Women's Football
Discussion
Why is it appearing everywhere?
It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
simoid said:
Why is it appearing everywhere?
It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
Why does anyone watch men's football though? Tradition, mainly. Sport in general doesn't make a great deal of sense if you think about it too much. It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
The basic reason for it is that the BBC has decided it wants more sport, and everything popular is expensive. So they've picked up the rights for cheaper things (women's football) and so they're bigging it up to get a bit of interest in it and improve the viewing figures.
And if you think it's a pathetic excuse for a sport, I assume you're a premier league footballer who can talk from a position that might make that statement even slightly justifiable? And when I say footballer, FIFA on the Xbox doesn't count.
davepoth said:
simoid said:
Why is it appearing everywhere?
It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
Why does anyone watch men's football though? Tradition, mainly. Sport in general doesn't make a great deal of sense if you think about it too much. It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
The basic reason for it is that the BBC has decided it wants more sport, and everything popular is expensive. So they've picked up the rights for cheaper things (women's football) and so they're bigging it up to get a bit of interest in it and improve the viewing figures.
And if you think it's a pathetic excuse for a sport, I assume you're a premier league footballer who can talk from a position that might make that statement even slightly justifiable? And when I say footballer, FIFA on the Xbox doesn't count.
The best football I see involves, for example, immense technical skills, physical abilities (pace/power/stamina) as well as teamwork and organisation. And a goalie that can touch the bar.
The women's game lacks many of these aspects. I assume that schoolboy football will be appearing on the BBC sometime soon.
simoid said:
I'm a PS3 man
The best football I see involves, for example, immense technical skills, physical abilities (pace/power/stamina) as well as teamwork and organisation. And a goalie that can touch the bar.
The women's game lacks many of these aspects. I assume that schoolboy football will be appearing on the BBC sometime soon.
But why is men's football so good? it's a professional league, and the players have the facilities and the salaries that mean they can concentrate on their skills and ability. That has only come from having TV money. The best football I see involves, for example, immense technical skills, physical abilities (pace/power/stamina) as well as teamwork and organisation. And a goalie that can touch the bar.
The women's game lacks many of these aspects. I assume that schoolboy football will be appearing on the BBC sometime soon.
Wholly aside from that, having women's sport on the TV provides good role models for the young, and although a lot of the benefit is going to be showing girls that it's OK to want to do sport (and I think it's crazy that anyone thinks otherwise), the fact that the womens' game doesn't have all of the overpaid and overhyped "superstars" that have in my opinion ruined the Premier League is a big positive to point out to everyone that you don't have to be a horrible person to succeed in life.
simoid said:
Why is it appearing everywhere?
It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
The bar is 8 feet btw........It's a pile of nonsense. Nobody watches it, so why the media coverage? It's a pathetic excuse for a sport as all you need to do to score is hit a shot above the 4ft 8 keeper and below the 9 feet bar. Tricky.
And Rachel Yankee has just broken Peter Shilton's caps record? Puh-lease.
(Don't think this is OT thread material, stand to be corrected...)
davepoth said:
But why is men's football so good? it's a professional league, and the players have the facilities and the salaries that mean they can concentrate on their skills and ability. That has only come from having TV money.
Wholly aside from that, having women's sport on the TV provides good role models for the young, and although a lot of the benefit is going to be showing girls that it's OK to want to do sport (and I think it's crazy that anyone thinks otherwise), the fact that the womens' game doesn't have all of the overpaid and overhyped "superstars" that have in my opinion ruined the Premier League is a big positive to point out to everyone that you don't have to be a horrible person to succeed in life.
I'm not sure I agree with anything you're saying, or even where you're coming from with some of it.Wholly aside from that, having women's sport on the TV provides good role models for the young, and although a lot of the benefit is going to be showing girls that it's OK to want to do sport (and I think it's crazy that anyone thinks otherwise), the fact that the womens' game doesn't have all of the overpaid and overhyped "superstars" that have in my opinion ruined the Premier League is a big positive to point out to everyone that you don't have to be a horrible person to succeed in life.
Women's football is a pile of pish, and I'd rather our licence fee wasn't spent on it. And I'd rather it didn't pop up on the BBC Football website between stories about some of the finest exponents of the game: Steven Gerrard, Spain and Italy.
simoid said:
I'm not sure I agree with anything you're saying, or even where you're coming from with some of it.
Women's football is a pile of pish, and I'd rather our licence fee wasn't spent on it. And I'd rather it didn't pop up on the BBC Football website between stories about some of the finest exponents of the game: Steven Gerrard, Spain and Italy.
This goes to the heart of a different argument I guess. Which is:Women's football is a pile of pish, and I'd rather our licence fee wasn't spent on it. And I'd rather it didn't pop up on the BBC Football website between stories about some of the finest exponents of the game: Steven Gerrard, Spain and Italy.
What do you think sport is for?
davepoth said:
simoid said:
I'm not sure I agree with anything you're saying, or even where you're coming from with some of it.
Women's football is a pile of pish, and I'd rather our licence fee wasn't spent on it. And I'd rather it didn't pop up on the BBC Football website between stories about some of the finest exponents of the game: Steven Gerrard, Spain and Italy.
This goes to the heart of a different argument I guess. Which is:Women's football is a pile of pish, and I'd rather our licence fee wasn't spent on it. And I'd rather it didn't pop up on the BBC Football website between stories about some of the finest exponents of the game: Steven Gerrard, Spain and Italy.
What do you think sport is for?
Playing it: to have fun, keep fit, socialise, and/or win.
Watching it: admiring people who do things I can't, or supporting my team/favourite, or just the general unpredictable entertainment.
On a societal level, I see it as an expansion of my individual uses, i.e. society can use sport to keep fit.
Never really thought about it though
simoid said:
For me personally...
Playing it: to have fun, keep fit, socialise, and/or win.
Watching it: admiring people who do things I can't, or supporting my team/favourite, or just the general unpredictable entertainment.
On a societal level, I see it as an expansion of my individual uses, i.e. society can use sport to keep fit.
Never really thought about it though
On that basis, I think it's possible to argue that womens' sport is exactly as valid as mens'. Playing it: to have fun, keep fit, socialise, and/or win.
Watching it: admiring people who do things I can't, or supporting my team/favourite, or just the general unpredictable entertainment.
On a societal level, I see it as an expansion of my individual uses, i.e. society can use sport to keep fit.
Never really thought about it though
davepoth said:
On that basis, I think it's possible to argue that womens' sport is exactly as valid as mens'.
Oh it's perfectly valid as a sport. Doesn't mean I want it taking up TV, radio and internet space at our expense.Or that records in the women's game are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
simoid said:
Oh it's perfectly valid as a sport. Doesn't mean I want it taking up TV, radio and internet space at our expense.
Or that records in the women's game are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
Consider for a moment replacing sport with another cultural arena. Books, for example.Or that records in the women's game are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
simoid has not said:
Oh it's perfectly valid as a book. Doesn't mean I want it taking up TV, radio and internet space at our expense.
Or that awards for women's books are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
Doesn't look quite right, does it?Or that awards for women's books are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
davepoth said:
simoid said:
Oh it's perfectly valid as a sport. Doesn't mean I want it taking up TV, radio and internet space at our expense.
Or that records in the women's game are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
Consider for a moment replacing sport with another cultural arena. Books, for example.Or that records in the women's game are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
simoid has not said:
Oh it's perfectly valid as a book. Doesn't mean I want it taking up TV, radio and internet space at our expense.
Or that awards for women's books are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
Doesn't look quite right, does it?Or that awards for women's books are equal or even comparable to those in the men's.
Football, golf, tennis, rugby, darts... they ain't
simoid said:
Nope. Because AFAIK women are (at least) just as good at writing books as men.
Football, golf, tennis, rugby, darts... they ain't
Darts? Really? Football, golf, tennis, rugby, darts... they ain't
My point is sort of that achievement is only part (and in my eyes really not a very big part) of sport. Remember when your games teacher said "it's the taking part that counts"? (actually, if you were any good at sport you probably never heard that).
It's silly to compare women's football with the men's game. Male footballers are (or at least should be) professional athletes. Women footballers are amateurs, who have to fit training and playing around their work and family commitments.
The top level of women's football should, therefore, be compared to the higher levels of the men's amateur game, not professional football. The girls might look better against a fair comparison.
The top level of women's football should, therefore, be compared to the higher levels of the men's amateur game, not professional football. The girls might look better against a fair comparison.
davepoth said:
My point is sort of that achievement is only part (and in my eyes really not a very big part) of sport. Remember when your games teacher said "it's the taking part that counts"? (actually, if you were any good at sport you probably never heard that).
Indeed. But televised sport should be the very pinnacle of entertainment with humans pushing the boundaries of their physical capabilities.This is not possible when the keeper can't touch the bar.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff