Guest MattP Posted 3 February 2015 Posted 3 February 2015 Been hearing this nonsense for years and we are still a million miles away. Men are faster, fitter and stronger and that's just not going to change. Can you seriously imagine a women in a psychical Battle with Drogba?
ScouseFox Posted 3 February 2015 Posted 3 February 2015 Can you seriously imagine a women in a psychical Battle with Drogba? yeah but isn't that a bit like saying can you imagine some little wimpy fella like bojan playing against a monster like wasyl? we're not just gonna not let some men play because they're physically weaker than some other men, why should that be the reason to stop women? i don't agree with women playing in the men's game cos it's the men's game but some of the reasons people give are about as weak as they make women out to be.
cambridgefox Posted 3 February 2015 Posted 3 February 2015 i prefer the term camel toeBrilliant,imagine if Vinnie Jones had grabbed Jill Gascoine instead of Paul( im old look her up)
Pride_Of_The_Midlands Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 They wouldn't be good enough. Apparently the USA Women's team (who are the best in the world) played against the USA Mens Under-17 team and the lads won 7-1.
davieG Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 How long would it be before a quota was introduced because there were not enough women being given the chance to play?
ramboacdc Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 women managers/coaches backroom staff i can see. i would support. women players i think you have to go down to basic biology. In a game like football or rugby women are not as strong/fast etc. i understand there are more than enough women out there who could kick 7 shades out of me but still. games like snooker/golf i would say yes any game involving skill over physical strength i would say yes to.
davieG Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 women managers/coaches backroom staff i can see. i would support. women players i think you have to go down to basic biology. In a game like football or rugby women are not as strong/fast etc. i understand there are more than enough women out there who could kick 7 shades out of me but still. games like snooker/golf i would say yes any game involving skill over physical strength i would say yes to. ....and professional football is becoming more like that with every season that passes. Contact of any kind in a tackle is fast becoming a signal for a freekick at best and more and more a yellow card.
ScouseFox Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 any game involving skill over physical strength i would say yes to. agreed let's send messi off to play with the girls, a small chap like that will quite simply never be able to compete in a man's world.
Guest MattP Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 yeah but isn't that a bit like saying can you imagine some little wimpy fella like bojan playing against a monster like wasyl? we're not just gonna not let some men play because they're physically weaker than some other men, why should that be the reason to stop women? i don't agree with women playing in the men's game cos it's the men's game but some of the reasons people give are about as weak as they make women out to be. Bojan is still far stronger than any female player you would be able to show me though, just look at the broadness in the shoulders, do you realise the power in the upper thighs and arms that male footballers still carry compared to women? Have a look at the build of Jessica Ennis, shes a brick shithouse for a women but a skinny bloke would still be able to push her over. Not to mention speed, women despite being smaller still can't run as fast as men over any distance, that's not a co-incidence - it's genetics. They wouldn't be good enough. Apparently the USA Women's team (who are the best in the world) played against the USA Mens Under-17 team and the lads won 7-1. The Williams sisters also played the Rochus brothers in an exhibition, two sets of singles and the brothers won 6-0 and 6-2. agreed let's send messi off to play with the girls, a small chap like that will quite simply never be able to compete in a man's world. You realise Messi underwent years of growth treatment just to get him to be able to play at the level they wanted?
Alexikokopops Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 i don't agree with women playing in the men's game cos it's the men's game but some of the reasons people give are about as weak as they make women out to be.
David Guiza Posted 5 February 2015 Posted 5 February 2015 They wouldn't be good enough. Apparently the USA Women's team (who are the best in the world) played against the USA Mens Under-17 team and the lads won 7-1. Where did you hear that? Not saying it didnt happen, just that I had a quick search and couldn't find anything at all. Same goes for the Williams sisters v Rochus brothers, although Karsten Braasch did beat them 6-1 and 6-2 respectively, apparently. To play devil's advocate, arguabally the reason that women aren't 'good enough' to play men's sport is because in almost every case, bar something like tennis, the coaching, money and proffessionalism between the two genders is huge. Of course 99% of the time the man will come out on top, but there are always exceptions, e.g. Pam Reed (marathon runner).
dsr-burnley Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 And yet in tennis, where the coaching and professionalism is similar, the gap in ability is equally huge. Can you seriously expect Serena Williams to get more than a few points against Novak Djokovic? She can't. She laughed when they asked her about a possible challenge match. I can't ever see women being good enough to play men's football. There are plenty of other non-contact sports where they are allowed to compete equally, such as cricket, golf, snooker, darts, even chess. Where are the champions?
Haydos Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Probably been posted bit I'm sure there was a pretty decent women's national team (possibly even US) that played against an U18's team from the Norwegian 2nd division and they got absolutely panned. I'm probably exaggerating the info there but it was along those lines.
ozleicester Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 so many sweeping generalisations. SOME women are bigger, stronger, more powerful and more skilled than SOME men, but they are unable to demonstrate their superiority because of archaic rules separating genders. Have a look at a few of the NZ and OZ and even British female rugby sides and the way some of them tackle. Id suggest most of the posters on this board would struggle to get up after one of their hits. Of course as a generalisation, women are smaller, slower and dont match the very best males, but some lardass playing in the conference could be well and truly taken apart by a quallity female player, but sexism, misogyny and fear prevents us from ever finding out. Oh, and as transgender becomes an increasing societal situation we are going to find it very difficult to decide who is cisgender and who is trans and in what team/league they should be playing. At the end of it all, surely it should simply be, that everyone should be able to play in the league/competition that best suits there skills and efforts. If she was going to score 25 goals for Leicester in the premier league, id take Pam Ayres as our center forward. Edit and if we want to just say.. this person played that person and lost so theres ya proof... well heres a few alternatives to that.. http://www.totalprosports.com/2011/10/28/9-female-athletes-who-competed-against-men/ Seana Hogan is a legend in the sport, and not just among the women. Yes, most of her records and wins are in the woman category, but not all of them. Perhaps most impressively, she holds the distinction of setting theoverall ultra cycling record time for the distance between Los Angeles and San Francisco. In 1996, she rode that in an incredible 19 hours 11 minutes. To this day, no one (man or woman) has ridden that route faster.
Guest MattP Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 To play devil's advocate, arguabally the reason that women aren't 'good enough' to play men's sport is because in almost every case, bar something like tennis, the coaching, money and proffessionalism between the two genders is huge. Of course 99% of the time the man will come out on top, but there are always exceptions, e.g. Pam Reed (marathon runner). Isn't that where the argument falls down though? In tennis they have all those things now for 30-40 years and even the two greatest female tennis players of all time can't make a set close against a player in the men's top 500? so many sweeping generalisations. SOME women are bigger, stronger, more powerful and more skilled than SOME men, but they are unable to demonstrate their superiority because of archaic rules separating genders. Have a look at a few of the NZ and OZ and even British female rugby sides and the way some of them tackle. Id suggest most of the posters on this board would struggle to get up after one of their hits. Of course as a generalisation, women are smaller, slower and dont match the very best males, but some lardass playing in the conference could be well and truly taken apart by a quallity female player, but sexism, misogyny and fear prevents us from ever finding out. Oh, and as transgender becomes an increasing societal situation we are going to find it very difficult to decide who is cisgender and who is trans and in what team/league they should be playing. At the end of it all, surely it should simply be, that everyone should be able to play in the league/competition that best suits there skills and efforts. If she was going to score 25 goals for Leicester in the premier league, id take Pam Ayres as our center forward. Edit and if we want to just say.. this person played that person and lost so theres ya proof... well heres a few alternatives to that.. http://www.totalprosports.com/2011/10/28/9-female-athletes-who-competed-against-men/ Seana Hogan is a legend in the sport, and not just among the women. Yes, most of her records and wins are in the woman category, but not all of them. Perhaps most impressively, she holds the distinction of setting theoverall ultra cycling record time for the distance between Los Angeles and San Francisco. In 1996, she rode that in an incredible 19 hours 11 minutes. To this day, no one (man or woman) has ridden that route faster. If you think some 'lardarse' in the conference (which I'll add the standard is frighteningy good to the average player) would be shown up by a female player you are living in a dreamworld. The speed of a conference match close up is still ten times that of a any womens match. I totally agree with you though about being allowed to play in what they want, let's cancel the womens tennis and put them in the same tournament, we wouldn;t have to put up with any screeching like Sharapova after the first two days of Wimbledon. Same with football, if they are good enough, shove them in with the professional game and let's see how they get on. True equality. I'd take Pam Ayres as well if she could score 25 goals for Leicester, but even the most outrageous feminist I doubt would try and convince anyone there is a woman out there who can do that yet. That link isn't great really is it? Motor Racing, Horse Racing, in other words sports where it's more to do with what's underneath than the person - the tennis match in there was a 25 year old girl v a 55 year bloke (which they failed to mention) - and also a match that has since been highly alluded to that was thrown to pay off his gambling debts to the mafia.
MooseBreath Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Spot on MattP. As always the feminist liberals can't wait to throw out accusations of sexism and so don't bother to look beyond the first stage of the problem. With true equality, at best you'd have the few best female players of their generation playing in about the 7th tier. The main game would still be totally dominated by men and the women's game wouldn't exist. They would be worse off than they are now.
Guest MattP Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Spot on MattP. As always the feminist liberals can't wait to throw out accusations of sexism and so don't bother to look beyond the first stage of the problem. With true equality, at best you'd have the few best female players of their generation playing in about the 7th tier. The main game would still be totally dominated by men and the women's game wouldn't exist. They would be worse off than they are now. And the women know that as well. Girls like Heather Watson and Laura Robson can make a decent living playing tennis now and people like Ozleicester would completely deny them that chance just so he can engage in his own selfish politics maligned with outdated fantasies. They must cringe reading the comments of these liberal minded pink male feminists more than we do.
MooseBreath Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 They must feel very patronised by these men who think they have a duty to speak out on their behalf. Ironic that those accusing others of sexism evidently feel that women are incapable of making their own arguments and decisions and need men to cater for them.
Guest MattP Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 They must feel very patronised by these men who think they have a duty to speak out on their behalf. Ironic that those accusing others of sexism evidently feel that women are incapable of making their own arguments and decisions and need men to cater for them. Striking similarities between things like this and the 'no to Page 3 campaign'. Feel that women are incapable of making their own decisions about whether they want to do things or not so a jealous, ugly, comfy shoe wearing minority try to stop them on the basis of masquerading it up as equality.
davieG Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 As I posted in this topic (http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/99120-the-power-of-the-internet/) people love a bandwagon it makes them feel like they belong and have purpose.
Stadt Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Yes "some" women are stronger than men but male footballers are stronger, quicker and fitter () than women footballers. I doubt (this is a generalisation) that women can generate the same power when striking a ball as men.
Guest MattP Posted 6 February 2015 Posted 6 February 2015 Yes "some" women are stronger than men but male footballers are stronger, quicker and fitter () than women footballers. I doubt (this is a generalisation) that women can generate the same power when striking a ball as men. My mate ozleicester once took a tackle from behind from a transexual, it was the hardest pounding he'd taken and was bleeding for days.
Pride_Of_The_Midlands Posted 10 February 2015 Posted 10 February 2015 Where did you hear that? Not saying it didnt happen, just that I had a quick search and couldn't find anything at all. Same goes for the Williams sisters v Rochus brothers, although Karsten Braasch did beat them 6-1 and 6-2 respectively, apparently. To play devil's advocate, arguabally the reason that women aren't 'good enough' to play men's sport is because in almost every case, bar something like tennis, the coaching, money and proffessionalism between the two genders is huge. Of course 99% of the time the man will come out on top, but there are always exceptions, e.g. Pam Reed (marathon runner). http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/uswnt-vs-u-17-usmnt.1939180/
BoneDog Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Is it illegal for a female to play in the football league? I flipping hope so.
ozleicester Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 I flipping hope so. why? Surely you want to see the best people playing at the best level they can?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.