The increasing prominence of woman's football - A dilemma!

Women's football???

A bit like a dog walking on its back legs; seldom done well, but, then again, one is surprised it's done at all.
 
I remember watching the Brazilian women play in the world cup a few years ago and i reckon they could beat the Scottish mens team. A bit off topic but just saying. Take from that what you will.
 
It is absolutely not acceptable to pleasure yourself to the image of scum players. Female or not, Just my opinion I could be wrong. (I’m not wrong).
 
Stephenj5 said:
Feels like it’s being rammed down our throats. BBC especially. It’s sheidt and will never ever be anything close to the men’s game.
Click to expand...

The BBC ram it down your throat because it's the only sport, or just about the only sport that they can afford to buy for broadcast. The games where they have had big crowds that they boast about tickets were priced much less than half the price you pay for a Premier league game. Thousands of tickets also given away free just to make the crowd look bigger.
 
buster60 said:
The BBC ram it down your throat because it's the only sport, or just about the only sport that they can afford to buy for broadcast. The games where they have had big crowds that they boast about tickets were priced much less than half the price you pay for a Premier league game. Thousands of tickets also given away free just to make the crowd look bigger.
Click to expand...

it winds me up how on breakfast Sally Nugent reports on it as the first story before far more important and higher profile sports news.
 
Its-Sebo said:
You’re making up stuff that I haven’t even said. Why would women’s team replace men’s teams?

My point is simply that women’s football is poor because of lack of investment and proper coaching. Unfortunately the female coaches now most likely weren’t very good because of the same reasons, so poor footballers and coaches are coaching them.

With time and proper investment the standard of football would shoot right up. That includes technique, positional sense, stamina, pace (despite what you might think, women can learn to read maps and you don’t need a map to play football).

They’d never match the physicality of men so wouldn’t be able to compete with the top teams but that doesn’t mean every men’s team could beat ever woman’s team simply because of physicality (e.g. Stranraer vs Barca Women’s 2030). They wouldn’t compete anyway so it doesn’t matter, my point is simply that the standard could get to a level that it would draw interest and that it’s a valid endeavour.
Click to expand...
Women tennis players are some of the best coached on the planet and yet the William's sisters couldn't beat a guy ranked 200 in the world
 
just don't think women football is very good watched a couple of times just doesn't interest me
however good luck to Rangers ladies
 
Clydevalley said:
Women tennis players are some of the best coached on the planet and yet the William's sisters couldn't beat a guy ranked 200 in the world
Click to expand...

It's obviously a totally different sport, but if anything you're proving my point. Women's Tennis is pretty good because they're well-coached and it's a viable career path, for that reason it's a very well watched sport despite the fact that the top women can't compete against the top men.

The standard of women's football now is very poor, with proper investment in time it would draw a lot of interest. They don't have to be as good as the top men's teams to be get viewing figures, evidenced by the fact that people pay to watch shîte football every week all over the world.

And I'm saying this as someone who wouldn't personally watch it. I wouldn't get out of bed for anything other than a first-team Rangers game.
 
I no attachment or feeling towards womens football. Even though Rangers has a womens team now, I have no desire to watch it. The keepers are such a low standard its laughable.
 
As a club either we adapt or die through lack of support. Young boys and girls grow up with two Rangers teams challenging for titles and Europe, competing, with players they can identify with and idolise?
Regardless of the comparative skill level, got to be better than having only one surely?
 
Standards outside of Man City , Chelsea and Arsenal is shocking just now. Will get better in time as there are lots of girls teams now from under 8 up.
 
evo14 said:
This. Football is a male dominated sport, enjoyed by the working classes and as such, gender must be made an issue to teach us a lesson that "women can do it too!"

They can play football. Just not to a standard that I would pay money to watch.

Ever wondered why the BBC aren't bending over backwards to show women's cricket or rugby?
Click to expand...

it’s the way it’s being rammed down the throats of everyone that annoys me. Ive no issue with women’s football, I wouldn’t go out my way to watch it, the way it’s made out to be something it’s not by the likes of sky does my head in.
it’s nowhere near the standard of even the Scottish lower divisions, yet we are expected to sit and listen to the likes of Alex Scott passing comment on players like Aguero. That’s like me critiquing Gordon Ramsay cos I can make toast and beans!
 
Women's football is of a poor standard and will improve over time but will never reach the standard of the men's game. I can take it or leave it but the notion that they should be paid at or near the same level as men is nonsense.
 
Womens football needs to be played on pitches and goals 50-70% smaller than mens to compensate for their lack of physicality.

This pretence that they are 'equal' being rammed down our throats from the likes of the BBC is delusional.
 
I feel it's getting pushed on us by the media. I have no interest in it and suspect viewer figures are low but it fits in with equality agenda etc hence its imposed upon us IMO.
 
I’m all for women playing football and trying to make a career out of it, I just think the standard is awful and not entertaining in the slightest.
 
KGer1872 said:
With the female game getting more and more coverage, and our own attempts, as well as the scums, at making a serious go of this, I see a great dilemma on the horizon.

I see they have just signed one Sarah Teegarden, an attractive specimen by all accounts (google her, can't seem to post pics just now).

Now fellow bears, where do we stand in this? Is a ham shank acceptable if the filly has adorned the green and grey?
Click to expand...
Some folk on here go as far as marrying them :eek: so as dirty as you might feel afterwards it could be alot worse :))
 
Goity said:
Womens football needs to be played on pitches and goals 50-70% smaller than mens to compensate for their lack of physicality.

This pretence that they are 'equal' being rammed down our throats from the likes of the BBC is delusional.
Click to expand...

Interesting take here on why changing the size of the Goals may not change the game that much. In mens at least smaller goalkeepers actually have better saving stats as they are more mobile and can get down quicker.

 
Also see this, Had Womens football not been banned for a time it may have been much more popular these days - in fact the more skills based passing game of the wartime and 1920's women's teams is seen as a precursor to todays playing style.

 
attack-hands said:
Um, rules?

(not sure if this applies but anyway)

Sarah%203.png
Click to expand...
I prefer men :))
 
attack-hands said:
Interesting take here on why changing the size of the Goals may not change the game that much. In mens at least smaller goalkeepers actually have better saving stats as they are more mobile and can get down quicker.

Click to expand...
I prefer female goalies who go down quicker, ba boom :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top