Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Zlatan with some real talk about women's footy
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Here's an interesting old thread from a different forum:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/34/other-other-topics/propbet-footrace-older-dude-vs-2-young-chicks-pics-vid-inc-318658/So at work the other day one of the young chicks (chick #1) at my office suggested that she could run faster than my office manager, 2+2er Mcpherzen. One of the other young chicks (chick #2) at my office agreed and felt that she could also run faster than Mcpherzen.
Since I am under the general impression that girls run slower than dudes, I laughed at them and suggested we bet on it. I offered 3:1 odds and they both accepted. During a conversation with Usher's special ladyfriend last night, she agreed that chick #2, whom she knows well, would be able to run faster than Mcpherzen, whom she also knows. So I booked action with her too.
The bet: A 50 yard footrace on grass.
The contestants:
Mcpherzen: My office manager and longtime friend. He is 38 years old and does not exercise. He cannot remember the last time he ran at full speed, and it has definitely been more than 5 years. When he was younger he was fast and athletic.
Here is a picture of Mcpherzen with me and Suzzer. He is on the left:
Chick #1 A 23 year-old who works at my office. She is strong and athletic and works out regularly. She has never ran competitively.
Her only experience with prop betting is that she fails at eating 100 oreos in 2 hours:
Chick #2 A 28 year-old who works at my office. We served together in the Army and she is very fit. She works out regulary also. She has never ran competitively but always finished at the front in any Army drill that involved running.
Here is a picture of Chick #2 making out with my special ladyfriend:
This seems like a lock to me. I"ll post a video of the race as soon as I can. Let's hear how OOT would handicap it.
Irieguyseems like a fit girl should beat older unfit guy most of the time, and definitely more than 25% of the time to make your bets horrible.
i like where you work. can you hire me? need an accountant or guy good with numbers?Conventional wisdom tells us that you're a lock. But your buddy looks like he has a gut to him, and some chicks are straight up fast. I have a feeling you're about to get owned for whatever amount you bet.this is what i think as well. some girls are ridiculous athletes as well, and it seems like these girls are working out and doing some running, while the guy is getting old and fat.
i wouldn't be surprised with either outcome, but i definitely wouldn't offer 3:1.Yeah, this isn't basketball or something, running is pretty much straight fitness level.lastchance wrote: »I have to echo the sentiments of everybody else here. This feels like a bad propbet to me.you losei think giving 3:1 is a horrendous betThat Foreign Guy wrote: »$100 on each girl please. I'll even take 2:1 on girl 2.
In case it's not clear, I think you set terrible odds here. Does he have mad reaction time or something? Also make sure he warms up well or he will pull something.
Maybe skinny random bar skank vs chubby old guy is 3:1 in his favour but these girls actually work out and you say one of them is good at running?equalsfive wrote: »At any distance over 50m you instantly lose your bet. With the short distance I'd say you only have 30-40% of winning. In other words, a bad bet.Army chick fell and she's not the type to make excuses. She was a good sport.
After she brushed herself off I had her race chick #1. Even though she's a good 3" shorter she beat chick #1 pretty handily.
We also talked quite a bit about how far the race would have to be before Zen lost and we decided it was somewhere between 2 miles and infinity, and probably a lot closer to inifinity.
This bet was a bit rigged, I guess, considering I have a degree in sports medicine. We spent a good week in kinesiology discussing this subject. Girls are shorter, have smaller lower extremity muscle mass, and their wider hips create an angle at the knee joint (the Q angle) which makes any activity that involves lower extremity power very rigged against them. Most people think "oh the world-record women's sprinter is 85% as fast as a dude, so chicks in good shape are kind of fast." This has everything to do with the freakishness of world-class female athletes (tall, massive muscle mass, narrow hips with no Q angle) and little to do with the gap in lower extremity power between women and men.
It's very difficult to be able to carry a full term human gestation in your pelvis, deliver the infant between the bones of your pelvis, AND be able to sprint and jump well. This thread illustrates how successful the women's rights movement has been in conditioning people to ignore the fact that women are physically capable of having children... at the expense of other less important feats of strength.
Irieguy
The point being that feminism has successfully distorted the way we compare females and males in terms of athleticism. There is an unrecoverable gap between the genders on topics like this but it's a problem in modern society to simply say as much.
In terms of women's football:
- the playing pool as a whole is much smaller;
- the rewards for playing at an elite level are not lucrative in the relative sense;
- this means the elite playing pool is tiny in comparison to the men's game;
- as a consequence it is correct (and should be uncontroversial) to suggest that ~200 caps in women's football is less of an absolute achievement than ~100 caps in men's football;
However it's still worth clarifying a few points here. In terms of the example posted of AIK U17's beating the Swedish National Team in a friendly, let me be very clear in noting to you all that AIK U17's would piss on your Sunday League team too, and beat you a lot worse than they did the Swedish Women's team. Cherry Orchard U17's would hammer the Irish Senior Women's team sure - but they'd beat most non professional men's sides handily while they're at it.
But such comparisons are stupid. They're different sports and it's still a fine achievement to become an elite level international women's footballer. Takes plenty of skill, hard work and genetics to do that - that shouldn't be questioned.0 -
-
Chancer3001 wrote: »Post more pics of girl 2.
Seriously, good test.
I would have backed the guy every time.
Again, just to be super clear let me say that the below post is completely incorrect:Chancer3001 wrote: »I got warned last time i said that me and my buddies would beat the best women's soccer team.
I'm not trolling and maybe I'm miles off. But that's what I believe.
I've watched a decent bit of women's soccer and the general standard is terrible.
The American team does have a class keeper though!
The US Women's team would destroy you. You'd have to approach elite amateur level men's teams before they start losing games (either in terms of elite youth teams with future professionals or LSL sides with exceptional athletes). The best women's teams have 'freakish world class female athletes' as discussed in my post above with brilliant technique and tactical drilling to a professional standard. You and your mates would spend time chasing shadows. And some of your mates, men or not, would be 'manhandled' by the likes of:
and
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
LuckyLloyd wrote: »Again, just to be super clear let me say that the below post is completely incorrect:
The US Women's team would destroy you. You'd have to approach elite amateur level men's teams before they start losing games (either in terms of elite youth teams with future professionals or LSL sides with exceptional athletes). The best women's teams have 'freakish world class female athletes' as discussed in my post above with brilliant technique and tactical drilling to a professional standard. You and your mates would spend time chasing shadows. And some of your mates, men or not, would be 'manhandled' by the likes of:
and
The US Womens team has been beaten handily by U15 boys teams - club teams not national ones.
http://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/uswnt-vs-so-cal-boys-odp.929075/0 -
-
-
-
Chancer3001 wrote: »Were just going to have to agree to disagree.
That keeper is tiny for a keeper. She'd be smaller than the smallest guy on my team. And she's in goals....
I'm 110% sure we'd win easily. Wouldn't even be a contest.
What has height got to do with the price of milk? It's a small factor to the point of almost being irrelevant, unless all you plan to do is hoof the ball up to the big man for 90 minutes.
Hope Solo is 5ft 9ins and height isn't everything for a keeper. She has better reflexes and jumping ability than a 6ft 5ins Sunday league keeper who can't move his feet without nearly falling over.
Good read here on the subject of goalkeepers' height being overstated -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2530650/The-Footballers-Football-Column-Richard-Lee-Peter-Schmeichel-played-decline-English-goalkeeping.htmlChancer3001 wrote: »Yeah but they're little 14 year old kids!! And they still beat the women.
It wouldn't be a contest!
I'm flogging a dead horse here. I'm surprised that people think they would stand a chance.
The 14 year old kids would also beat your team because they would be much better footballers technically, no other reason.
You're right, you're flogging a dead horse as your Sunday league team are probably not as good as you seem to think.
Edit: Any chance you can post the league your team is in? It'd make the debate a bit easier
0 -
-
-
What has height got to do with the price of milk? It's a small factor to the point of almost being irrelevant, unless all you plan to do is hoof the ball up to the big man for 90 minutes.
Hope Solo is 5ft 9ins and height isn't everything for a keeper. She has better reflexes and jumping ability than a 6ft 5ins Sunday league keeper who can't move his feet without nearly falling over.
Good read here on the subject of goalkeepers' height being overstated -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2530650/The-Footballers-Football-Column-Richard-Lee-Peter-Schmeichel-played-decline-English-goalkeeping.html
The 14 year old kids would also beat your team because they would be much better footballers technically, no other reason.
You're right, you're flogging a dead horse as your Sunday league team are probably not as good as you seem to think.
Edit: Any chance you can post the league your team is in? It'd make the debate a bit easier
Xavi you're missing the original point here: Nobody suggests that we give the 14 year-olds a prize for their achievements just like their grown male counterparts, so why should the female players get such prizes?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
The 15/16 year olds would hammer your team too, by more.
I think you're putting way too much emphasis on strength/size and not enough on technical ability. Those academy teams aren't winning because they're bigger, it's because they are better footballers.
In a sliding scale - academy teams >>>>> the best women's teams >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your average Sunday league teamsChancer3001 wrote: »Nah totally disagree.
The 15 year olds wouldn't hammer us. We'd beat them.
A much much worse senior team will beat a kids team.
A kids team 15+ will beat a women's team.
Show me any example of a women's team doing well against boys teams?LSL is a "sunday league" standard.
A good LSL team would beat the best women's team in the world. A good LSL team would also beat the best u16 boys team in the world.
A really good LSL team will have a few players who would easily play LOI first division if they were pushed/got the chance.LuckyLloyd wrote: »
The point being that feminism has successfully distorted the way we compare females and males in terms of athleticism. There is an unrecoverable gap between the genders on topics like this but it's a problem in modern society to simply say as much.
In terms of women's football:
- the playing pool as a whole is much smaller;
- the rewards for playing at an elite level are not lucrative in the relative sense;
- this means the elite playing pool is tiny in comparison to the men's game;
- as a consequence it is correct (and should be uncontroversial) to suggest that ~200 caps in women's football is less of an absolute achievement than ~100 caps in men's football;
However it's still worth clarifying a few points here. In terms of the example posted of AIK U17's beating the Swedish National Team in a friendly, let me be very clear in noting to you all that AIK U17's would piss on your Sunday League team too, and beat you a lot worse than they did the Swedish Women's team. Cherry Orchard U17's would hammer the Irish Senior Women's team sure - but they'd beat most non professional men's sides handily while they're at it.
But such comparisons are stupid. They're different sports and it's still a fine achievement to become an elite level international women's footballer. Takes plenty of skill, hard work and genetics to do that - that shouldn't be questioned.
tl;dr
First up, specifically for the benefit of Chancer:
Have you any idea how good most club under-age sides are?
I'll recount a story. I was part of a 5-a-side team that did very well in the National 5-a-side Championships many moons ago (around the turn of the Noughties 1999/2000/2001 memory vague lot of drink consumed since then). I was a pretty good club player and we had a pretty decent side for that tournament.
Our side consisted of my mates dad (who played for St. Pats for a good chunk of the 1970s/early 1980s and got Irish under-age caps), me, my mate, then we had a 15 year old from Cherry Orchard, a 17 year old who at the time was a Stella Maris regular, and we rounded out the 7 man squad with 2 lads who had "retired" from football but had played for Bohs at under-age level i.e. gave it up to focus on drinking!!
Still, all things being equal, we had 2 promising talents, 2 messers who at their best were with top dublin youth sides, an ex-LOI players and the 2 of us who had played at a decent level but were more interested in the drinking.
In our group matches that year (Salthill, Galway), we had 1 good semi-pro English side and 2 Irish sides. We got through. In the next round we faced a semi-professional Norwegian team. That year teams came from all over. Prize money was decent and it was a great weekend. Think it was 5 grand winning team. We managed to cling on to a tight 1-0 win.
Anyway, here's where my tale gets relevant. I can never remember if it was 1/4 finals or Last-16 but we were drawn against Galway United U-19s (with 1 over-age player). I can't remember many of their names but i know Luther Watson was on that side as i had a chat with him after the game and made a pledge to buy him on Championship Manager :pac:
They absolutely murdered us. Their fitness, strength, skill, pace, technique, the works it was astoundingly good stuff. It ended up 3-0 but could have been 7-0. They went on to win the tournament. Their side defo contained lads aged 15-18.
Point is this - despite being a relatively good motley crew ourselves, we were thoroughly annihilated by Galway Uniteds under age side. The semi-professional English and Nowegian teams, in comparison, were pedestrian.
It seriously can't be underestimated how good these "boys" are at football. Academy sides etc. Not only would they obliterate most womens teams but they'd most certainly mop the floor with any sunday sides.
People fall into the trap of making ridiculous comments without engaging their brains. Seaneh, for example, stating a really good LSL team would beat the best u-16 team in the world?
Try this:
15-17 year olds:
Zakaria Bakkali (PSV) - Hat-trick in top flight football already.
Matts Moehler Dahli (Molde) - Already appeared in Norway squad.
Allen Hallilovic (Dinamo Zagreb) - youngest to ever play for Croatia
Hachim Mastour (15) (AC Milan) - next big thing
Nathan (Atletico Paraenese) - 2nd best played u-17 world cup
Dennis Suarez (Barcelona) - huge potential
Jonathan Tah (Hamburg) - already appearances in the 1st team at CB.
Timo Werner (Stuttgart) - 1st teamer
Harry Wilson (16) (Liverpool) - already impressive
Gedion Zelalem (16) (Arsenal) - Impressed pre-season.
Richairo Živković (Gronigen) - 5 goals as a 16 year old.
I'll tell you what, go find the best LSL side or any motley crew in Leinster, Munster or anywhere else playing Sunday League Football. I'll make a few enquiries re-mortgage every possession i own and bet my house/life that those 15, 16 and 17 year olds above would absolutely hammer any amateur side in this island.
Think before typing!!
1. Under-Age academy sides are frighteningly good. They have been for many moons.
2. LSL generally featuring people who've failed at a career in football and/or have a life beyond football. Work. Booze. Fags. Whatever. Amateurs!! Usually all decent players but amateurs!
3. Womens Football - I've seen so many comparisons on this thread to mens football and macho nonsense about the boys down the pub beating them.
If it makes you feel better, brilliant.
The real debate, as in mens sports, is:
a) How to get more girls into football.
b) How to popularise the sport.
Start with b) and you get to a).
As it stands, female soccer participation is incredibly high globally. The fact it's still to filter down into mainstream sports is down to a number of factors.
Sportswomen do NOT need to be as good as sportsmen for their sport to become a mainstream tv sport. Andy Murray would destroy Serena Williams. Tiger Woods would destroy Annika Sorenstam. Cian Healy would maul Fiona Coghlan in a scrum. etc etc etc
So what? Who cares?
In any sport, in any gender, the keys to the success of the sport are: Participation, facilities, coaching.
We have the participation globally here. Facilities and coaching need to be worked on globally. Plenty of improvement to be had there.
Ultimately these things take time and usually a bit of luck to make a breakthrough. Mens rugby is incredibly popular these days in Ireland but for years it was in the doldrums as an amateur, almost niche sport lost amongst the sea of competition from GAA and football primarily.
I wouldn't be at all averse to womens football using sexuality to reach out further. The men do it. Cristiano Ronaldo loves to dazzle around a football pitch wearing skin tight shirts. He loves to show his body and torso off outside the pitch. If it would help even 1% why not. Get the hottest women footballers in tight shirts, padded sports-bras on the field and off it straight on to the front cover of FHM half-naked. I'm sure that's already been done but more of it til it makes an impact, however small.
Sex sells. That might only be a 0.1% factor in improving things but to get a sport into the public consciousness things like that do help. Characters are needed. Football wouldn't be where it is today in England without the likes of George Best. Sometimes ya need that 1 character, that bit of genius, that bit of sex appeal and you can stretch out to a far wider audience.
As for the "boys down the pub" beating the best girls sides etc.....seriously get a life!! I sincerely hope there is a professional girls football side out on the lash somewhere tonight saying "those boys down the pub wouldn't last 2 mins in bed with me".
After all, if you're gonna make outlandish sexist comments based on pub talk, might as well be a 2-way thing And i was told from a very early age girls are usually right.... 0 -
-
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement