Var

[Muddy Retriever]

Compare with BBC (everybody’s favourite scapegoat!) Radio 5 breakfast show this morning, trying to claim that the atmosphere in the stadium in Lyon was “electric”, you could “cut it with a knife” and it “could have boiled over at any moment”..... those kind of superlatives just don’t do anyone any favours... not least the women’s game itself.

I agree with that.

I watched the second half last night and was disappointed for the English players. They clearly gave it their all and came up short. (Have to say that was a truly abysmal penalty attempt!)

But the BBC in order to push a particular narrative are asking us to suspend all disbelief. Electric? You could hear the players on the pitch shouting to each other at times. I heard afterwards that there were 53,000 in the ground last night and I couldn't believe it.

The standard of women's football will inevitably improve as more people get interested and there is a proper grassroots. But it has some way to go yet so for the BBC to try and create some kind of equivalence with the men's game is laughable. But given the world view the BBC pushes not at all surprising.

[DrPatrickBarry]

I have never hear such whining from grumpy old men. These players are the best in the world, at Women's Football. I don't see you miserable gits harping on about how crap women swimmers, Olympic runners, tennis players, etc, etc are? If any of these athletics from these sports had to compete against men they would be slaughtered , which means they must be absolutely crap at their sport. Why are you signaling out football? I could not care less about English football male or female, so I just ignore all the coverage. But good on them for the work that have done to get to that level despite all the crap from the likes of you lot. If you don't like it ignore it.

[Wheeze]

Its hard trying to overcome a life-long view of the world when change comes along. What are the datum points?
Viewed from the perspective of watching the mans game, the standard of play last night was, at times, pitiful especially the passing and marking. But if all you'd ever known was the womans game, what would we have made of it? The atmosphere did sound good. 50k female throats are never going to be able to replicate the guttural roar of 50k males at full throttle and yes, you could hear the players shrieking at each other. And thats part of the clue. The much higher pitch of their voices made the sound easier to pick out. I quite enjoyed that....added to the tension of the match as the shrieking got more panicked as time ticked away.
Good on them. And surely the BBC as a public service broadcaster has a duty to reflect the societal wishes of the day. I presume we are all woke and onside with female parity?

[Muddy Retriever]

I have never hear such whining from grumpy old men. These players are the best in the world, at Women's Football. I don't see you miserable gits harping on about how crap women swimmers, Olympic runners, tennis players, etc, etc are? If any of these athletics from these sports had to compete against men they would be slaughtered , which means they must be absolutely crap at their sport. Why are you signaling out football? I could not care less about English football male or female, so I just ignore all the coverage. But good on them for the work that have done to get to that level despite all the crap from the likes of you lot. If you don't like it ignore it.

If you take women runners as an example, the difference between them and male runners is purely physical. When I watch a top female athlete run I am pretty confident that what I am seeing is the best a woman can achieve right now.

The same isn't true of football. It's not just a question of less physical strength or speed, the skill and technique of the top women footballers is a world away from the skill and technique of the best male footballers. There are very good reasons for this and I alluded to them in my last post. The grassroots for women's football is nothing like that of men so less participants. There are nothing like as many professional women's football teams so women don't have the opportunity to hone their skills and get better.

My gripe is not with women's football, but with the pretence that is being made that there is an equivalence to fit somebody's agenda.

[DrPatrickBarry]

What a lot of crap, why does everybody not support the top 3 or 4 team in the premiership? And god forgive but why would anybody watch football from the lower divisions because these men are playing nowhere near as good as men are capable of playing.

Do you complain when the BBC make a big deal of the early rounds of the FA cup, with all these crap teams from lower and non-league divisions.
OK I ask again why are you signaling out women?

[Wheeze]

Whoa, whoa Pat...you took an angry pill this morning? I dont think Muddy was doing anything other than observing a difference between the performance of the sexes. I dont see that as singling out anything. Come on, lets not trash another thread was abrasive posts!

[Travs]

But when the early rounds of the FA Cup are featured, it’s about the history and tradition of the ‘greatest cup competition in the world’ and there is absolutely no pretence that the players are at world-class standard. There’s an understanding of exactly where the abilities and levels of the players lie.

An understanding which is sadly lacking from the coverage of the women’s World Cup.

I don’t see anyone disputing the right of the women to have coverage, or to have the women’s game thrust into the limelight... most people who take issue with it, are questioning the apparent agenda which is implying we should all be gasping in amazement at the ability on show, and that anybody who questions this is a Neanderthal sexist.

If a bloke had taken that penalty last night they’d be getting crucified (quite unjustly) by the mass media for “bottling it”. Are women footballers exempt from such scrutiny because of the mere fact they are female...

[DrPatrickBarry]

Whoa, whoa Pat...you took an angry pill this morning? I dont think Muddy was doing anything other than observing a difference between the performance of the sexes.

I am questioning why they are observing that difference for football only and not other sports?
They are accepting that women are weaker than men so cannot cycle, run or swim as fast, or hit balls as hard but that is OK. But they are not accepting that (after the FA succesfully destroyed the massive game of Womens football in the early twentieth century) the women's game is many decades behind the men's game and may never catch up, but what we have is the pinnacle of women's football.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articl...omens-football

[Muddy Retriever]

I am questioning why they are observing that difference for football only and not other sports?

Did you actually read my post? I did observe the difference for running. I made the point that there was a bigger difference in standard between the sexes in football than in running. And I said why I thought that was.

Women have also suffered discrimination in running. Before 1980 women were prohibited from running in Olympic distance races.

Re your point about why everybody doesn't support the top three or four teams in the premiership, well a lot do of course. There are plenty of glory supporters. But many of us follow our local teams, that we have felt a connection with since we were young kids. But that doesn't make us claim that they are as good as Man City. And if we did we'd be laughed at.

Re the FA Cup, Travs was spot on.

[Llani Boy]

Same old Dr P B.

If you have a different point of view from him on Women's sport you are a sexist, different view on immigration a racist, different view on Brexit an extremist.

In the nicest possible way can I suggest that you are a Cloud Cuckoolandist, Dr PB.