[Albion] Women’s Football

[Change at Barnham]

Arsenal Women have committed to play all their home games at the Emirates.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Fair point. But maybe I phrased it wrong- Is it LOSING money? Because if it is, then it is a vanity (or possibly even virtual-signalling?) project.

Because of course, this isn't an accusation that could be levelled at any men's football teams.

 

[Brovion]

On the male goalies point- the game was completely different then. Heavier balls, it was much slower, the players were much less fit. You can't tell me a 5"8 keeper would do well in today's game.

Give it 10-15 years or so, and I bet the average female professional footballer will be over 6 foot tall. Thus excluding the vast majority of the population, no matter how talented they are.

I know! Why don't we make the men's goals bigger!

Yes, ok, a joke, but the FA standardised the size of the goal in 1882, (that's when crossbars were introduced) when the average height of a UK male was 5ft 6ins. It's now 5ft 10ins, so one could argue (I'm not, but one could) that the current dimensions are fine for women but too small for modern men.

I disagree with you on goal sizes for adults, but 100% agree on children. However I do think it's at least worth discussing rather than dismissing out of hand as 'sexist'. After all the minimum size of boundaries in women's cricket are smaller than those of men's so there is a precedent for acknowledging the difference between men and women. (However as a counter-argument Rugby is played on an identical pitch).

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Because of course, this isn't an accusation that could be levelled at any men's football teams.

That is of course true. I have slowly become a fan of the odd women's game and can appreciate it as a different product to the men's. However the question may be better posed as the men's game generates a LOT of money, does the women's?

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

That is of course true. I have slowly become a fan of the odd women's game and can appreciate it as a different product to the men's. However the question may be better posed as the men's game generates a LOT of money, does the women's?

Well, by comparison clearly no. But it doesn't cost anything like the same amount either.

The amount of money in the men's game is as much a failure of governance as a commercial success. The enormous player salaries and agent fees, clubs owned by petro-states, oligarchs and other dodgy people, constant gambling ads and broadcasting deals that constantly screw fans over. Now I guess some of that is the reality of maximising revenue in the modern world, but I really wouldn't want to be using modern men's football as a benchmark for success in financial terms. Particularly given how many clubs lose catastrophic amounts, are still shit and in some cases go bust despite the amount of money sloshing around.

Similar complaints could be made about many major team sports in Britain, obviously.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

On the male goalies point- the game was completely different then. Heavier balls, it was much slower, the players were much less fit. You can't tell me a 5"8 keeper would do well in today's game.

Give it 10-15 years or so, and I bet the average female professional footballer will be over 6 foot tall. Thus excluding the vast majority of the population, no matter how talented they are.

So, exactly like anyone who dreams of being a goalkeeping in men's professional football, then?

 

[Commander]

So, exactly like anyone who dreams of being a goalkeeping in men's professional football, then?

I'm not just talking about goalkeepers. The pitch and the goal dimensions being too big is just going to make size and power even more important in women's football than it is in men's football. And, the percentage of the male population who are over 6 foot is much higher than the percentage of the women's population. So it isn't exactly the same, no.

Speaking of goalkeepers, I saw Kuipers in the Barbers in Haywards Heath yesterday. He is absolutely massive. He still looks like he could play in goal in the Championship now.

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

I too used to think there was merit in the smaller goals thing until I started watching the women's game. Are there loads of games ending up with Sunday League scores due to the height of the crossbar? Nope. Just today the club have posted a montage of their women's keeper, Baggeley, and her saves against the now European Champions. Being 5ft 6 doesn't seem to be an issue.

As I see it, the standard is improving but the gulf between top and bottom is growing, and Chelsea's domestic dominance is an issue for the WSL. Hopefully more teams will invest like we have and really being to threaten the Status Quo, although I can see it is hard to sustain crowds in games without the pull of Lionesses playing. Just have to stay patient, I think.

 

[keaton]

It is odd, isn't it? I'm pretty sure if I had a daughter playing in goal I would be thinking this is f***ing ridiculous, as she got lobbed for the 4th time when on her goal line. So many times I've seen a goal on social media scored in women's football that they are saying is an absolute screamer, and when you watch it it's about two foot away from the top corner, with the poor keeper at absolute full stretch and still a foot short of the ball. It just doesn't seem fair to me!

I'd also argue that the dinosaurs in the game are the ones that can't see why 12-13 year old boys shouldn't be playing 11-a-side on full size pitches with full size goals. It's exactly the same principle, and yet somehow to use the same logic for the women's game is somehow seen as sexist. I'd argue it's the exact opposite, and it would make the game far more inclusive in the long run, because at the moment all that is going to happen as the game progresses is that the best players will just end up being the biggest, strongest and tallest women, thus ruining the chances of 99% of talented girls who don't possess those physical attributes. Women's football is on the crest of a wave and genuinely has an opportunity to create a brilliant and unique sport that could be insanely popular, and grow a huge fanbase from both inside and outside of the men's game. But with the path it is currently on, I don't think that's going to happen.

I have browsed through this thread today. A really interesting and informative read.
A few bizarre takes.
The most bizarre being those who are so offended by the very idea of adjusting the pitch/goal sizes for the women’s game. You can disagree with the idea, but some of the emotive comments…..odd.
It is as if some see the idea as an affront to the good name of women

But I'm pretty sure when they've been asked women's footballers have said they don't want smaller goals?

 

[jackalbion]

I too used to think there was merit in the smaller goals thing until I started watching the women's game. Are there loads of games ending up with Sunday League scores due to the height of the crossbar? Nope. Just today the club have posted a montage of their women's keeper, Baggeley, and her saves against the now European Champions. Being 5ft 6 doesn't seem to be an issue.

As I see it, the standard is improving but the gulf between top and bottom is growing, and Chelsea's domestic dominance is an issue for the WSL. Hopefully more teams will invest like we have and really being to threaten the Status Quo, although I can see it is hard to sustain crowds in games without the pull of Lionesses playing. Just have to stay patient, I think.

They need another relegation spot!

 

[beorhthelm]

Well, by comparison clearly no. But it doesn't cost anything like the same amount either.

The amount of money in the men's game is as much a failure of governance as a commercial success. The enormous player salaries and agent fees, clubs owned by petro-states, oligarchs and other dodgy people, constant gambling ads and broadcasting deals that constantly screw fans over. Now I guess some of that is the reality of maximising revenue in the modern world, but I really wouldn't want to be using modern men's football as a benchmark for success in financial terms. Particularly given how many clubs lose catastrophic amounts, are still shit and in some cases go bust despite the amount of money sloshing around.

Similar complaints could be made about many major team sports in Britain, obviously.

the football industry has been hugely successful, earning billions a year. clubs may not be seeing the whole benefit of that, the main beneficiaries are players.
that's driven by fan's and club owner's desire for success, buy the best (or at least better) players, pay them more etc.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

the football industry has been hugely successful, earning billions a year. clubs may not be seeing the whole benefit of that, the main beneficiaries are players.
that's driven by fan's and club owner's desire for success, buy the best (or at least better) players, pay them more etc.

This feels like an extremely limited, specific and flawed definition of "hugely successful".