Women’s champions league final.

[Tazio]

Days worth of the BBC website and BT bumming up how amazing Chelsea and their coach are. How amazing their players are, especially the English ones. 
 

Currently 3-0 down within 20 minutes to Barcelona in the final. 
 

Will they ever learn? 

[milky_26]

4-0 now

[Spellczech]

Stats are irrelevant... All about taking taking chances

 

Edited May 16, 2021 by Spellczech
trying to keep up...

[Sooperstar]

I think Barca conceded about 5 league goals all season or something silly like that.

[Tazio]

Just now, milky_26 said:

4-0 now

What’s interesting is that Barca play like the men’s team. The coach even looks and dresses like a Pep replica. 

[milky_26]

4 minutes ago, Sooperstar said:

I think Barca conceded about 5 league goals all season or something silly like that.

It's worth noting that this Barcelona side averages 60% possession and has scored 128 goals in 26 league matches this season, conceding five.

[Saint Jambo]

In the short-term, I'm not convinced that attaching women's teams to established men's teams has been a great success for women's football. It has ensured that all the same inequalities in resources are present in the women's game as the men's game, but because of the different starting points and there being fewer top class players to go around, it means the disparities on the field between teams are even wider. It's probably made it more marketable to sponsors and the top players are being paid more, but it makes the product worse when so many games are so one sided.

[Tazio]

1 minute ago, Saint Jambo said:

In the short-term, I'm not convinced that attaching women's teams to established men's teams has been a great success for women's football. It has ensured that all the same inequalities in resources are present in the women's game as the men's game, but because of the different starting points and there being fewer top class players to go around, it means the disparities on the field between teams are even wider. It's probably made it more marketable to sponsors and the top players are being paid more, but it makes the product worse when so many games are so one sided.

Certainly they are applying the same models to the women’s game in England at least. 75% of signings in the summer window to the English top league were foreign players. Fill the top league with foreign talent at great expense and then wonder how the national team underachieves. 

[CJGJ]

Remember all the chat about Emma Hayes becoming the first female manager in men's football...she's just so good all the UK based journalists kept telling us

 

 

Her side is playing like Stendel's before he clued up and remembered defence does count

[Malinga the Swinga]

Just now, Tazio said:

Certainly they are applying the same models to the women’s game in England at least. 75% of signings in the summer window to the English top league were foreign players. Fill the top league with foreign talent at great expense and then wonder how the national team underachieves. 

The girl who is playing wide left, Martens, for Barcelona is tearing Chelsea apart. Pace to burn and skill to match. 

The other one who catches is eye is midfielder from France who is dropping back and pinging passes all over the shop. 

Those who don't think women can play football should be made to watch Barcelona, they can play football for sure. 

[Pasquale for King]

Not a great weekend for Chelsea 😆

[Sid]

Why are there four females in the studio when all men’s football has at least one female pundit now and quite often the host is female? 
I’m ok with female pundits (I think there are possibly too many and padded out for gender balance reasons when ex-club players would add more) but if they are trying to be gender neutral, should they not put a token bloke on the panel? 

[kila]

36 minutes ago, CJGJ said:

Her side is playing like Stendel's before he clued up and remembered defence does count

 

They have a Berra equivalent and she got rid of her?

 

[Homme]

1 hour ago, Tazio said:

What’s interesting is that Barca play like the men’s team. The coach even looks and dresses like a Pep replica. 

 

A Peplica?

[Pasquale for King]

47 minutes ago, Sid said:

Why are there four females in the studio when all men’s football has at least one female pundit now and quite often the host is female? 
I’m ok with female pundits (I think there are possibly too many and padded out for gender balance reasons when ex-club players would add more) but if they are trying to be gender neutral, should they not put a token bloke on the panel? 

It’s a fair point, I think the male pundits would need to have the same level of knowledge about the women’s game that female pundits have about the men’s game. I’m not sure if they do, they struggle with the names and rules as it is. 

[Spellczech]

19 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

It’s a fair point, I think the male pundits would need to have the same level of knowledge about the women’s game that female pundits have about the men’s game. I’m not sure if they do, they struggle with the names and rules as it is. 

BBC had Pat Nevin doing the live reporting. Said it was all over at 36 mins - probably wanted to go home...

[Nookie Bear]

12 hours ago, Tazio said:

Days worth of the BBC website and BT bumming up how amazing Chelsea and their coach are. How amazing their players are, especially the English ones. 
 

Currently 3-0 down within 20 minutes to Barcelona in the final. 
 

Will they ever learn? 

 

First rule of broadcasting: at no point can you criticise a single thing about the women's game.

 

Everything is amazing, skill levels are unbelievable, so inspirational...

 

And you tune in to give it a proper chance and you're like

 

Yes, girls should play and be encouraged to do so, but some honesty is required as well.

 

As for the gender of the pundits, does anyone actually listen to pundits anyway??

 

[i8hibsh]

It is above criticism.

 

 

[Norm]

13 hours ago, Saint Jambo said:

In the short-term, I'm not convinced that attaching women's teams to established men's teams has been a great success for women's football. It has ensured that all the same inequalities in resources are present in the women's game as the men's game, but because of the different starting points and there being fewer top class players to go around, it means the disparities on the field between teams are even wider. It's probably made it more marketable to sponsors and the top players are being paid more, but it makes the product worse when so many games are so one sided.

I agree. 

 

Long established clubs, who have spent decades developing women footballers and improving the game, are now left by the wayside as the bigger men's clubs come in and hoover up all the talent with their fat paychecks. 

 

Teams like Potsdam and Frankfurt, essentially the Barca and Real Madrid of women's football 10 years ago, can now barely get a look in. Decades of history of well established and well run teams now having to compete with sides who are bankrolled by the men's side. 

 

Even here, Glasgow City have pished womens football for almost forever. But now the OF are getting in, they'll end up the same way as Third Lanark. 

 

There should be something in place that prevents the men's teams siphoning money off to the ladies. Sharing training facilities and coaching staff, I can handle. But when the player's wages are covered by income generated by the men's teams, it's wrong in my opinion. 

[benny]

6 hours ago, Norm said:

I agree. 

 

Long established clubs, who have spent decades developing women footballers and improving the game, are now left by the wayside as the bigger men's clubs come in and hoover up all the talent with their fat paychecks. 

 

Teams like Potsdam and Frankfurt, essentially the Barca and Real Madrid of women's football 10 years ago, can now barely get a look in. Decades of history of well established and well run teams now having to compete with sides who are bankrolled by the men's side. 

 

Even here, Glasgow City have pished womens football for almost forever. But now the OF are getting in, they'll end up the same way as Third Lanark. 

 

There should be something in place that prevents the men's teams siphoning money off to the ladies. Sharing training facilities and coaching staff, I can handle. But when the player's wages are covered by income generated by the men's teams, it's wrong in my opinion. 

There is a wage cap in England for the womans football league.

A lot of folk want that for the men's team on here.

So it looks like they have got one thing right down there.

Edited May 17, 2021 by benny

[1971fozzy]

6 hours ago, i8hibsh said:

It is above criticism.

 

 

pretty much spot on

[Fozzyonthefence]

9 hours ago, Norm said:

I agree. 

 

Long established clubs, who have spent decades developing women footballers and improving the game, are now left by the wayside as the bigger men's clubs come in and hoover up all the talent with their fat paychecks. 

 

Teams like Potsdam and Frankfurt, essentially the Barca and Real Madrid of women's football 10 years ago, can now barely get a look in. Decades of history of well established and well run teams now having to compete with sides who are bankrolled by the men's side. 

 

Even here, Glasgow City have pished womens football for almost forever. But now the OF are getting in, they'll end up the same way as Third Lanark. 

 

There should be something in place that prevents the men's teams siphoning money off to the ladies. Sharing training facilities and coaching staff, I can handle. But when the player's wages are covered by income generated by the men's teams, it's wrong in my opinion. 

I agree.  It’s good that there is encouragement to grow the women’s game but I don’t like how they have to sponge off the men’s teams to be professional.  If they can’t be self sustaining as professional clubs because of lack of interest or lack of crowds or tv interest (and that applies to the top English women’s teams too) then to me they should just remain amateur.  
 

Let’s be honest, there is no real interest in the UK in watching women’s club football either by attending games or on tv.  Although crowds in England are well up the average is still only 3,400 and bearing in mind ticket prices are cheap as chips (way cheaper than watching League 2 men’s football in Scotland and you can get season tickets for around £30), they don’t really generate much income.  Man City v Man Utd were doing a deal a couple of seasons ago where an adult ticket was only £7 which also entitled 3 under 16’s in free with each adult so they’re literally giving tickets away and their attendances are even more false than Hibs men!

 

Tin hat on, but the media exposure that English women’s football gets is political correctness gone mad and is way more than the interest in it justifies. Why does it regularly get a mention on the UK national news as one of the sporting headlines when there is probably less interest in it than the men’s National League down there?  In fact last night, on the BBC news I’m sure the women’s Champions League final was the only sporting event that got a mention!

 

 

[benny]

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

I agree.  It’s good that there is encouragement to grow the women’s game but I don’t like how they have to sponge off the men’s teams to be professional.  If they can’t be self sustaining as professional clubs because of lack of interest or lack of crowds or tv interest (and that applies to the top English women’s teams too) then to me they should just remain amateur.  
 

Let’s be honest, there is no real interest in the UK in watching women’s club football either by attending games or on tv.  Although crowds in England are well up the average is still only 3,400 and bearing in mind ticket prices are cheap as chips (way cheaper than watching League 2 men’s football in Scotland and you can get season tickets for around £30), they don’t really generate much income.  Man City v Man Utd were doing a deal a couple of seasons ago where an adult ticket was only £7 which also entitled 3 under 16’s in free with each adult so they’re literally giving tickets away and their attendances are even more false than Hibs men!

 

Tin hat on, but the media exposure that English women’s football gets is political correctness gone mad and is way more than the interest in it justifies. Why does it regularly get a mention on the UK national news as one of the sporting headlines when there is probably less interest in it than the men’s National League down there?  In fact last night, on the BBC news I’m sure the women’s Champions League final was the only sporting event that got a mention!

 

 

Know what you mean but the teams are getting better and the crowds getting bigger.

They are doing a good job of promoting the league.

It is only going to get better in the next couple of years.

I was at a City v Lyon womans game a few years back.

It was awful and Lyon were the top team at the time.

Now i watch a game every week and if you take it for what it is i enjoy it.

The City v Chelsea game the other week was a very good game.

Okay it will never be up there with the mens game but Chelsea,City,Arsenal,Man U and Everton when on their game are a decent watch.

[Fozzyonthefence]

48 minutes ago, benny said:

Know what you mean but the teams are getting better and the crowds getting bigger.

They are doing a good job of promoting the league.

It is only going to get better in the next couple of years.

I was at a City v Lyon womans game a few years back.

It was awful and Lyon were the top team at the time.

Now i watch a game every week and if you take it for what it is i enjoy it.

The City v Chelsea game the other week was a very good game.

Okay it will never be up there with the mens game but Chelsea,City,Arsenal,Man U and Everton when on their game are a decent watch.

As I said the crowds are fake news!  Tickets cost peanuts or they’re literally giving them away.  Chelsea played Spurs at Stamford Bridge and got a huge 24,500 but the gate receipts were £0!  Every single ticket a freebie.  Now I’m not saying that is a bad marketing ploy because they have to create an interest that frankly isn’t there.   But put the prices up to say League 2 men’s in England and let’s see how much they drop.  
 

Running a full time professional set up relying on generous hand outs from the men’s team doesn’t sit right with me but I suppose the likes of Man City, Arsenal, etc can afford it.  Just hope it doesn’t go the same way in Scotland but I can’t see even Rangers or Celtic throwing huge amounts into it (maybe just enough so they can compete at the top which they’re already doing but can’t see them buying top overseas players to play against Forfar Farmington).

 

From your post it sounds like you live down south so you may not know the answer to the question I was going to ask - how many of the Scottish teams are full time / part time out of interest?  Or are all of the WSL teams down south now full time in the top league?

 

And another one - who actually televises live WSL games or Champions League games?  Perhaps not marketing it that well because I genuinely have no idea!

[benny]

3 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

As I said the crowds are fake news!  Tickets cost peanuts or they’re literally giving them away.  Chelsea played Spurs at Stamford Bridge and got a huge 24,500 but the gate receipts were £0!  Every single ticket a freebie.  Now I’m not saying that is a bad marketing ploy because they have to create an interest that frankly isn’t there.   But put the prices up to say League 2 men’s in England and let’s see how much they drop.  
 

Running a full time professional set up relying on generous hand outs from the men’s team doesn’t sit right with me but I suppose the likes of Man City, Arsenal, etc can afford it.  Just hope it doesn’t go the same way in Scotland but I can’t see even Rangers or Celtic throwing huge amounts into it (maybe just enough so they can compete at the top which they’re already doing but can’t see them buying top overseas players to play against Forfar Farmington).

 

From your post it sounds like you live down south so you may not know the answer to the question I was going to ask - how many of the Scottish teams are full time / part time out of interest?  Or are all of the WSL teams down south now full time in the top league?

 

And another one - who actually televises live WSL games or Champions League games?  Perhaps not marketing it that well because I genuinely have no idea!

Stay in Falkirk.

Woman's games on BBC,BT Sports,FA Player and most clubs apps.

Up here i do not know but i think Alba and BBC.

They promote the game down south a lot better,hence the freebies and are attracting female kids more and more.

 

[Fozzyonthefence]

6 minutes ago, benny said:

Stay in Falkirk.

Woman's games on BBC,BT Sports,FA Player and most clubs apps.

Up here i do not know but i think Alba and BBC.

They promote the game down south a lot better,hence the freebies and are attracting female kids more and more.

 

They can’t just keep giving away freebies though, if it’s going to be a success they have to get to a point where large amounts of fans are prepared to pay proper ticket prices.  If lots of these female kids end up playing then that’s good but I suspect it may become one of these sports where there is a large participation at girls or amateur level but never much interest in the professional game.  

Time will tell but for me it’s been a bit like American football (NFL, etc) - I gave it a try but just couldn’t take it seriously or have any interest in it.  I watched some of the women’s World Cup and thought the standard was awful but I guess that’s what happens when you put amateurs up against professionals, not that the professionals were that great either!