Woman's World Cup.

Blueshoe

stockshares wrote: »

I know they clashed with Hurling and that there were games shown yesterrday. They should have put the World Cup games today on Rte 1 or Rte Now in English.

Or

Put hurling on Tg4. They have no problem putting it on Tg4 for the League in Winter.

It came to a choice between Hurling and the Women's World Cup for Prime time Rte 2 slot and they chose Hurling.

Btw they are only showing hurling cos they thought it would be popular due to last year's championship but all games apart from Galway v Kilkenny have turned out one sided.

Rte are Bandwagon jumpers who no ****all about sport

Women's world cup or hurling .
Lol.

ILoveYourVibes

When they do sports commentary in Irish it goes so fast it sounds like Arabic!

Blinky Plebum

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

When they do sports commentary in Irish it goes so fast it sounds like Arabic!

Great, finally we've worked out a way to get the rest of the world to start respecting and fearing us.

Charlie19

So what's the issue?

Another boards.ie outrage.

Watched Brazil v Jamaica and England v Scotland. It wasn't a great standard but too bad, a decent Hatrick the Brazil game though.

Zaph

Blinky Plebum wrote: »

It is an Irish Language station so broadcasting in Irish on the station is to be expected.

TG4 purchased the rights and obviously RTE weren't interested enough because if they were they could easily outbid them.

Every game of the tournament will be shown on either TG4 or RTE. In the UK BBC are showing every game, but a lot of them will only be on the red button or on digital platforms.

People give out about obesity and also the lack of girls continuing in sport after a certain age. The latter won't improve if girls don't have decent role models to emulate or can't see even the highest levels of their sport on TV, and increased participation can only have a positive impact on the issue of kids being overweight, at least for girls anyway.

Is the standard in the Women's World Cup as good as the men's? Of course it isn't, because it's taken over 150 years for the men's game to get to the stage it's at now. Women's football has been around almost as long, but had to deal with prejudice and lack of official support for much of that time. For example, in 1921 the English FA banned women's football from being played on any ground affiliated to the FA, a ban which was only lifted in 1969. The reason? Because football allegedly "damaged women's bodies". The real reason was more likely that women's football became incredibly popular during and immediately after WWI as all the men were away fighting. After the war the FA were afraid they'd lose paying customers to women's football so they took action on ridiculously spurious grounds.

So now you move forward another 50 years and what do we have? A bunch of guys whinging because there are women on their TV playing football at a lower standard than they'd like to watch. Well if the women's game had been allowed to develop in the same way as the men's over the years then the standard would probably be up to their lofty standards today. Ironic, isn't it?

kowloon

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

When they do sports commentary in Irish it goes so fast it sounds like Arabic!

One has a hlf-time show, the other has executions.

MarkY91

stockshares wrote: »

Particularly true for fans of the EPL. Jersey wearing gob****es who'd fall over a football if they tried to kick it

So going by your logic, people aren't allowed to like Formula 1 because they would be crap at driving the cars.

Richard Hillman

MarkY91 wrote: »

So going by your logic, people aren't allowed to like Formula 1 because they would be crap at driving the cars.

It's the fencing fans that rile me. Never lunged at somebody with a sword in their lives.

DrPhilG

[Deleted User] wrote: »

the keepers are still crap tho. would be interesting to see if there's a physiological basis for why that should be tbh

I wondered about that. Last time I watched any women's football this was the thing that stood out. Some decent quality elsewhere on the pitch but the keepers were inevitably absolutely dreadful. Sunday league quality and that's no exaggeration at all.

kildare lad

They started an academy for underage girls at my local football club. It started off with about 30 girls it was down to 8 girls within a few weeks, in fairness to them, the 8 girls and the club have sticked with it. We've 5 under 11's teams, there's 1 girl on a team out if nearly 60 boys. There's one girl on the u13s team and that's it .

At the local gaa that my son plays at, there's seems to be a good few girls teams and women's teams . I don't know it that's cause of the eat/sleep/drink at the people who're involved in the gaa or other reasons, but they've no problem fielding women's teams.

We were talking bout the women's world cup up at training the other day, and no one had any interest on watching it. These lads love football but they couldn't care less about the women's world cup. But then again out of all the girls I'm friends with in Facebook, not one of them has posted anything about the women's world cup but yet, they've put up loads about love island .

All them women commentators who like to blame men for lack of equal pay or lack of viewers in women's football , I'd like to remind them that half the population of this planet is female . If they took as much interest supporting and watching football as men do , then women's sport will make as much money as men do.

kildare lad

https://youtu.be/LzNsDvNfTZs

Here's a good clip of a bloke trying to explain to women about football and pay. It's likes talking to a wall

SirGerryAdams

Zaph wrote: »

Well if the women's game had been allowed to develop in the same way as the men's over the years then the standard would probably be up to their lofty standards today. Ironic, isn't it?

Absolute rubbish!

Even the simple fact that women are smaller and less athletic ability means the goals will always be too big for them.

Bob Harris

I'm not sure why people think that commentary in Irish on an Irish language channel is some kind of 'agenda'.

ahnowbrowncow

Zaph wrote: »

Every game of the tournament will be shown on either TG4 or RTE. In the UK BBC are showing every game, but a lot of them will only be on the red button or on digital platforms.

People give out about obesity and also the lack of girls continuing in sport after a certain age. The latter won't improve if girls don't have decent role models to emulate or can't see even the highest levels of their sport on TV, and increased participation can only have a positive impact on the issue of kids being overweight, at least for girls anyway.

Is the standard in the Women's World Cup as good as the men's? Of course it isn't, because it's taken over 150 years for the men's game to get to the stage it's at now. Women's football has been around almost as long, but had to deal with prejudice and lack of official support for much of that time. For example, in 1921 the English FA banned women's football from being played on any ground affiliated to the FA, a ban which was only lifted in 1969. The reason? Because football allegedly "damaged women's bodies". The real reason was more likely that women's football became incredibly popular during and immediately after WWI as all the men were away fighting. After the war the FA were afraid they'd lose paying customers to women's football so they took action on ridiculously spurious grounds.

So now you move forward another 50 years and what do we have? A bunch of guys whinging because there are women on their TV playing football at a lower standard than they'd like to watch. Well if the women's game had been allowed to develop in the same way as the men's over the years then the standard would probably be up to their lofty standards today. Ironic, isn't it?

I agree that in time the standard will get better, even looking book at 60s and 70s football the standard in the men's game has increased massively.

Women's football will never reach near the same level but it should still be encouraged and developed to be the best it can be, like female athletics.

The calls for pay equality or ridiculous though and deserve to be called out for the nonsense that it is.

IAMAMORON

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Maybe if they let them take off their tops when they scored..

I read that if they wip off their Jerseys and start dancing and gyrating topless around the cornerflag that the ref has the option to give them a yellow card.

Any other player, even non goal scorers , can also get a yellow card if they remove their Jerseys.

Thats probably why the players aren't doing it.

Necro

Zaph wrote:

So now you move forward another 50 years and what do we have? A bunch of guys whinging because there are women on their TV playing football at a lower standard than they'd like to watch. Well if the women's game had been allowed to develop in the same way as the men's over the years then the standard would probably be up to their lofty standards today. Ironic, isn't it?

Ah no, there's obviously merit to better promotion of the women's game tbh.

Though I do tend to agree, the male versions are more popular and have more backing for a large part down to their primarily male audience support the sport, attending games, buying merchandise etc.

Until women start following their own versions as avidly as men it can never possibly be as popular, the ladies really do need to get out and show support to watch it grow imo.

Bob Harris

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

The calls for pay equality or ridiculous though and deserve to be called out for the nonsense that it is.

Indeed, yesterday's men's final in Roland Garros was over 3 hours, the women's barely over an hour. The same prize money is given to each and beyond the court the men's game attracts more sponsorship and TV money. It seems to undermine the equal work/equal pay argument.

In football the work is the same, in that matches last the same so it comes down to the fact that it does not attract the same ticket sales, merchandising, tv deals or sponsorship. Then they have to be paid commensurately. Claims for equal pay just don't hold up.

stockshares

MarkY91 wrote: »

So going by your logic, people aren't allowed to like Formula 1 because they would be crap at driving the cars.

My point was they follow a team because it's cool or the in thing without any real feeling for the sport.

Of course there are genuine fans but the Epl attracts some amount of arseholes.

vicwatson

I’m enjoying the games of Football I’ve seen thus far. It’s a game of football, just enjoy it.

stockshares

DrPhilG wrote: »

I wondered about that. Last time I watched any women's football this was the thing that stood out. Some decent quality elsewhere on the pitch but the keepers were inevitably absolutely dreadful. Sunday league quality and that's no exaggeration at all.

Agree on this. I don't think Hope Solo is that good a keeper either but she puts herself out there(self promoter)

stockshares

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

Absolute rubbish!

Even the simple fact that women are smaller and less athletic ability means the goals will always be too big for them.

Goal size and physical size of keepers is definitely a factor but reaction times are noticeably slow as well.

weldoninhio

stockshares wrote: »

Not the Womens games today. A Major Tournament!

They also don't seem to realise that it's not just Irish people who live here and who would be interested in the matches.

Expecting people from abroad to sit through commentary in Irish is narrow minded and petty.

If Brazil played Argentina in the men's World cup and it was on TG4 there would be uproar.

Btw I've nothing against TG4 as a station . They have good documentaries and serve a purpose. Sport should not be used though to please others agenda.

It's madness. I was in Poland a few weeks ago and all of the channels were in Polish, was very annoying.

stockshares

Bob Harris wrote: »

I'm not sure why people think that commentary in Irish on an Irish language channel is some kind of 'agenda'.

It's an attempt to use Sport to coerce people into learning/speaking Irish. It's the wrong way to go about it.

It's good to have an Irish language Station but Sport shouldn't be used in this way.

El_Duderino 09

I wouldn't get too hung up on equal pay claims. It's a negotiation position. It's like when unions start negotiations with a 10% pay claim. And they'll consider 3% pay rise a success.

But you all know that's how negotiations work so I'm assuming anyone who's getting upset is Doing so by choice because they enjoy getting upset about wimminz issues.

Zaph

SirGerryAdams wrote: »

Absolute rubbish!

Even the simple fact that women are smaller and less athletic ability means the goals will always be too big for them.

It's actually a very valid point, and one women's coach last week said that the goal size should be reduced for women. Of course it should, pretty much every male keeper is over 6 feet tall, but as a proportion of the overall population relatively few women are, and there are even fewer who play football. Making the goals more commensurate with the average height of women would reduce the number of lobbed goals and would also improve the standard of goalkeeping.

stockshares

weldoninhio wrote: »

It's madness. I was in Poland a few weeks ago and all of the channels were in Polish, was very annoying.

Just because Poland does it

Seeing as it's a Global competition a little thought beforehand would have been helpful.

ahnowbrowncow

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I wouldn't get do hung up on equal pay claims. It's a negotiation position. It's like when unions start negotiations with a 10% pay claim. And they'll consider 3% pay rise a success.

But you all know that's how negotiations work so I'm assuming anyone who's getting upset is Doing so by choice because they enjoy getting upset about wimminz issues.

Just like it was only a negotiation position in tennis?

Lower quality and shorter games, half the viewership and less advertising income and still that ended up in equal prize money.

Not as farfetched as you make out.

And I haven't noticed anyone being upset in this thread.

stockshares

Zaph wrote: »

It's actually a very valid point, and one women's coach last week said that the goal size should be reduced for women. Of course it should, pretty much every male keeper is over 6 feet tall, but as a proportion of the overall population relatively few women are, and there are even fewer who play football. Making the goals more commensurate with the average height of women would reduce the number of lobbed goals and would also improve the standard of goalkeeping.

Good point, lobbed goals are a problem. Takes away from the game when goals are easily achieved.

It also doesn't help with promoting the game because a gulf in class between two teams is more pronounced on the scoreboard. It leads to one sided results like 5-0 etc.

To promote the game they need games to be competitive, at least on the scoreboard with no runaway victories.

El_Duderino 09

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Just like it was only a negotiation position in tennis?

Lower quality and shorter games, half the viewership and less advertising income and still that ended up in equal prize money.

Not as farfetched as you make out.

And I haven't noticed anyone being upset in this thread.

If they achieved it in tennis then doesn't it validate the claim?

I hear that women are less likely to push for a pay rise in work and do they're less likely to get a pay rise. So in tennis they pushed for a ay rise and they got it. Fair play, no?

Baggly

Mod

This thread belongs in the Soccer forum.

If mods decide to reopen or merge this thread, please be aware the Soccer forum charter will be in place.

Skylinehead

Thread already exists and isn't full of the usual AH crap. Located here:


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057984378