Women's Football - Wage Disparity Debate

Lilbaz · Jul 8, 2019

nailsy said:
But the argument for equal pay is coming from the US womens team who generate a lot more money for their federation than the mens team. Why shouldn't they earn an equal amount to the men in those circumstances?

Because they don't earn more for their federation. They earn more for the womens world cup than the mens team generates for the mens world cup.
The total for each is then distributed (by fifa) between the federations that were involved.

Maxtremist · Jul 8, 2019

nailsy said:
But the argument for equal pay is coming from the US womens team who generate a lot more money for their federation than the mens team. Why shouldn't they earn an equal amount to the men in those circumstances?

I completely think they should. The women's US team is the standard bearer for the women's game. They're getting the crowds and the money and the investment whilst the men's team continually disappoints and is nowhere near successful.

Archibald&Crooks · Jul 8, 2019

Lilbaz said:
Because they don't earn more for their federation. They earn more for the womens world cup than the mens team generates for the mens world cup..

But (it seems) they do Baz. From my post above, Carly Lloyd said

"I understand that the men’s World Cup generates vastly more money globally than the women’s event, but the simple truth is that U.S. Soccer projects that our team will generate a profit of $5.2 million in 2017 while the men are forecast to lose almost $1 million. Yet we get shortchanged coming and going"

There wasn't a women's World Cup in 2017.

Lilbaz · Jul 8, 2019

Archibald&Crooks said:
But (it seems) they do Baz. From why post above, Carly Lloyd said

"I understand that the men’s World Cup generates vastly more money globally than the women’s event, but the simple truth is that U.S. Soccer projects that our team will generate a profit of $5.2 million in 2017 while the men are forecast to lose almost $1 million. Yet we get shortchanged coming and going"

There wasn't a women's World Cup in 2017.

Then that hasn't got anything to do with fifa. What games are the womens/mens internationals generating/losing money in? Qualifiers? Friendlies?

If it hasn't got anything to do with fifa then completely split the federations and have each negotiate their own tv deals and sponsors.

Archibald&Crooks · Jul 8, 2019

Lilbaz said:
Then that hasn't got anything to do with fifa. What games are the womens/mens internationals generating/losing money in? Qualifiers? Friendlies?

If it hasn't got anything to do with fifa then completely split the federations and have each negotiate their own tv deals and sponsors.

I suppose all games, overall but I disagree, it's got a lot to do with FIFA.

And again, from my earlier post

Australia's soccer players' union has called on FIFA to almost double player payments for this month's Women's World Cup to end what it describes as discrimination against female footballers.

Now you'd think they ought to know what they get compared to the geezers. There's obviously a massive discrepancy going on

Carly Lloyd (again)
The men get almost $69,000 for making a World Cup roster. As women, we get $15,000 for making the World Cup team.

Seriously? People don't think that's wrong?

I don't get why this thread is going around in circles. It's like people begrudge the women getting a bit more or worse, its like it's coming out of people's own pockets

Yes the mens game generates more, I get that, all they want is (at international level) to get something closer in some regards and the same in others (which is why players in the USA are taking their federation to court) but it also needs FIFA to pony up. As I said in this thread earlier, it's a game, ask for parity with the men and you get somewhere nearer what you would really take.

ALL the money goes into the pot for one reason. So FIFA can distribute it as they see fit, for the good of football. This attitude of men earn this much more so they get that much more works at club level, but that doesn't need to be the case at FIFA level. They can easily afford to give the womens associations/federations more which you'd hope would filter into how they treat their players, at that point it isn't a FIFA issue. This is exactly why the Australian Football Federation is taking them to court. And this is exactly one of the things FIFA's squillions are for.

WalkerboyUK · Jul 8, 2019

Could be wrong, but the qualification for the Women's World Cup was also a much smaller contest, and a lot easier.
Using USA as an example:
3 group games - 6-0 against Mexico, 5-0 against Panama, 7-0 against Trinidad & Tobago
Meanwhile in the other "group" Cuba were conceding 29 goals in 3 games

Then you have a pretty pointless knock-out stage with US beating Jamaica 6-0 in the semi, and both finalists (Canada & USA) qualify for the World Cup anyway.

Meanwhile, for last year's World Cup Qualifiers the Men's US team had a 10 match group stage.
Failed to qualify so presumably didn't get their $69k each anyway.
Bear in mind that Mexico, Honduras Panama & Costa Rica played 16 qualifier matches - I'd be interested to know what FIFA paid their respective associations for their qualification and participation.

Should the Women's team get $69k each for winning 4 games to qualify??
Maybe the answer is a change to a flat match fee across the board, regardless of men/women, let's say $5k for example for each competitive fixture and $2k for a friendly.
I'm sure that would be "unfair" because one team probably plays more competitive games than the other... Men get paid more for playing 10 qualifiers and failing than women playing 4/5 and succeeding...

nailsy · Jul 8, 2019

Lilbaz said:
Then that hasn't got anything to do with fifa. What games are the womens/mens internationals generating/losing money in? Qualifiers? Friendlies?

If it hasn't got anything to do with fifa then completely split the federations and have each negotiate their own tv deals and sponsors.

I think you're talking about a slightly different issue. The prize money comes from FIFA and the women have asked for more, but they aren't demanding an equal amount to the men's game. To be fair Infantino has just announced that they will double the prize money for the next tournament. It's still way below the men's funding, but it's a step in the right direction.
The equal pay issue is mainly where the US women's team generate more money for their federation than the men's team, but are paid less.

nailsy · Jul 8, 2019

WalkerboyUK said:
Could be wrong, but the qualification for the Women's World Cup was also a much smaller contest, and a lot easier.
Using USA as an example:
3 group games - 6-0 against Mexico, 5-0 against Panama, 7-0 against Trinidad & Tobago
Meanwhile in the other "group" Cuba were conceding 29 goals in 3 games

Then you have a pretty pointless knock-out stage with US beating Jamaica 6-0, and both finalists (Canada & USA) qualify for the World Cup anyway.

Meanwhile, for last year's World Cup Qualifiers the Men's US team had a 10 match group stage.
Failed to qualify so presumably didn't get their $69k each anyway.
Bear in mind that Mexico, Honduras Panama & Costa Rica played 16 qualifier matches - I'd be interested to know what FIFA paid their respective associations for their qualification and participation.

Should the Women's team get $69k each for winning 4 games to qualify??

They should both be paid the same basic appearance fee.

WalkerboyUK · Jul 8, 2019

nailsy said:
They should both be paid the same basic appearance fee.

As I literally added just before you posted this!

Lilbaz · Jul 8, 2019

nailsy said:
They should both be paid the same basic appearance fee.

Should that go for all countries?

Lilbaz · Jul 8, 2019

Archibald&Crooks said:
I suppose all games, overall but I disagree, it's got a lot to do with FIFA.

And again, from my earlier post

Australia's soccer players' union has called on FIFA to almost double player payments for this month's Women's World Cup to end what it describes as discrimination against female footballers.

Now you'd think they ought to know what they get compared to the geezers. There's obviously a massive discrepancy going on

Carly Lloyd (again)
The men get almost $69,000 for making a World Cup roster. As women, we get $15,000 for making the World Cup team.

Seriously? People don't think that's wrong?

I don't get why this thread is going around in circles. It's like people begrudge the women getting a bit more or worse, its like it's coming out of people's own pockets

Yes the mens game generates more, I get that, all they want is (at international level) to get something closer in some regards and the same in others (which is why players in the USA are taking their federation to court) but it also needs FIFA to pony up. As I said in this thread earlier, it's a game, ask for parity with the men and you get somewhere nearer what you would really take.

ALL the money goes into the pot for one reason. So FIFA can distribute it as they see fit, for the good of football. This attitude of men earn this much more so they get that much more works at club level, but that doesn't need to be the case at FIFA level. They can easily afford to give the womens associations/federations more which you'd hope would filter into how they treat their players, at that point it isn't a FIFA issue. This is exactly why the Australian Football Federation is taking them to court. And this is exactly one of the things FIFA's squillions are for.

Because it is hypocritical. If the us womens team played panama in a wc qualifier they wouldn't want equal pay to the panama players.
I've said numerous times that you shouldn't get paid to represent your country, it should be a privilege. The money should go to grass roots of either sex.

Maxtremist · Jul 8, 2019

Lilbaz said:
Because it is hypocritical. If the us womens team played panama in a wc qualifier they wouldn't want equal pay to the panama players.
I've said numerous times that you shouldn't get paid to represent your country, it should be a privilege. The money should go to grass roots of either sex.

Whilst I appreciate your opinion I do think there's a lot of context it doesn't take into account. In my eyes, part of the whole privilege line and way of thinking comes from the fact that there's so much money in the men's game that when you represent your country it should be a privilege. Which doesn't work as well for the women's game. Not to mention it's still you doing a job. As privileged as you might feel it doesn't mean you should work for free/be happy to work for less.
Then if you're gonna bring up the grass roots side of things, how much money is in the grass roots of the women's game? It's at a massive disparity to how much is in the men's game and the infrastructure there in coaching, accessibility etc... and that then leads to a worse product for the women's game, less women getting involved in it etc...

fortworthspur · Jul 9, 2019

just split the TV contracts and then everyone will know who generates what.

fortworthspur · Jul 9, 2019

excellent summary:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...han-men/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.66146eda6160

nailsy · Jul 9, 2019

Lilbaz said:
Should that go for all countries?

Its difficult to answer that. In theory the men and women are all doing the same job of kicking a ball for ninety minutes, but there are other factors like the attendances, if both teams are made up of professional players, how much money they generate, etc.

Lilbaz said:
Because it is hypocritical. If the us womens team played panama in a wc qualifier they wouldn't want equal pay to the panama players.
I've said numerous times that you shouldn't get paid to represent your country, it should be a privilege. The money should go to grass roots of either sex.

Its not hypocritical at all. They want to be paid the same as other people doing the same job for their employer.
I work for a large multinational company. I'm paid the same as a male or female worker doing the same job as me here in the UK. I'm not paid the same as someone doing the same job in the USA or in Germany. And I'm definitely not paid the same as a worker doing the same job for a rival company.

Archibald&Crooks · Jul 9, 2019

nailsy said:
Its difficult to answer that. In theory the men and women are all doing the same job of kicking a ball for ninety minutes, but there are other factors like the attendances, if both teams are made up of professional players, how much money they generate, etc.

Its not hypocritical at all. They want to be paid the same as other people doing the same job for their employer.
I work for a large multinational company. I'm paid the same as a male or female worker doing the same job as me here in the UK. I'm not paid the same as someone doing the same job in the USA or in Germany. And I'm definitely not paid the same as a worker doing the same job for a rival company.

Some people are taking all this to ridiculous places, just for the sake of arguing I suspect. The USA women's team are in a unique situation so (IMO) that stands apart in some respects from other countries. It's plain to see how they have a case with regards how their own federation pays them.

Then you have the discontent surrounding the World Cup and FIFA, which is coming from more than just the USA. This is starting to be addressed.

Fifa president Gianni Infantino wants to increase the size of the Women's World Cup to 32 teams and double its prize money, and launch a women's Club World Cup.

After calling the ongoing tournament in France "the best women's World Cup ever", Infantino set out a five-point plan to make sure football "seizes this opportunity".

Bidding for the 2023 tournament - which has yet to be allocated and was set to contain 24 sides - may have to restart to accommodate the extra teams.

Infantino also said the world governing body wants a women's World League for national sides - similar to the Uefa Nations League - which would include promotion and relegation.

He also plans to double a planned $500m (£400m) investment in women's football in the next four years, saying Fifa has unprecedented levels of reserves and "we don't need all that money in Swiss banks - they have enough"

That's a start and one would hope some of that money filters down to the players.

So again, how anyone can reasonably argue against women getting more, when even FIFA are starting to see it is beyond me.

Donki · Jul 9, 2019

I had a lot more respect for woman’s football before this World Cup when all this silly talk of money, political talk involving Trump and LGBT that has been brought up. They should earn an amount directly related to the money they generate and that’s been all that needs to be said.

'O Zio · Jul 9, 2019

Archibald&Crooks said:
So again, how anyone can reasonably argue against women getting more, when even FIFA are starting to see it is beyond me.

I don't think anyone (sensible) is against the women getting more in the sense of more investment from FIFA in the women's game in order to develop it. But that's not the same as how much the players should get in fees/prize money from FIFA for participating in the WC. If the competition is less presitgious, involves fewer games, is watched by less people, and generates less money, it makes no sense for it to have equal prize money to the men's WC. It just doesn't. An equal % of the money generated then fair enough, but an equal dollar amount when the overall pot is much smaller is just completely illogical.

As for the US team and their fees from their own federation, that's a completely separate issue. It's fairly obvious that they should get paid more than the men by "US Soccer", not just equal, but that's to do with their own federation and is irrelevant to the FIFA prize money/fee debate so I'm not really sure why they keep getting lumped into the same discussion.

nailsy · Jul 9, 2019

'O Zio said:
I don't think anyone (sensible) is against the women getting more in the sense of more investment from FIFA in the women's game in order to develop it. But that's not the same as how much the players should get in fees/prize money from FIFA for participating in the WC. If the competition is less presitgious, involves fewer games, is watched by less people, and generates less money, it makes no sense for it to have equal prize money to the men's WC. It just doesn't. An equal % of the money generated then fair enough, but an equal dollar amount when the overall pot is much smaller is just completely illogical.

As for the US team and their fees from their own federation, that's a completely separate issue. It's fairly obvious that they should get paid more than the men by "US Soccer", not just equal, but that's to do with their own federation and is irrelevant to the FIFA prize money/fee debate so I'm not really sure why they keep getting lumped into the same discussion.

As far as I'm aware no-one has said that it should. Or have I missed something?

'O Zio · Jul 9, 2019

nailsy said:
As far as I'm aware no-one has said that it should. Or have I missed something?

Can't be arsed to dredge back through the whole thread but I'm pretty sure there are people arguing that it's inequality/discrimination if the women get paid less than the men. If there aren't then I must've got the wrong end of the stick somewhere, in which case I apologise. I think part of the trouble is that there are 2 or 3 separate discussion to be had and they all keep getting lumped into the same thing when they're not. The US women being paid more by their federation than the men is one of them, and that I fully support.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Women's Football - Wage Disparity Debate

Just call me Baz

Well-Known Member

Aegina Expat

Just call me Baz

Aegina Expat

Well-Known Member

SC Supporter

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

Just call me Baz

Just call me Baz

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SC Supporter

Aegina Expat

Has a "Massive Member" Member

Well-Known Member

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

Similar threads