What's new

Women's Football - Wage Disparity Debate

WalkerboyUK

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2009
21,658
23,476
I agree with you when talking about e.g. the PL men who make more money than they know what to do with anyway, but if you're a player like the women are who make just a "normal" salary then I think it's fair enough that they get a match fee.

Just reading the lawsuit they lodged against USSF.
Makes for interesting reading when it comes to money and I get what they're calling out.
US men's team get basic $5000 per game, which can increase to $17k dependent on level of opponent in FIFA ranking and the result of the match.
Women's team get a flat rate for the year, regardless of how many games they play.
The problem though is not really the USSF, it's FIFA, who determine the payout for tournaments.
Men's team got $5.3 million for reaching last 16 in 2014.
Women's team got $1.7 million for winning in 2015.

That being said, I'm sure the men could argue that they regularly play against stronger opposition (largely because they're shit themselves).
 

Klinsmannesque

Well-Known Member
Jul 26, 2013
900
4,665
Supply and demand pal. I'm all for the liberation of equality and women's football but I'm also not going to blow smoke up their backsides and say I think it's anywhere near as entertaining to watch as the men's game.

The harsh reality is that in the majority of cases the women's teams would cease to exist or be able to function without money from its male counterparts. The West Ham ladies football team for example loses £500,000 per year which gets covered by the men's team. If the women's game is going to flourish it should be how the men's team did in a natural and organic way not piggy backing onto 135-140 years worth of history just because someone shouts it isn't fair.

The Tottenham Hotspur ladies for an example already have a HUGE advantage over the first Tottenham Hotspur men's teams as they can associate themselves with the name Tottenham Hotspur, a brand built over 135 years by the male teams.

You highlight about equal pay etc and mention about women's tennis. Is that the same women's tennis that saw the Williams sisters, the two biggest stars of the women's game lose on the same day to a guy ranked outside the top 200 in the world? Does he get paid as much in marketing and event money as they do even though he proved himself to be a more superior player than them? Sometimes males gain an advantage being male, sometimes they have a disadvantage. He will never earn anywhere near as much as those two but he's proven himself to be better than them.

It's a flawed argument for me and the women's game if it truly wants to prove itself needs to organically fine its way and not keep looking for handouts. Yes there are areas that need addressing of course but most of the time the reason a footballer gets paid what he gets paid isn't because it's fair on him as a human, it's supply and demand. He gets paid what he does as it'll keep their cash cow running. It isn't not a charity and it irks me that so many people in life expect handouts. Once the ladies start playing football in a way that I find interesting and exciting enough to genuinely want to watch I'll change my tune but what I saw when I watched the women's World Cup was closer to watching kids running around in a park than it was watching the top men's teams playing the game and if the women's game focused more on improving that side of things they will find their pay quickly looking far closer to what they feel they deserve.

At club level they have been more than happy to take the name of a men's team, that suited them and the women's game has come on leaps and bounds but I haven't seen many of them opt against using the men's team name and brand so they build it themselves and that bothers me. I don't see many ladies teams not trying to cut corners, all this progress seems a little bit plastic to me they need to give themselves time and trailblazer the game for futurer generations.

Give them help yes but handouts absolutely not. Long term it will make their game better if they learn how to generate success like the men's game did.

Completely agree with most points. It's unfortunate but the quality of the product is no where near that of the men's - I watched Madagascar vs Congo yesterday and there was more quality in that than the final (which I also watched). The gulf is still enormous. I also think the argument in the States for example on equal pay is a flawed - the two key points I have seen argued are the womens game brings in more money than the mens and they have more success. If the first point is true, then yes its a good argument - but the success part is ridiculous - the women's game is a less competitive product. It's like saying that the winner of League 1 should get more money than a top half finish in the PL - that to me dilutes their point and causes friction - just stick to the facts

I do think whilst FIFA sit on bundles of cash there is an obligation on additional investment to help it along, and it's fine to see PL clubs subsidising their own women's team as a small amount (in PL club terms) will go a long way) but not to the levels being demanded by some corners.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
Just reading the lawsuit they lodged against USSF.
Makes for interesting reading when it comes to money and I get what they're calling out.
US men's team get basic $5000 per game, which can increase to $17k dependent on level of opponent in FIFA ranking and the result of the match.
Women's team get a flat rate for the year, regardless of how many games they play.
The problem though is not really the USSF, it's FIFA, who determine the payout for tournaments.
Men's team got $5.3 million for reaching last 16 in 2014.
Women's team got $1.7 million for winning in 2015.

That being said, I'm sure the men could argue that they regularly play against stronger opposition (largely because they're shit themselves).

That can also argue that the men's game generates far more revenue for FIFA than the women's game does. It's like saying the winners of the League Cup only get £1m and the quarter finalists of the Champions League get £10m etc.

Something needs addressing and if the women's game is getting unfairly treated it absolutely deserved justice but if it is looked into and all seems Ok based on economic variables then they need to lump it and realise that they need to evolve their game and leave FIFA with little choice but to reward them in line with what they deserve.

Yes the women's football team has achieved more than the USA men's team on face value but all I will say is I've never seen a woman's footballer make a £60m transfer like we've recently seen one of the USA men's players make. The game not just off the field but on the field is miles behind.

I've got an idea. Let the USA women's team play against the USA men's team for who gets which prize pot and the winner takes the right and fair reward. We'll soon see which team is actually better and which team is limited by the level it has to play in and against.

Women's rights, absolutely but let's not get ahead of ourselves that this equal pay malarkey isn't just utopian ideology and won't stay that way for sometime. Let's give them a helpi hand but let's not make it into something it isn't just yet.
 

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,392
That can also argue that the men's game generates far more revenue for FIFA than the women's game does. It's like saying the winners of the League Cup only get £1m and the quarter finalists of the Champions League get £10m etc.

Something needs addressing and if the women's game is getting unfairly treated it absolutely deserved justice but if it is looked into and all seems Ok based on economic variables then they need to lump it and realise that they need to evolve their game and leave FIFA with little choice but to reward them in line with what they deserve.

Yes the women's football team has achieved more than the USA men's team on face value but all I will say is I've never seen a woman's footballer make a £60m transfer like we've recently seen one of the USA men's players make. The game not just off the field but on the field is miles behind.

I've got an idea. Let the USA women's team play against the USA men's team for who gets which prize pot and the winner takes the right and fair reward. We'll soon see which team is actually better and which team is limited by the level it has to play in and against.

Women's rights, absolutely but let's not get ahead of ourselves that this equal pay malarkey isn't just utopian ideology and won't stay that way for sometime. Let's give them a helpi hand but let's not make it into something it isn't just yet.


I'd imagine that statistically, women's football attracts a higher percentage of female viewers than the male equivalent but far lower attendances overall. Until attendances reach some sort of parity it's only right and proper that the men's game generates more revenue which is reflected in player's pay. If it's really seen as an equal rights issue, more women need to support their own side of the game to level up the playing field, because men aren't that interested in the women's game.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
I'd imagine that statistically, women's football attracts a higher percentage of female viewers than the male equivalent but far lower attendances overall. Until attendances reach some sort of parity it's only right and proper that the men's game generates more revenue which is reflected in player's pay. If it's really seen as an equal rights issue, more women need to support their own side of the game to level up the playing field, because men aren't that interested in the women's game.

I already think they do in all fairness. Not because they enjoy the game but because they are supporting women.

Alex Morgan has more followers on Twitter than Spurs do. Numbers wise people will look at that as evidence of inequality and rightly so. Dig a little deeper and people will find that it's a flawed number to point to as Elneny also has more followers than Spurs.

Is that because he's bigger than us? A good player or because he comes from Egypt? I would love the women's game to evolve, it will give me another sport to enjoy watching but it's daft for people to say that women get a raw deal when the USA women's team are rumoured to have lost to the Spurs u15/u16 team whilst using our training facilities before the World Cup. Apparently the game got called off after 20 minutes because they were 5-0 down against our young lads.

They need to focus on developing their game so they don't lose such matches, take their game up levels and the demand will grow as will the money they are paid.

They say that the women's game is bigger over there but I don't see or know of many women's professional teams like I do DC United, New York Red Bulls, Atlanta etc. It's a hobby that has recently turned professional and they demand equal pay? The men's game should leave them to look after themselves, give them true liberation if that's what they want and let's see where it gets them. I haven't once heard a female player thank the male side of the club, it's roots basically for bankrolling them (West Ham ladies are still allowed to run even though they run at a loss of £500k per year). A little gratitude in some areas will go along way to winning me over instead of wagging fingers and accusations of misogyny in the direction of a federation or organtion that has built itself through sweat and graft and accomplishment.

Give them a helping hand but don't roll over for them by falling for the false accusations that make the game look unfair. If it is unfair that's a different story altogether but let's not pretend this ladies game currently touches the sides.

I hope one day it does but with the amount of air time female pundits, experts and media outlets get I find the sexist card more damaging, dividing and an insult personally. I think elements of the ladies game are letting themselves down but that always happens when a repressed person receives liberation at first. I hope the game finds its way from both sides.
 
Last edited:

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,232
57,392
I already think they do in all fairness. Not because they enjoy the game but because they are supporting women.

Alex Morgan has more followers on Twitter than Spurs do. Numbers wise people will look at that as evidence of inequality and rightly so. Dig a little deeper and people will find that it's a flawed number to point to as Elneny also has more followers than Spurs.

Is that because he's bigger than us? A good player or because he comes from Egypt? I would love the women's game to evolve, it will give me another sport to enjoy watching but it's daft for people to say that women get a raw deal when the USA women's team are rumoured to have lost to the Spurs u15/u16 team whilst using our training facilities before the World Cup. Apparently the game got called off after 20 minutes because they were 5-0 down against our young lads.

They need to focus on developing their game so they don't lose such matches, take their game up levels and the demand will grow as will the money they are paid.

They say that the women's game is bigger over there but I don't see or know of many women's professional teams like I do DC United, New York Red Bulls, Atlanta etc. It's a hobby that has recently turned professional and they demand equal pay? The men's game should leave them to look after themselves, give them true liberation if that's what they want and let's see where it gets them. I haven't once heard a female player thank the male side of the club, it's roots basically for bankrolling them (West Ham ladies are still allowed to run even though they run at a loss of £500k per year). A little gratitude in some areas will go along way to winning me over instead of wagging fingers and accusations of misogyny in the direction of a federation or organtion that has built itself through sweat and graft and accomplishment.

Give them a helping hand but don't roll over for them by falling for the false accusations that make the game look unfair. I fancy it is unfair that's a different story altogether but let's not pretend this ladies game currently touches the sides.

I hope one day it does with the amount of air time female pundits, experts and media outlets get I find the sexist card more damaging and an insult personally. I think elements of the ladies game are letting themselves down but that always happens when a repressed person receives liberation at first. I hope the game finds its way from both sides.

The USA is also in a pretty unique position where the men's game is very much a second tier sport. I'm sure they'd get pretty short shrift if female baseball or basketball players demanded the same pay as the men.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
The USA is also in a pretty unique position where the men's game is very much a second tier sport. I'm sure they'd get pretty short shrift if female baseball or basketball players demanded the same pay as the men.

I'd love to see the women's game kick on and flourish but most women's teams operate at a loss so how they can demand more pay is completely beyond me. Simply put the bigger picture needs to be looked at and addressed by both FIFA and the women participating in the game.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
I think the US situation is pretty unique and needs to be looked at as such. If their women really do bring in more money than the men then it makes sense that they get paid more IMO. However, in the overwhelming majority of cases around the world, the men's team make their respective FA/club etc. probably hundreds of times more money in revenue so it's a no brainer that they get paid more than the women.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
I think the US situation is pretty unique and needs to be looked at as such. If their women really do bring in more money than the men then it makes sense that they get paid more IMO. However, in the overwhelming majority of cases around the world, the men's team make their respective FA/club etc. probably hundreds of times more money in revenue so it's a no brainer that they get paid more than the women.

It definitely needs looking at I agree. Something tells me it's a little bit like a Harlem Globetrotters type of thing though. The USA ladies team looks great because women's football on the whole isn't that good. If I'm wrong and they deserve and get justice then wonderful but they were 5-0 down to the Spurs u15/u16s team earlier in the summer after 20 minutes so that tells me something.

The extra revenue should get pumped back into the game, from grassroots all the way through to paying back the men's teams finding them at the moment. The girls game needs to learn how to become self sufficient before it can wag its finger at unfairness in my opinion. The USA ladies team is a unique scenario though and I'm intrigued to see where it will go. If they deserve more and rightly fight for it fair play to them but to brand football as misogynistic when all I see now are female presenters, pundits, commentators and footballers playing for a men's brand or team I find it a little bit hollow and ungratifying. We could easily have left women's football to fend for itself but we've given it a massive helping hand and it runs the risk of abusing that gratitude by seeking and desiring more than it warrants. Let the female game grow and give it every opportunity to, it deserves to but to use the sport as a platform to shout sexist behaviour I don't really like or buy into as much as some liberal beliefs I hold.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
It definitely needs looking at I agree. Something tells me it's a little bit like a Harlem Globetrotters type of thing though. The USA ladies team looks great because women's football on the whole isn't that good. If I'm wrong and they deserve and get justice then wonderful but they were 5-0 down to the Spurs u15/u16s team earlier in the summer after 20 minutes so that tells me something.

The extra revenue should get pumped back into the game, from grassroots all the way through to paying back the men's teams finding them at the moment. The girls game needs to learn how to become self sufficient before it can wag its finger at unfairness in my opinion. The USA ladies team is a unique scenario though and I'm intrigued to see where it will go. If they deserve more and rightly fight for it fair play to them but to brand football as misogynistic when all I see now are female presenters, pundits, commentators and footballers playing for a men's brand or team I find it a little bit hollow and ungratifying. We could easily have left women's football to fend for itself but we've given it a massive helping hand and it runs the risk of abusing that gratitude by seeking and desiring more than it warrants. Let the female game grow and give it every opportunity to, it deserves to but to use the sport as a platform to shout sexist behaviour I don't really like or buy into as much as some liberal beliefs I hold.

I suppose the argument is that giving the women's game a leg-up in the short term will eventually help it grow to a point where it is self-sufficient.

But anyway, I think you're mixing two separate arguments. The amount of money the players get in match fees is a separate argument for the amount of money that gets invested in the women's game etc. IMO
 

Archibald&Crooks

Aegina Expat
Admin
Feb 1, 2005
55,533
204,721
I've found absolutely nothing suggesting the complaint over equal pay is for wages at club level.

There's shitloads out there about at National level, IIRC the Australians are taking FIFA to court over it, from assorted links easily found

Australian women - 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.

Hope Solo - In an interview with Vox, Solo explained why she, along with four of her teammates, decided to file a suit against the US Soccer Federation over pay discrimination. Although the pay disparity was significant — the women's team is paid almost four times less than the men's team despite bringing in more money — the decision to sue wasn't an easy one

But Solo has bigger ambitions than simply being paid the same as male players: She believed her team should be making even more. "We’ve brought in almost $20 million in revenue, while the men’s team has lost $2 million," she said. "So they didn’t bring any revenue into the federation. Not to mention we had more viewership. We broke records."


Carly Lloyd - Each year, the United States men’s and women’s national teams each play a minimum of 20 friendly matches. The top five players on the men’s team make an average of $406,000 each year from these games. The top five women are guaranteed only $72,000 each year

If I were a male soccer player who won a World Cup for the United States, my bonus would be $390,000. Because I am a female soccer player, the bonus I got for our World Cup victory last summer was $75,000.

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

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.

I was on the road for about 260 days last year. When I am traveling internationally, I get $60 a day for expenses. Michael Bradley gets $75. Maybe they figure that women are smaller and thus eat less.

When Hope Solo or Alex Morgan, say, makes a sponsor appearance for U.S. Soccer, she gets $3,000. When Geoff Cameron or Jermaine Jones makes the same sort of appearance, he gets $3,750

Again, I've found nothing to say it's at club level. there may well be complaints about it, I don't know, I didn't search very hard for that because I think it's obviously a flawed thing which is why I don't think that's the (main) issue if it's one at all, but the very VERY public and prominent gripe is at National Federation and FIFA level. I don't understand why there's all this talk about clubs and I'd be surprised if they'd use the arguments above and then expect parity with mens football (soccer) club players where the obvious argument, the argument being made in this thread, the argument they are using themselves, would be thrown straight back in their faces.

Seems to me they got a point

*Shrugs
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
I suppose the argument is that giving the women's game a leg-up in the short term will eventually help it grow to a point where it is self-sufficient.

But anyway, I think you're mixing two separate arguments. The amount of money the players get in match fees is a separate argument for the amount of money that gets invested in the women's game etc. IMO

Giving the girls game a leg up short term will of course help them but isn't that what clubs have been doing letting them piggy back onto their brands and helping to fund them up to this stage? It needs and deserves help but then again so do homeless people but that's another subject altogether. Self sufficiency is and will always be the best way to grown and to learn.

The ladies teams can't demand more money in match fees if that pot is getting invested elsewhere in my opinion which seems to be the case with the amount domestic clubs are giving it. I hope somehow and somewhere it all finds its way and it becomes a wonderful spectacle. The next four years and where the ladies game goes after this World Cup will be a very interesting thing and I'm proud to see teams in higher levels of the game doing what it is to give it the nudge required but the best way it can flourish is by becoming self sufficient instead of throwing money at it. Get those 3.8m Twitter followers led Morgan has to do something more than just follow her online and the game will naturally find new levels and develop so the money follows

They need to ensure that they don't continue to bite the hand that feeds them. Keep their heads down and work on making the game better it's on a great trajectory and it hopefully will continue to thrive.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
I've found absolutely nothing suggesting the complaint over equal pay is for wages at club level.

There's shitloads out there about at National level, IIRC the Australians are taking FIFA to court over it, from assorted links easily found

Australian women - 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.

Hope Solo - In an interview with Vox, Solo explained why she, along with four of her teammates, decided to file a suit against the US Soccer Federation over pay discrimination. Although the pay disparity was significant — the women's team is paid almost four times less than the men's team despite bringing in more money — the decision to sue wasn't an easy one

But Solo has bigger ambitions than simply being paid the same as male players: She believed her team should be making even more. "We’ve brought in almost $20 million in revenue, while the men’s team has lost $2 million," she said. "So they didn’t bring any revenue into the federation. Not to mention we had more viewership. We broke records."


Carly Lloyd - Each year, the United States men’s and women’s national teams each play a minimum of 20 friendly matches. The top five players on the men’s team make an average of $406,000 each year from these games. The top five women are guaranteed only $72,000 each year

If I were a male soccer player who won a World Cup for the United States, my bonus would be $390,000. Because I am a female soccer player, the bonus I got for our World Cup victory last summer was $75,000.

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

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.

I was on the road for about 260 days last year. When I am traveling internationally, I get $60 a day for expenses. Michael Bradley gets $75. Maybe they figure that women are smaller and thus eat less.

When Hope Solo or Alex Morgan, say, makes a sponsor appearance for U.S. Soccer, she gets $3,000. When Geoff Cameron or Jermaine Jones makes the same sort of appearance, he gets $3,750

Again, I've found nothing to say it's at club level. there may well be complaints about it, I don't know, I didn't search very hard for that because I think it's obviously a flawed thing which is why I don't think that's the (main) issue if it's one at all, but the very VERY public and prominent gripe is at National Federation and FIFA level. I don't understand why there's all this talk about clubs and I'd be surprised if they'd use the arguments above and then expect parity with mens football (soccer) club players where the obvious argument, the argument being made in this thread, the argument they are using themselves, would be thrown straight back in their faces.

Seems to me they got a point

*Shrugs

Very good points and it's definitely valid and if Us Women's football generates that kind of money compared to the men's team they should absolutely get what they are owed and the men's team should get less than they are getting at present.

Self sufficiency for me is key and if the women's game in America warrants a serious review of all things money for both the men's and women's team then the law should intervene. I do think the arguement across the board will lead to divides in other areas of the women's and men's game though.

It's a really fascinating subject and the US women's team is a unique thing to observe. I hope they get exactly what they deserve no more and no less, the same applies to the other football teams both male and female globally.
 

buckley

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2012
2,595
6,073
Just a thought and that is if at the time the women World Cup was on TV at the same time as Premior league/spains premior division /Italys top division and so on country to country how many football followers would choose to watch the women game above a top mens game ? For myself I watched the women football because it was on at a time when no mens football was on and I am a football nut but it is simply no contest between men and women football.
Incidently I believe that the final score between the USA women team and the Spurs under 15 team was 13-1 .just to give some perspective and the women should be careful because some clubs may drop women football if there demands are asking for unrealistic demands for money and they may end up losing big time.
 

Maxtremist

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2014
1,530
3,300
There are some... let's say... interesting viewpoints that have been shown in this thread. I think a lot of it is some level of naivety but that's getting close to name calling and me thinking my opinion is better than others which it isn't or anything like that.

I think they're just fighting their fight, and rightly so. They wanna get paid more and are looking at their male counterparts getting paid insane amounts of money for arguably doing the same job. So they're asking for more. The issue behind that becomes a lot of the context and the business of it. The men get paid more because more people watch the men's game and there's more money in it.

With them asking for more pay, if you really want to go into all the things this would and can lead to, it's going into getting more funding and investment into the women's game. The men's game has had how many years of investment etc... to build it up which the women's game never got the chance to and now has to battle against, so a large part of this will be helping them give them a chance. There is a disparity between the two sports but I think it's naive to not look at the context of why. I mean was there not a large chunk of football history where women weren't even allowed to play sports? So of course nowadays you're gonna get better men's teams than women's as the men's teams have had time to develop, grow, have the investment, have the people growing up wanting to be footballers and thus a bigger range of players to pick from etc...

There's also the idea that the games are played differently. If anyone watches it, look at things like the WNBA compared to the NBA or even women's wrestling compared to men's. It's the same sports but they play it differently. Naturally going for a more technical based game than a more power based game that the men's do, so there's also a slightly disingenuous thing going on when you compare the two since they're stylistically going for different things.

Ultimately they want more pay and that's fine to want. And I get (and I think more importantly they get) the business side as to why there's a disparity. Them calling for it though does not mean that it'll change overnight or that they expect it to. I'd argue it's more if they keep campaigning for this then other parts of the game will change. They keep doing well then more investors will start looking at the game, more fans will watch the game and thus more revenue will be in the game. Especially when they're looking at how outrageous everything is getting financially for the men's game.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
There are some... let's say... interesting viewpoints that have been shown in this thread. I think a lot of it is some level of naivety but that's getting close to name calling and me thinking my opinion is better than others which it isn't or anything like that.

I think they're just fighting their fight, and rightly so. They wanna get paid more and are looking at their male counterparts getting paid insane amounts of money for arguably doing the same job. So they're asking for more. The issue behind that becomes a lot of the context and the business of it. The men get paid more because more people watch the men's game and there's more money in it.

With them asking for more pay, if you really want to go into all the things this would and can lead to, it's going into getting more funding and investment into the women's game. The men's game has had how many years of investment etc... to build it up which the women's game never got the chance to and now has to battle against, so a large part of this will be helping them give them a chance. There is a disparity between the two sports but I think it's naive to not look at the context of why. I mean was there not a large chunk of football history where women weren't even allowed to play sports? So of course nowadays you're gonna get better men's teams than women's as the men's teams have had time to develop, grow, have the investment, have the people growing up wanting to be footballers and thus a bigger range of players to pick from etc...

There's also the idea that the games are played differently. If anyone watches it, look at things like the WNBA compared to the NBA or even women's wrestling compared to men's. It's the same sports but they play it differently. Naturally going for a more technical based game than a more power based game that the men's do, so there's also a slightly disingenuous thing going on when you compare the two since they're stylistically going for different things.

Ultimately they want more pay and that's fine to want. And I get (and I think more importantly they get) the business side as to why there's a disparity. Them calling for it though does not mean that it'll change overnight or that they expect it to. I'd argue it's more if they keep campaigning for this then other parts of the game will change. They keep doing well then more investors will start looking at the game, more fans will watch the game and thus more revenue will be in the game. Especially when they're looking at how outrageous everything is getting financially for the men's game.

Makes total sense to me. It definitely needs help along the way but men's football only got investment to do well when it had gone through the pain periods and was seen as something worth investing in.

I hope the women's game don't have to go through the same levels the men's game did all those years ago and neither should it as we are a more evolved sport and society now. If it can and ever will justify equal pay I'm not too sure but if the current women's team makes their footballing federation more than the males team then the US football federation owe it to the game and more importantly the human race to seriously look at amending that. If the ladies game long term genuinely has legs then great, if it is a flash in the pan and people are only supporting them because they are women who knows yet but it does deserve a chance and support to at least prove itself, that I can get on board with.

If better pay and investment is done for the right reasons I'm all for it and I do agree that crowds and sponsors can and will grow because of it, I just have my doubts that there is serious longevity in the game but that's just an observation not something I'm completely set in stone on.

If it works out and I'm wrong then wonderful, I hope that's the case but ultimately I will in the meantime back it and I'll never not do my part in helping it get there, be it tuning in to watch it like I have done during this world cup or taking my niece and nephews to a local game which unfortunately for me would be the West Ham ladies ?
 

Maxtremist

Well-Known Member
Jun 11, 2014
1,530
3,300
Makes total sense to me. It definitely needs help along the way but men's football only got investment to do well when it had gone through the pain periods and was seen as something worth investing in.

I hope the women's game don't have to go through the same levels the men's game did all those years ago and neither should it as we are a more evolved sport and society now. If it can and ever will justify equal pay I'm not too sure but if the current women's team makes their footballing federation more than the males team then the US football federation owe it to the game and more importantly the human race to seriously look at amending that. If the ladies game long term genuinely has legs then great, if it is a flash in the pan and people are only supporting them because they are women who knows yet but it does deserve a chance and support to at least prove itself, that I can get on board with.

If better pay and investment is done for the right reasons I'm all for it and I do agree that crowds and sponsors can and will grow because of it, I just have my doubts that there is serious longevity in the game but that's just an observation not something I'm completely set in stone on.

If it works out and I'm wrong then wonderful, I hope that's the case but ultimately I will in the meantime back it and I'll never not do my part in helping it get there, be it tuning in to watch it like I have done during this world cup or taking my niece and nephews to a local game which unfortunately for me would be the West Ham ladies ?

One of the biggest issues for the women's game now is how big the men's game is and how much of it there is. I think it was a Sunday Supplement thing and kind of a throwaway line but if you're already watching the Premier League, the Champions League, the Nation's League, the World Cup etc... it's just logistically hard to also find time for the Women's game. It's why I know she got a lot of online stick for it but I agreed with Rapione and her dislike for the fact that yesterday had 3 international finals on the same day (Women's world cup, Gold Cup + Copa America).

I think the women's game has legs if people really give it the time and invest in it. It just needs moments like this summer when it can shine/show it's worth/show its entertainment. With that as well as with a lot of sports, it needs success in the right places at the right time. Part of why it's so big in the US is just how successful it's been for them. I'd imagine if England had won this year you'd have seen an increase of people watching the game and into the game over here (like the increase in other athletics and sports in the wake of the World Cup).

End of the day, the right reasons is a subjective thing but I'd say a lot of it is just basically saying... this is a legitimate sport too. It'll take time but what would be nice would be to see it on a similar level to Tennis or athletics. Where they're the same sport but both appreciated and valued for their own merit. The gap between the men's and women's sports there doesn't feel as wide as it does with football.
 

fortworthspur

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2007
11,244
17,536
The USA is also in a pretty unique position where the men's game is very much a second tier sport. I'm sure they'd get pretty short shrift if female baseball or basketball players demanded the same pay as the men.

nevertheless, people from all over the world will watch the men's team lose to a quality opponent when they manage to qualify for the world cup.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Very good points and it's definitely valid and if Us Women's football generates that kind of money compared to the men's team they should absolutely get what they are owed and the men's team should get less than they are getting at present.

Self sufficiency for me is key and if the women's game in America warrants a serious review of all things money for both the men's and women's team then the law should intervene. I do think the arguement across the board will lead to divides in other areas of the women's and men's game though.

It's a really fascinating subject and the US women's team is a unique thing to observe. I hope they get exactly what they deserve no more and no less, the same applies to the other football teams both male and female globally.

But what they are really after is a bigger share of the world cup pot. The women get 13% of the money generated by the womens world cup. The men get 9%.
It shouldn't matter what country you play for the distribution should be equal on how far you get in the comp.
If they want more then the mens world cup will have to subsidise it or other womens teams get less.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
There are some... let's say... interesting viewpoints that have been shown in this thread. I think a lot of it is some level of naivety but that's getting close to name calling and me thinking my opinion is better than others which it isn't or anything like that.

I think they're just fighting their fight, and rightly so. They wanna get paid more and are looking at their male counterparts getting paid insane amounts of money for arguably doing the same job. So they're asking for more. The issue behind that becomes a lot of the context and the business of it. The men get paid more because more people watch the men's game and there's more money in it.

With them asking for more pay, if you really want to go into all the things this would and can lead to, it's going into getting more funding and investment into the women's game. The men's game has had how many years of investment etc... to build it up which the women's game never got the chance to and now has to battle against, so a large part of this will be helping them give them a chance. There is a disparity between the two sports but I think it's naive to not look at the context of why. I mean was there not a large chunk of football history where women weren't even allowed to play sports? So of course nowadays you're gonna get better men's teams than women's as the men's teams have had time to develop, grow, have the investment, have the people growing up wanting to be footballers and thus a bigger range of players to pick from etc...

There's also the idea that the games are played differently. If anyone watches it, look at things like the WNBA compared to the NBA or even women's wrestling compared to men's. It's the same sports but they play it differently. Naturally going for a more technical based game than a more power based game that the men's do, so there's also a slightly disingenuous thing going on when you compare the two since they're stylistically going for different things.

Ultimately they want more pay and that's fine to want. And I get (and I think more importantly they get) the business side as to why there's a disparity. Them calling for it though does not mean that it'll change overnight or that they expect it to. I'd argue it's more if they keep campaigning for this then other parts of the game will change. They keep doing well then more investors will start looking at the game, more fans will watch the game and thus more revenue will be in the game. Especially when they're looking at how outrageous everything is getting financially for the men's game.

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?
 
Top