Old school tear up?

[M.I.B.]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39027600

The thought of a mob of North London's finest girls going at each other.......actually, I'd better stop now

 

[Gassin's finest]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39027600

The thought of a mob of North London's finest girls going at each other.......actually, I'd better stop now

Bloody hell, look at that draw! Merseyside, North London and Birmingham derbies.

 

[Insomnia]

I thought this was gonna be about the Millwall match

 

[riggi]

I don't think we should condone those sort of things.

 

[Insomnia]

I don't think we should condone those sort of things.

yeah Woman's football should be banned

 

[mark87]

Wonder if Ozil will be playing.

 

[nferno]

Had to delete my history after visiting that link.

 

[mattie g]

yeah Woman's football should be banned

Nah. We got ideas.

They could, for example, have tighter shorts. Female players are pretty, if you excuse me for saying so, and they already have some different rules to men - such as playing with a lighter ball. That decision was taken to create a more female aesthetic, so why not do it in fashion?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/jan/16/football.gender

 

[danielneeds]

Quick look at the THFC ladies Twitter, and Leah Rawle is pretty cute.

 

[JerryGarcia]

Handbags at dawn!

 

[hughy]

Wonder if Ozil will be playing.

He doesn't show up in the games which matter.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

Why is women's football so sub par? No sexist overtones, i really mean it - even at the top end, it's barely League 2 in terms of pace and ability, which makes no sense. Is it just a law of averages thing? I mean, there are clearly some very talented, very fast, very technical, very powerful women who play football, but most teams seem to consist of 3 or 4 decent players but everyone else just filling gaps. You could probably count the number of really international class women playing in the UK on your fingers.

Women are not less able, less fit or less determined than men, yet there is this clear and obvious chasm of ability between the sexes and i can't seem to figure out why. Women have played football for generations, yet they can't stand alongside female rugby or cricket teams, athletics competitors or gymnasts when it comes to the comparable level that they compete at.

 

[SpunkyBackpack]

Why is women's football so sub par? No sexist overtones, i really mean it - even at the top end, it's barely League 2 in terms of pace and ability, which makes no sense. Is it just a law of averages thing? I mean, there are clearly some very talented, very fast, very technical, very powerful women who play football, but most teams seem to consist of 3 or 4 decent players but everyone else just filling gaps. You could probably count the number of really international class women playing in the UK on your fingers.

Women are not less able, less fit or less determined than men, yet there is this clear and obvious chasm of ability between the sexes and i can't seem to figure out why. Women have played football for generations, yet they can't stand alongside female rugby or cricket teams, athletics competitors or gymnasts when it comes to the comparable level that they compete at.

It's just time really isn't it? We've had professional mens teams for hundreds of years, women's leagues are still building a fanbase, it might get there but they're up against a thousand years of mens football and history and over a million mens teams with a fanbase of billions, a trillion of which have snotty (read- sexist) attitudes which will take time to break down, but it is getting better.


That and the keepers are too short so it looks silly. And maybe something to do with pelvises.

 

[riggi]

Probably all have their periods at the same time on the pitch!!!

Megabantz loooolZZZ

 

[sussexyid]

Why is women's football so sub par? No sexist overtones, i really mean it - even at the top end, it's barely League 2 in terms of pace and ability, which makes no sense. Is it just a law of averages thing? I mean, there are clearly some very talented, very fast, very technical, very powerful women who play football, but most teams seem to consist of 3 or 4 decent players but everyone else just filling gaps. You could probably count the number of really international class women playing in the UK on your fingers.

Women are not less able, less fit or less determined than men, yet there is this clear and obvious chasm of ability between the sexes and i can't seem to figure out why. Women have played football for generations, yet they can't stand alongside female rugby or cricket teams, athletics competitors or gymnasts when it comes to the comparable level that they compete at.

Money

It's been thrown at the men's game for years. Training, coaching, training camps etc but look at what is spent on the women's game.

And... You can earn £20k a week at a mid table championship side these days. That's a heck of a draw to kids. Even if the Dont make it to the very top they can earn enough to be very comfortable after they finish playing.

Women's team have nowhere that kind of financing so why wouldn't you become a doctor or something instead? Far less of a life struggle.

 

[Mr Pink]

Why is women's football so sub par? No sexist overtones, i really mean it - even at the top end, it's barely League 2 in terms of pace and ability, which makes no sense. Is it just a law of averages thing? I mean, there are clearly some very talented, very fast, very technical, very powerful women who play football, but most teams seem to consist of 3 or 4 decent players but everyone else just filling gaps. You could probably count the number of really international class women playing in the UK on your fingers.

Women are not less able, less fit or less determined than men, yet there is this clear and obvious chasm of ability between the sexes and i can't seem to figure out why. Women have played football for generations, yet they can't stand alongside female rugby or cricket teams, athletics competitors or gymnasts when it comes to the comparable level that they compete at.

Because the vast majority couldn't trap a bag of cement?

 

[mattie g]

Why is women's football so sub par? No sexist overtones, i really mean it - even at the top end, it's barely League 2 in terms of pace and ability, which makes no sense. Is it just a law of averages thing? I mean, there are clearly some very talented, very fast, very technical, very powerful women who play football, but most teams seem to consist of 3 or 4 decent players but everyone else just filling gaps. You could probably count the number of really international class women playing in the UK on your fingers.

Women are not less able, less fit or less determined than men, yet there is this clear and obvious chasm of ability between the sexes and i can't seem to figure out why. Women have played football for generations, yet they can't stand alongside female rugby or cricket teams, athletics competitors or gymnasts when it comes to the comparable level that they compete at.

Because, at a very general level, women aren't as big, fast, or strong as men. Women are better at many things than are men, but feats of physical ability aren't among them. Yes...there are absolutely some women who are more athletically gifted than most men, but that's not nearly the norm.

There's a smaller pool of high-level athletes to pull from when it comes to women's football, and when you factor in that the most athletically gifted women aren't near the level of speed and strength as their counterparts in the men's game, you get a "sub-par" product.

It's nothing to do with sexism, and everything to do with accepting and embracing the fact that men and women have different strengths and abilities.

 

[Luka Van der Bale]

Why is women's football so sub par? No sexist overtones, i really mean it - even at the top end, it's barely League 2 in terms of pace and ability, which makes no sense. Is it just a law of averages thing? I mean, there are clearly some very talented, very fast, very technical, very powerful women who play football, but most teams seem to consist of 3 or 4 decent players but everyone else just filling gaps. You could probably count the number of really international class women playing in the UK on your fingers.

Women are not less able, less fit or less determined than men, yet there is this clear and obvious chasm of ability between the sexes and i can't seem to figure out why. Women have played football for generations, yet they can't stand alongside female rugby or cricket teams, athletics competitors or gymnasts when it comes to the comparable level that they compete at.

What? It's not sexist to say that men are more athletically able than women. It's just science - they're built with more muscle; they're faster and stronger. Look at the records for sprint times, the serve speeds in tennis, the level of football... by any barometer in almost any sport men are ahead. Not sure football is any worse than the norm in this regard. And I don't see why that norm is hard to believe if you've any understanding of the genetic differences between the two genders.

 

[danielneeds]

What? It's not sexist to say that men are more athletically able than women. It's just science - they're built with more muscle; they're faster and stronger. Look at the records for sprint times, the serve speeds in tennis, the level of football... by any barometer in almost any sport men are ahead. Not sure football is any worse than the norm in this regard. And I don't see why that norm is hard to believe if you've any understanding of the genetic differences between the two genders.

The gulf in football class is not physiological. The fastest men run 100 metres in 9.5 secs, the fastest women in 10.5. It's not a chasm. The infrastructure, the training, the amount of boys who want to be and believe they can become professional footballers compared to girls is thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands more. The pool is so much smaller, it's a different game at the moment, and needs time to grow and develop.

 

[Luka Van der Bale]

The gulf in football class is not physiological. The fastest men run 100 metres in 9.5 secs, the fastest women in 10.5. It's not a chasm. The infrastructure, the training, the amount of boys who want to be and believe they can become professional footballers compared to girls is thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands more. The pool is so much smaller, it's a different game at the moment, and needs time to grow and develop.

Of course that's also a part of the reason. But in relation to your first point, when talking about such small numbers a second is a massive difference - we're talking an 11% increase in time.