I'm sure we all agree that the women's game can (and should !!) improve in popularity / stature etc 

Does it currently justify the level of exposure (as in the BBC example) - I would say no - will it continue to gain popularity without more exposure though ?

How do you expect it to improve popularity and stature when it gets criticised how it has been done tonight? It's not even the top main story. 

[Golden Fox]

To be fair, I was half joking and half serious, but its a classic case of the straw that breaks the camel's back, where I get mildy irritated numerous times without making comment, but the one time I'm in the mood to be lazy (its been a tough day), it just got me thinking what other opions were...

 

For context, I have an 11 year old daughter who plays competitive football and I've taken her to as many women's football games as Leicester games, so I'm really supportive of the strides the sport has made...

 

...but for me, it is a different sport from men's football and sometimes I can feel cheated when I click on a link and read through a few paragraphs only to realise its a story about women's football and not men's. There is very little crossover between women's and men's football (I don't have much time for either Phil Neville or Inter Miami!) but I feel I've had enough in agreement to validate my point of view and know I'm not alone in this, while fully appreciating the ridicule of taking screenshots compared to an extra click of the mouse.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

4 minutes ago, tom27111 said:

Absolutely not. 

Geoff, you work in the media, you know how it works.

Newsworthy stories are the highest up on a website and get more airtime.

If I'm wrong, why aren't Talksport going live to women's games during the score update show at 3pm on a Saturday?

Why aren't H&J, Durham, Brazil, Goldstein etc. having phone-ins about women's football on a regular and consistent basis?

Why isn't Jim White getting excited about the Women's transfer deadline day?

It isn't a sexist point of view from me at all.

The WSL is newsworthy and hence why it is on the BBC website. Why does rugby league or cricket or darts etc appear higher on the website now and again when it isn't as big as mens football? It's a mix of stories.

talkSPORT have done commentaries on Womens games and have reporters at selected games. There is even a weekly show on the network. And they do have debates on womens football.

It's not as massive as the mens game in this country but interest is growing.

There's too much sexist bollocks spouted about womens football and female pundits.

If I want to avoid certain TV shows or certain subjects then I avoid them very easily.

The OP starting a thread about story positioning on the BBC website is just ridiculous.

[Jobyfox]

8 minutes ago, NaijaFox said:

It's not "miles behind" because it's not in direct competition with the men's game.

It's no different from tennis, basketball or even athletics. Each has its own peculiarities - and audience.

I think that’s what I’m saying really - that it should be judged on it’s own merits. It’s not in direct competition or comparable to the men’s game. But as soon as you do start comparing it then it will be judged unfavourably - so let’s not do it! 
 

Some commentators seem obsessed with trying to force fit a narrative of comparison with men’s football.  “Jill Scott is the most capped England player”. No she’s not. She’s the most capped women’s player just as Shilton is the most capped men’s player. Emma Hayes saying women’s football isn’t a step down. I’m sorry, but currently it is even if they do all work and train just as hard. 

 

I also don’t think that comparisons with Tennis and Athletics are particularly helpful. Women have had the same opportunities and exposure in those sports for quite some time. Women’s football is at a completely different stage of evolution 

 

 

[NaijaFox]

2 minutes ago, Jobyfox said:

I also don’t think that comparisons with Tennis and Athletics are particularly helpful. Women have had the same opportunities and exposure in those sports for quite some time. Women’s football is at a completely different stage of evolution 

It is, in terms of not being in direct competition with men's sport.

[UpTheLeagueFox]

4 minutes ago, Jobyfox said:

Emma Hayes saying women’s football isn’t a step down. I’m sorry, but currently it is even if they do all work and train just as hard. 

I thought she was referencing it would be a step down for her leaving Chelsea women for Wimbledon men.

And I think she would be absolutely right.

[AjcW]

Just now, UpTheLeagueFox said:

I thought she was referencing it would be a step down for her leaving Chelsea women for Wimbledon men.

And I think she would be absolutely right.

She 100% was. She’ll get a championship job offer soon and she knows it. It was the right thing to say and the right decision for her 

[Foxxed]

1 hour ago, Golden Fox said:

OK - I'm probably going to be lambasted for this viewpoint, but after watching the game tonight, I've gone on the BBC website to have a quick read of thier report:

But the report isn't one of the top stories you need to navigate down to the football page:

The BBC's algorithms are now prioritising Chelsea Women over Leicester getting as far in the FA Cup as they have since 1982.

 

I appreciate the push for equality and this will only happen with more exposure, but in terms of importance and number of fans interested in the result, this feels like there is a mismatch, and there is a real agenda behind this - I don't know if it because of women's football or because it is 2 of the "Rich 6" playing each other, but am I out of line in thinking this is going too far?

 

 

I know your pain. As a youth I had to skip to the very BACK of the newspaper. Only then did I get the news I wanted. The nationals were worse. They forced me to skip past TWO WHOLE PAGES before I found the news I wanted. They should have put it on the front page. But bloody political correctness stopped them. Boils my piss to think about it.

 

 

Edited 10 February 2021 by Foxxed

[UpTheLeagueFox]

1 minute ago, AjcW said:

She 100% was. She’ll get a championship job offer soon and she knows it. It was the right thing to say and the right decision for her 

Yep. There will be women coaches in the mens game before too long - and why not? Only dinosaur men would have a problem with it - the same blokes who hate that female pundits know loads more about football than them.

[tom27111]

12 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

The WSL is newsworthy and hence why it is on the BBC website. Why does rugby league or cricket or darts etc appear higher on the website now and again when it isn't as big as mens football? It's a mix of stories.

talkSPORT have done commentaries on Womens games and have reporters at selected games. There is even a weekly show on the network. And they do have debates on womens football.

It's not as massive as the mens game in this country but interest is growing.

There's too much sexist bollocks spouted about womens football and female pundits.

If I want to avoid certain TV shows or certain subjects then I avoid them very easily.

The OP starting a thread about story positioning on the BBC website is just ridiculous.

Fair enough.

 

I didn't look at Op's screen shots, so took it out of context.

 

I imagine the Live commentary on Talksport would have been the World Cup or Euro's?

 

I have rarely listened to the station lately, but a lot of other sports get more airtime than women's football, or at least did in the last few years when I did listen.

 

Again, because they are more in the public interest.

 

As a product, the Premier League is the best in the world. Other sports have things that have piqued interest too, T20 for example in cricket.

 

As a product, the WSL isn't very good.

 

The BBC tend to lean towards it because they have the TV rights. But the exposure is good for it and positive for young women.

 

If it was a decent product, they wouldn't. And you'd get 20,000 plus fans to watch games live.

Edited 10 February 2021 by tom27111

[CosbehFox]

48 minutes ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

I did laugh last week when the Chelsea women's manager turned down the Wimbledon men's manager job saying it wasn't a step up.

 

Each to their own I suppose and it was her right to do so.

Well she didn’t turn it down for starters. And her point was actually ‘I’m going from a world class training facility with international players from across the world to a rented college pitch of a training ground and nowhere the same level of backroom support’. 
 

It’s like a double tennis player who is ranked world no.1 deciding to go play singles and get ranked about 572 in the world 

Edited 10 February 2021 by Cardiff_Fox

[Foxxed]

51 minutes ago, OntarioFox said:

Honestly, if our girls get promoted this year (possible, sitting top with a game in hand on Durham), it'll be great to have some national press coverage. 

I don't see the issue. The problem is more with the BBC's absolutely wank sports coverage in general nowadays - Women's footy is about all they can afford the rights to, so they're obviously going to push it in the same way they do the others they actually have on-board - for example, the Six Nations, or Wimbledon (which is hanging by a thread at this point from what I understand).

 

I'm obviously not based in the UK atm so I can't comment, but looking at the schedules it looks like they don't even have rights to the Men's games anymore? Or have they just buried them on the red button this round?

It's been asked before, I'm sure, but Morgan the manager and Morgan the centre half are related. But are they related to club legend Morgan?

[Jobyfox]

6 minutes ago, NaijaFox said:

It is, in terms of not being in direct competition with men's sport.

With respect I’m agreeing with that. In fact I think that’s  my whole bloody point!!!

[CosbehFox]

1 minute ago, Foxxed said:

It's been asked before, I'm sure, but Morgan the manager and Morgan the centre half are related. But are they related to club legend Morgan?

No 

[Foxxed]

1 minute ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

No 

Thanks. Will we stay up if we get promoted?

[UpTheLeagueFox]

1 minute ago, tom27111 said:

I imagine the Live commentary on Talksport would have been the World Cup or Euro's?

I have rarely listened to the station lately, but a lot of other sports get more airtime than women's football, or at least did in the last few years when I did listen.

Again, because they are more in the public interest.

Ad a product, the Premier League is the best in the world. Other sports have things that have piqued interest too, T20 for example in cricket.

As a product, the WSL isn't very good.

The BBC tend to lean towards it because they have the TV rights. But the exposure is good for it and positive for young women.

If it was a decent product, they wouldn't. And you'd get 20,000 plus fans to watch games live.

Yes, they've done comms on big tournaments.

"As a product, the WSL isn't very good." Are you purely comparing it to the men's game? Because that would be pointless.

Men's football gets way more coverage (TV/papers/radio) because it's way more popular than anything else ... but that doesn't mean other sports, and those played by women, should be ignored/mocked.

[LCFC1996]

Just now, Foxxed said:

Thanks. Will we stay up if we get promoted?

We’d invest fairly heavily I’d say so I’d fancy our chances to establish ourselves, if they don’t drop this season then West Ham would be favourites to go down imo

[Jobyfox]

29 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

I thought she was referencing it would be a step down for her leaving Chelsea women for Wimbledon men.

And I think she would be absolutely right.

That was the wider context of why she was being asked, but read the full quote.

 

What she was saying about opportunities is something nobody can disagree with and also many other points she was making; but not that the game is at the same level - because it’s not. 
 

I think people in the women’s game think that any criticism is aimed at the dedication and commitment of the athletes. I’m sure they work and train just as hard as the men in every sense. Maybe even harder.
 

But there are fewer players, less competition, fewer world class performers/teams etc etc. Against a league structure that was established in 1888. 

Edited 10 February 2021 by Jobyfox

[tom27111]

3 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Yes, they've done comms on big tournaments.

"As a product, the WSL isn't very good." Are you purely comparing it to the men's game? Because that would be pointless.

Men's football gets way more coverage (TV/papers/radio) because it's way more popular than anything else ... but that doesn't mean other sports, and those played by women, should be ignored/mocked.

No, I'm not comparing it directly to the mens game or that alone.

 

It simply isn't a great product, or very marketable. 

 

Scores of other sports are, many of which are played by women.

 

Look at the popularity and interest in netball over the past 3 or 4 years.

 

Maybe the WSL could learn a lesson from that.

[Foxxed]

7 minutes ago, LCFC1996 said:

We’d invest fairly heavily I’d say so I’d fancy our chances to establish ourselves, if they don’t drop this season then West Ham would be favourites to go down imo

How have we invested heavily?

[LCFC1996]

Just now, Foxxed said:

How have we invested heavily?

So far, turning fully pro, signing established WSL players like Remi Allen, Sophie Howard & Kirstie Levell, the best Championship players in Natasha Flint, Sam Tierney and Sophie Barker as well as a load of good young players too, the plan is to continue that on promotion should we get it

 

An investment off the pitch would be the move to Belvoir Drive.

[Jobyfox]

6 minutes ago, LCFC1996 said:

So far, turning fully pro, signing established WSL players like Remi Allen, Sophie Howard & Kirstie Levell, the best Championship players in Natasha Flint, Sam Tierney and Sophie Barker as well as a load of good young players too, the plan is to continue that on promotion should we get it

 

An investment off the pitch would be the move to Belvoir Drive.

I think it would be great to establish a really good women’s team. It can only serve to raise the exposure of the LCFC brand in general. In a similar way that Lyon have done in France 

[Foxxed]

5 minutes ago, LCFC1996 said:

So far, turning fully pro, signing established WSL players like Remi Allen, Sophie Howard & Kirstie Levell, the best Championship players in Natasha Flint, Sam Tierney and Sophie Barker as well as a load of good young players too, the plan is to continue that on promotion should we get it

 

An investment off the pitch would be the move to Belvoir Drive.

Wasn't Belvoir Drive a gift? How much more money do they get from promotion? It can't be as big as is it in the men's league. Who's bank rolling us?

[LCFC1996]

1 minute ago, Foxxed said:

Wasn't Belvoir Drive a gift? How much more money do they get from promotion? It can't be as big as is it in the men's league. Who's bank rolling us?

Yes, it’s still an investment to give it to the women’s team rather than flog it to a developer though.

 

Top/King Power are bank rolling us just like the men’s team, before their takeover last summer it was just the Morgan family and you get basically nothing just for promotion, before Barclays became sponsors of the WSL you didn’t get much for winning that! The new TV money combined with Barclays sponsorship means that will start going up pretty quickly though.

[Ian Nacho]

Just let it be. If you don’t like it just don’t read it.