male sports keeping female affiliates afloat.

Remove this Banner Ad

ydraw said:
As has already been discussed a number of times, she got her ass handed to her by the #203 ranked man, after he'd had a couple of beers.
Click to expand...


On Serena, she did lose a 6-0 set to Simona Helap last year then beat her the next time they played. I suspect if Serena had the opportunity to get use to the way the men play then she would start to be competitive against the lower ranked guys.
 
Bombermania said:
On Serena, she did lose a 6-0 set to Simona Helap last year then beat her the next time they played. I suspect if Serena had the opportunity to get use to the way the men play then she would start to be competitive against the lower ranked guys.
Click to expand...

Serena herself commented that playing the #203 ranked man was so tough because he had physical abilities greater than any woman she had ever played against.

No serious commentator thinks Serena could beat anyone in the top 300 or so.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bombermania said:
On Serena, she did lose a 6-0 set to Simona Helap last year then beat her the next time they played. I suspect if Serena had the opportunity to get use to the way the men play then she would start to be competitive against the lower ranked guys.
Click to expand...
the guy played a round of golf, smoked a few darts, and had a couple of beers before he played her, i think if he took it seriously it would've been a hell of a lot worse.
 
slimdusty4 said:
it took years, generations for football (soccer) to become the powerhouse it is today, the same with cricket, and AFL, hell the NBA has grown dramatically since the early 80', and it hasn't happened overnight.

the FPA have said that the Matildas will be receiving a pay increase post the world cup, and its on the back of good, groundbreaking performances. you don't get a pay rise because "hey they're getting more", you earn it, and they have.

i ask you, in a world where women are seeking equality, and to be graded on their performances, not their gender, what kind of message does it send, for the mens game to "chop out" cash to the women's game, because they can't afford to get what they want on their own?

not a step in the right direction for gender equality and feminine independence if you ask me.
Click to expand...
I'm fully aware that these sports have taken decades to develop. That is the point. Whilst these games were developing and were at the stage that women's sport is at now, the women were confined to their homes or doing more 'genteel' pursuits. Tennis is a sport that was played by 'ladies' back in the day, and unsurprisingly it is a game where women can compete professionally and be paid very well in.

In football, the women's game started some 40 or 50 years behind the men's game, and in the case of women's football in the UK, was deliberately prevented from advancing by men. The men's game is so far ahead of the women's, that without any help, women will almost certainly never catch up. If the development of the game was a marathon, the men would be at the 40k mark and the women would just be starting. But people like you see this as 'fair' because both groups are now in the same race whilst ignoring the fact that half of the population were prevented from starting at the same time.
 
ydraw said:
Serena herself commented that playing the #203 ranked man was so tough because he had physical abilities greater than any woman she had ever played against.

No serious commentator thinks Serena could beat anyone in the top 300 or so.
Click to expand...

No, she couldn't but someone ranked 1000 might be a different story.
 
romeohwho said:
The female soccer is already better to watch than the male game.
Click to expand...

But you like the part where they swap jerseys after the game :)

Seriously, I'm guessing you may be a soccer player from a few years ago? The reason I ask is because I've often said I enjoy watching the women's basketball because they play very much like the men's game when I played 25 years ago.
 
D-N-R said:
I'm fully aware that these sports have taken decades to develop. That is the point. Whilst these games were developing and were at the stage that women's sport is at now, the women were confined to their homes or doing more 'genteel' pursuits. Tennis is a sport that was played by 'ladies' back in the day, and unsurprisingly it is a game where women can compete professionally and be paid very well in.

In football, the women's game started some 40 or 50 years behind the men's game, and in the case of women's football in the UK, was deliberately prevented from advancing by men. The men's game is so far ahead of the women's, that without any help, women will almost certainly never catch up. If the development of the game was a marathon, the men would be at the 40k mark and the women would just be starting. But people like you see this as 'fair' because both groups are now in the same race whilst ignoring the fact that half of the population were prevented from starting at the same time.
Click to expand...

I've said it previously in this thread. what kind of message does it send when the women want to be on the same pegging as the men, but need help from the male competition, if your industry doesn't support it, i can't help you.

you can't keep it afloat on your own, then asking for a handout from male counterparts doesn't make it equal, it makes you a charity case.
 
Runnin Blue said:
W

When you say funding, do you mean by the government or the FFA?
Click to expand...
fFA but don't they receive government funding to FFA? So government indirectly finances.

If FFA received no government funding then they may not have a responsibility to foster the women's game if no commercial value in it.
 
Crankyhawk said:
fFA but don't they receive government funding to FFA? So government indirectly finances.

If FFA received no government funding then they may not have a responsibility to foster the women's game if no commercial value in it.
Click to expand...
I could be wrong but I don't think they do. The only time I know of recently that the government stepped in was to contribute to the failed World Cup bid.

Again, I could be wrong though.
 
Mitchell Madness said:
In this case you're wrong
Equality would see them get paid based on their work, which they aren't
Click to expand...



equality does not mean equal outcomes or charity
Soccer for example is 100% financially supported by the men's game. Women's soccer is financed by (surprise surprise) the men.
If this is not enough they also equal share of the pie of which the contribute 0% of the revenue.

laughable

Equality actually means women's soccer to be totally self sufficient and deriving their own revenue which they would distribute to the players not bleeding the men's comp.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Elite high school aged boys teams can comprehensively beat world champion level women's teams. Quality is a big part of the marketability of sports. I do respect women who reach the elite level in their talent pool.

Many in this thread are either deluded or trying to be overly PC. You seem to want women to be paid more because they are women rather than for the product they produce and the revenue resultant from that.
 
Except for a woman who won a few World Championship Rallies in the early 80s, no woman has done anything in all top level, mainstream motorsport. Motorsport competitions are the only ones where woman compete, directly, equally as men. If anything, their physical build is an advantage. Particularly in motorbike racing.
 
It's PC/feminist bullstink to suggest the sexes are even in the same ballpark. That Serena story is pretty funny. Had the ego and couldn't bring it vs a complete no-name. Probably set back credibility of the feminist lie 10 years on it's own.

I liked seeing that womens AFL game, don't get me wrong. But it was like watching the grand final of a suburban U/17 boys league.

That was the performance level. And we know that nope, that's not marketable to the masses for revenue streams going forward.

I think these are the sports where women mostly bring an elite brand worth watching.. 1) Golf, 2) Tennis, 3) Netball, 4) Hockey, 5) Swimming, 6) Diving
 
imadodgyumpire said:
Except for a woman who won a few World Championship Rallies in the early 80s, no woman has done anything in all top level, mainstream motorsport. Motorsport competitions are the only ones where woman compete, directly, equally as men. If anything, their physical build is an advantage. Particularly in motorbike racing.
Click to expand...

Women and men compete together in equestrian sports but the horses do most of the heavy lifting there of course.

I don't mind watching some women's sport but overall I find men's sport much more entertaining. As others have said, I want to watch the best compete so in the main that is the men. I like women's golf and I used to watch women's tennis but now, unless an Aussie is playing, the shrieking has completely turned me off.

Interesting to read the comments in here about women's aussie rules. I am yet to see a match but everything I am hearing in the media is that it is great and as good as the mens. Now I read they can't kick the ball very far!

As far as women getting paid as much as the men, they will if they can draw the same crowds and generate the same TV deals.
 
As with anything with women involved they want to be just given it on a silver platter. They don't want to have to build it up themselves, work hard to gain exposure and funding by themselves.

Because you know, nobody ever worked hard in the 100+ years to make the AFL the sucess it is now. It was all just given to them because they were males in a male institution.
 
Bumpswithagrin said:
Women and men compete together in equestrian sports but the horses do most of the heavy lifting there of course.
Click to expand...
Yes. I missed that.

Bumpswithagrin said:
I don't mind watching some women's sport but overall I find men's sport much more entertaining. As others have said, I want to watch the best compete so in the main that is the men. I like women's golf and I used to watch women's tennis but now, unless an Aussie is playing, the shrieking has completely turned me off.

Interesting to read the comments in here about women's aussie rules. I am yet to see a match but everything I am hearing in the media is that it is great and as good as the mens. Now I read they can't kick the ball very far!
Click to expand...
Knowing you're a woman. I think it's good you get the difference, and are not offended by it. This fact doesn't seem to be acknowledged by those who oppose this view.

Bumpswithagrin said:
As far as women getting paid as much as the men, they will if they can draw the same crowds and generate the same TV deals.
Click to expand...
You might not like motorsport. But regardless of crowd/tv viewer sizes. If there as a woman who could drive an F1 car at a similar level to Fernando Alonso, Lewis Hamilton and Sebastien Vettel. They'd get paid more than all of them put together. Which would mean they'd be the single highest paid sportsperson in the world, a number of times over.
 
imadodgyumpire said:
You might not like motorsport. But regardless of crowd/tv viewer sizes. If there as a woman who could drive an F1 car at a similar level to Fernando Alonso, Lewis Hamilton and Sebastien Vettel. They'd get paid more than all of them put together. Which would mean they'd be the single highest paid sportsperson in the world, a number of times over.
Click to expand...

Can you explain to me why they would be paid so much regardless of crowd/TV size? Is it just because they would be unique? (I daren't say a novelty!).

Some of the arguments being put up on this subject are just plain stupid. A woman just rang SEN and said GWS and GCS don't draw the same crowds as other teams and yet they are all paid the same so the Matildas should be paid the same as the Socceroos o_O (um, they play in a totally different competition...)
 
Gus Poyet said:
As with anything with women involved they want to be just given it on a silver platter. They don't want to have to build it up themselves, work hard to gain exposure and funding by themselves.

Because you know, nobody ever worked hard in the 100+ years to make the AFL the sucess it is now. It was all just given to them because they were males in a male institution.
Click to expand...

The thing is I'm sure the women involved in these sports understand why they are not paid as much but it's just the media and do gooders who have to put their oar in and stir things up. As someone else pointed out, these people are choosing to play sport at the elite level knowing full well what the monetary compensation is, no one is forcing them to do it. Sure they would like to be paid more but how can it be justified when they are not generating the income?

Thought of another women's sport I quite like to watch, cricket :)
 
Bumpswithagrin said:
The thing is I'm sure the women involved in these sports understand why they are not paid as much but it's just the media and do gooders who have to put their oar in and stir things up. As someone else pointed out, these people are choosing to play sport at the elite level knowing full well what the monetary compensation is, no one is forcing them to do it. Sure they would like to be paid more but how can it be justified when they are not generating the income?

Thought of another women's sport I quite like to watch, cricket :)
Click to expand...

When women won't even watch women playing sports in large numbers you know there's little appeal in it.

Given over half the countries population is women.
 
Gus Poyet said:
When women won't even watch women playing sports in large numbers you know there's little appeal in it.

Given over half the countries population is women.
Click to expand...

I find it bizarre that the AFL are really pushing for this women's AFL competition, they even have target dates in mind etc. I have absolutely no problem with women playing aussie rules but why not let it just evolve naturally like the men's comp did? They are going to set up a comp, promote the you know what out of it, it will get little support then we will all be made to feel guilty and labelled misogynists for not watching it! Clearly the whole thing is being done for PC reasons not due to demand.
 
Bumpswithagrin said:
Can you explain to me why they would be paid so much regardless of crowd/TV size? Is it just because they would be unique? (I daren't say a novelty!).
Click to expand...
Without tv/promo money, the automotive industry is still enormous and generates a lot of money on its own. Without tv/promo money, how much could other sports/competitions generate? Unlike the top footy players of the time, top Grand Prix drivers of the past (I'll even say stretching as far back as the 30s. If not, before that) weren't needing to supplement their income with "normal" jobs/careers from monday to friday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top