Pages: 1 ... 108 109 110 [111] 112 113 114 ... 275   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Whats wrong with football?  (Read 661949 times)
bamboonoshop


+83/-277
Offline Offline

Posts: 3109


Chief Feather Ruffler


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1650 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 11:24:34 »

RE: Women's Football. 

I'm sorry, but all those saying "why is it trying to be like the men's game (or the real game as you like to call it)" etc. This shows the same short sighted behaviour when the very sport you love started in the first place. It was amatuer, it was slow, the facilities were terrible, the pitches were shit (some still are). Women's football has every right to be as big as Men's if there is support from people around the World. The recent WWC had the most exposure of women's football since it turned pro.

 I personally think it's great and there is no reason why women's and men's football can't co-exist together. You know, like Athletics does, Tennis does, and so on.

Maybe once the last of the "real men" (*use obnoxious c*nts) who expect their dinner on the table, bed made, great sex and without a woman then nagging him, once the last of that generation have gone, we may see a more generational shift.

Accepting change isn't a bad thing.
Logged

COYR WAWRAWA COYR
EldeneRed

« Reply #1651 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 12:16:38 »

RE: Women's Football. 

I'm sorry, but all those saying "why is it trying to be like the men's game (or the real game as you like to call it)" etc. This shows the same short sighted behaviour when the very sport you love started in the first place. It was amatuer, it was slow, the facilities were terrible, the pitches were shit (some still are). Women's football has every right to be as big as Men's if there is support from people around the World. The recent WWC had the most exposure of women's football since it turned pro.

 I personally think it's great and there is no reason why women's and men's football can't co-exist together. You know, like Athletics does, Tennis does, and so on.

Maybe once the last of the "real men" (*use obnoxious c*nts) who expect their dinner on the table, bed made, great sex and without a woman then nagging him, once the last of that generation have gone, we may see a more generational shift.

Accepting change isn't a bad thing.

Exactly this.
Logged
singingiiiffy


+16/-10
Offline Offline

Posts: 1565





Ignore
« Reply #1652 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 13:08:36 »

todays bbc football headline: bristol player scores winner after 4,000 mile journey.

theres giving publicity then theres writing shit to force publicity. I cant wait to see the fifa (game) ratings on the womens team. be interesting to see where they rank individually compared to mens league players.

Quote
Maybe once the last of the "real men" (*use obnoxious c*nts) who expect their dinner on the table, bed made, great sex and without a woman then nagging him, once the last of that generation have gone, we may see a more generational shift.

this is the problem with any womens football debate. people like you consider it to be sexist not to care about their scores and news etc. attendances are no bigger than average conference teams yet the publicity in comparison is extremely different.
Logged
Nemo
Shit Bacon


+23/-3
Offline Offline

Posts: 12456





Ignore
« Reply #1653 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 13:12:21 »

this is the problem with any womens football debate. people like you consider it to be sexist not to care about their scores and news etc. attendances are no bigger than average conference teams yet the publicity in comparison is extremely different.

There's a difference between not caring and being actively hostile, which people are to women's sports in a way they simply aren't to men's sports they're not interested in. 30,000 people at the women's FA Cup final by the way, and 55,000 for the England ladies at Wembley last year. Things must have changed in the conference since I last looked.
Logged
Saxondale


+38/-6
Offline Offline

Posts: 5702





Ignore
« Reply #1654 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 13:14:50 »

I would have gone to the womens cup final if Id been free.  But then again I have 2 daughters so am rather more likely to be sympathetic towards womens sport.
Logged

Never knowingly overstated.
singingiiiffy


+16/-10
Offline Offline

Posts: 1565





Ignore
« Reply #1655 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 13:21:42 »

There's a difference between not caring and being actively hostile, which people are to women's sports in a way they simply aren't to men's sports they're not interested in. 30,000 people at the women's FA Cup final by the way, and 55,000 for the England ladies at Wembley last year. Things must have changed in the conference since I last looked.

Nationally I agree, I even watched some of the world cup my self. For individual clubs attendances the conference is a realistic bench mark. I stand by the view that the news stories being filled up on the main football page are not worthy of major footballing news.
Logged
ExiledEric


+0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 61




Ignore
« Reply #1656 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 13:54:49 »

Exactly this.

+1
Logged
Barry Scott


+25/-18
Offline Offline

Posts: 8758




« Reply #1657 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 14:31:57 »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/33780720

My Spurs supporting mate used to rant about how the Spurs bid was overlooked despite the cost to the tax payer being nil - I've no idea to how truthful he was, I don't care to be honest. What I do care about is why the fucking fuck West Ham get the stadium and us tax payers help the poor club pay for it.
Logged
bamboonoshop


+83/-277
Offline Offline

Posts: 3109


Chief Feather Ruffler


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1658 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 15:39:23 »


this is the problem with any womens football debate. people like you consider it to be sexist not to care about their scores and news etc. attendances are no bigger than average conference teams yet the publicity in comparison is extremely different.

Ok.....

Here's an article about the men's game attendances and a lot of it refers to the early part of the 1900s, you know, when football was either still semi-pro or just starting to turn pro. - http://talksport.com/node/24936

Here's an article about the history of men's football in general, it talks about it's roots in public schools and the unpopular choice to form a professional association. - https://paulrobertlloyd.com/articles/fcplc

You are probably more against it, because you are living in the time when it is evolving. It's threatening something you already enjoy, yet really you can enjoy it just the same as the men's version. There are benefits to this for all  Grin Just look a little deeper.

My comments never termed sexism. I was purely stating a generational attitude, which some of us are taught, some of us disregard and some of us grow out of and form our own measured view.

You can't really blame the media reports (of which I agree, some are pointless) on the sex of the sport played. We get silly reporting across the board and I don't think the BBC is the best example of media representation in sport. Hey ho, only my opinion. Also aren't we currently debating whether we need to know "How many crumbs of Birdseye Crispy Pancakes is retained in Lee Power's dinner shirt" (although now i'm intrigued to know) along with other stretched out journalism?

Finally here is an article (although 6 years old) bears some relevance to your attitude surrounding the popularity of the women's attendances - http://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/sep/10/england-womens-football-team

Here's a couple of snippets if you can't be arsed to look.

"...Kerr's Ladies FC, a works factory team from Preston, drew a crowd of 53,000 on Boxing Day in 1920 to watch their game against St Helen's Ladies at Everton's Goodison Park stadium.."

"...And then, on 5 December 1921, the Football Association put an end to all that, banning women from playing on FA-affiliated pitches (effectively, all grounds with spectator facilities) with the assertion that "the game of football is quite unsuitable for females and ought not to be encouraged". It is hard not to suspect this was, at least in part, a defensive move made by male officials who felt threatened by the success of their female counterparts. And so the women's game was allowed to wither on the vine, missing out on half a century of development while the men's leagues established ever stronger roots."
Logged

COYR WAWRAWA COYR
Abrahammer


+10/-8
Offline Offline

Posts: 3955


A legitimate dude sighting




Ignore
« Reply #1659 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 16:51:45 »

It's threatening something you already enjoy

It really isn't.

Give it 6 months, the WWC will be forgotten and the sport will revert to its minority status. Attendances for the women's league here will be conference, at best, levels
« Last Edit: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 16:54:27 by Abrahammer » Logged
bamboonoshop


+83/-277
Offline Offline

Posts: 3109


Chief Feather Ruffler


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1660 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 23:24:31 »

It really isn't.

Give it 6 months, the WWC will be forgotten and the sport will revert to its minority status. Attendances for the women's league here will be conference, at best, levels

I say judge it in 20 years. Development of anything initially unpopular or against the grain always takes time. Do I have to go down the "Everyone told the Wright Brothers they would never succeed" type theories?
Logged

COYR WAWRAWA COYR
Costanza


+71/-15
Offline Offline

Posts: 9316


**Est Quod Est**


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1661 on: Thursday, August 6, 2015, 23:44:12 »

The women's game will only ever compliment the men's equivalent but that would be a great achievement in its own right. The WSL summer move and the bigger clubs investing more has put England ladies in its current boom. The bigger clubs pull interest and it's over, again. I dare say it'll survive longer this time.

The old attendances are pretty meaningless for the here and now, especially those during post-war years. It was something of a novelty and nothing that was taken hugely seriously (not saying that attitude was right).

WSL just needs to keep doing its thing and do its best to ignore the inane comparisons to the men's game. USA is a great example where the women's game is popular but simply cannot maintain a professional set up without getting in to perennial financial difficulties.

Also, GB could really do with a women's team at the Olympics but, you know, we can't get along.
Logged

bamboonoshop


+83/-277
Offline Offline

Posts: 3109


Chief Feather Ruffler


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1662 on: Friday, August 7, 2015, 00:16:30 »

The women's game will only ever compliment the men's equivalent but that would be a great achievement in its own right. The WSL summer move and the bigger clubs investing more has put England ladies in its current boom. The bigger clubs pull interest and it's over, again. I dare say it'll survive longer this time.

The old attendances are pretty meaningless for the here and now, especially those during post-war years. It was something of a novelty and nothing that was taken hugely seriously (not saying that attitude was right).

WSL just needs to keep doing its thing and do its best to ignore the inane comparisons to the men's game. USA is a great example where the women's game is popular but simply cannot maintain a professional set up without getting in to perennial financial difficulties.

Also, GB could really do with a women's team at the Olympics but, you know, we can't get along.


Ironically though, it was actually the Football League that implemented the ban on women playing at proper stadia. For nearly 50 years. So we can really say it was irrelevant. If that had been implemented in the men's game for that long, attendances would also have suffered and some of the stadia today may not have been built.

Tbf Costanza, at least you made a case in a more diplomatic way. Fair game.
Logged

COYR WAWRAWA COYR
Ells


+256/-273
Offline Offline

Posts: 3422


Not 30 yet




Ignore
« Reply #1663 on: Friday, August 7, 2015, 00:45:05 »

Surely the whole point of the increased coverage is to increase attendances? So the "argument" that attendances in women's football are low so there shouldn't be so much coverage is missing the point..
Logged

If Don Rogers were alive today, he'd be turning in his grave
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia


+146/-518
Offline Offline

Posts: 33391





Ignore
« Reply #1664 on: Friday, August 7, 2015, 00:53:44 »

I say judge it in 20 years. Development of anything initially unpopular or against the grain always takes time. Do I have to go down the "Everyone told the Wright Brothers they would never succeed" type theories?

People told Elmer, The Flying Monk he wouldn't succeed, but 900 years later the Wright brothers did....not everything happens overnight.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 108 109 110 [111] 112 113 114 ... 275   Go Up
Print
Jump to: