Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Errm. The reigning world champions of women's football (soccer) are Spain.
Sorry, my bad, repost tweet was from 2021, Spain won in '23, the USA did win in '19.
Yeah, it was Muarry. Reporter said You're the only player to have won an Olympic Gold in both, singles and doubles. And Murray interrupted to say, MALE, I'm the only male player to have done it. Serena and Venus have done it already.
Not the only time Muzza has done this, either. He's a true ally.
Also, when people were criticising Amelie Mauresmo as his coach, he said, when I had a male coach, my losses were my fault. Now that I have a female coach, suddenly they're her fault?
The quote was actually that you're the first tennis player to win two Olympic golds. He never came close to winning an Olympic doubles medal so that doesn't make any sense.
He then brings up Serena Williams which most non tennis fans will assume was forgotten because she was a woman but it's more likely that she was forgotten because the reporter wasn't only counting singles medals. I mean it's pretty common in tennis to only refer to singles grand slams.
If anything he was sticking up for doubles tennis, not women.
He has won a doubles medal. But yeah, not Gold, it was Silver. (Mixed Doubles with Laura Robson) But no, Murray was sticking up for women. He literally said no, I'm the first Male player, women have done this already. It wasn't about doubles vs singles.
Oh sorry, I wasn't looking at mixed doubles. He might have said it to stick up for women, but the reason for the mistake was likely that he wasn't including doubles (reasonable)
Murray could have easily responded with "First player to win two SINGLES gold" and it probably would have been a less viral but more helpful correction
There are several instances of this sort of thing. Another example is when a journalist said Sam Query was the “first American” to reach a major semi final since 2009 - completely ignoring multiple women who had. In the instance mentioned in your comment, if Serena Williams was a man with two Olympics gold medals, I’d bet that the journalist would not have said Andy Murray was the first to win two Olympic golds. This is not a singles vs doubles misunderstanding, and I don’t get why some men do mental gymastics to try and prove something isn’t just plain sexism
Well you'd very clearly lose that bet as Massu won 2 golds in 2004 but also wasn't included as 1 was in doubles tennis. So there clearly wasn't a double standard in genders here. It's not mental gymnastics.
Except this post was in 2021 when USA were the world champions. So OP has this one wrong on this occasion. But i remember the Andy Murray comment; completely shut the reporter up haha!
I don't think it's relevant whether they're world champions. If I say Chelsea missed out on the champions league this season and someone replies "well actually Chelsea women's did qualify for the champions league", I would think it's pedantic.
You can say these rules are unfair but 99% of people refer to the men's team without any qualifier so correcting somebody seems overboard
And as I've said, the Murray correction wasn't about men vs women. It was about singles vs doubles tennis which again is a normal thing in tennis.
I don’t know about that.
> Venus and Serena Williams took on then World No. 203 Karsten Braasch at the 1998 Australian Open, in an exhibition event named "The Battle of the Sexes." The event came about after the Americans allegedly claimed that they could beat any male player ranked outside the top-200.
Karsten won, easily.
Not that I think the Williams sisters are that close to Federer, but idk if I put that much stock in a result from 1998 given that they were 16 and 17 at the time. I imagine a similar match-up in 2005-2010 would go much differently.
The US national women practiced against the U-16 boys a few years ago and they stopped because they were so overmatched.
Doesn't matter though, they are the world champions in their sex bracket and they deserve respect
I found this interesting fact:
>The 2019 Women's World Cup final had an average TV audience of **82.18 million**. The 2022 Men's World Cup final achieved a global reach of almost **1.5 billion** viewers.
The US womens team negotiated a deal which was equitable at the time. Mens international teams are paid purely on performance with the expecation that they are already getting paid well from their respective clubs, The womans team rejected this deal and negoatiated salaries etc for a reduced performance bonus on wins.
Thats the uncomfortable truth that when the womens team won the world cup and started to demand equal pay on performance bonuses they were trying to proveriably have their cake and eat it too because after winning the performance bonus was more lucrative.
The us women want to be paid the same as the US men. Those are the relevant numbers to compare. Us woman's viewership v us mens viewership. And domestic attendance.
Us women have won lawsuits against the ussf twice resulting in pay increases.
They were offered the same package multiple times, and they declined it and wanted more.
It's not equality.
Edit: Found a vid that explains it fairly well. Women were offered the same as men, declined it, got something else, realised it sucked, then wanted to change again.
https://youtu.be/LLeAWuRbObQ?si=CRlXwG4oON0Sqyd1
In short, the women's team wanted to be salaried, while the men's team is play to get paid.
The women's team has reliable income, and the men's team gets almost nothing from the USSF.
>In short, the women's team wanted to be salaried, while the men's team is play to get paid.
Its incredible that the media has been completely ignoring this fact for simple outrage journalism. "Sexism" news sell quite well nowadays.
They wanted to be paid the same*
*but unlike the Men, they wanted the benefits the package THEY AGREED UPON but without the risks the men had. The men get paid PER GAME, so if they don't play, no pay. They also weren't given Healthcare, 401k, and such in their package. The women's deal was they got a GUARANTEED pay regardless of time on the field, plus Healthcare, 401k, and such.
The women were OFFERED the same deal the men had but denied it. They wanted the same PAY as the men AND the benefits on top of that pay, which would make them get paid MORE than the men.
which lawsuit did they win? Pretty sure they had multiple lawsuits thrown out, and then finally settled out of court.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/sports/soccer/us-womens-soccer-equal-pay.html
> U.S. Soccer was under no obligation to settle with the women’s team; a federal judge in 2020 had dismissed the players’ equal pay arguments, stripping them of nearly all of their legal leverage, and the players’ appeal was not certain to succeed.
>The us women want to be paid the same as the US men.
No. US women initially signed a contract giving them a fixed amound of money and benefits, not linked to their performance. They specifically rejeted the same contract that men have where they would have been paid according to games played and won.
Only AFTER their good perfromance during the past few years they realized they coudl get more and started complaining. There are countless experts on Youtube breakign teh whole thing down.
This whole thing had nothing to do with sexism.
So how many people are attending regular games in the top division in the US?
In Germany women usually play for an average of ~1000 people while men play for ~40000. While the top teams average 3k for women and 81k for men.
Another interesting fact: the Aussie Matildas team has been consistently achieving sellout crowds in big venues like Sydney's Olympic Stadium and attracting some of the highest annual TV ratings.
As an aside, the interstate women's rugby League fixtures are also doing very well.
It does take time to generate an audience though - get to know the players, become a fanboy/girl, understand the other teams and their tactics & strengths.
Can't say I buy into the argument about "less skill" much, because it's about entertainment and women's games are easily as entertaining as men's IMHO.
I'd always prefer a women's international that ends up 3-2 than a dull men's slugfest for 0 or 1 all followed by a turkey shoot at goal (don't hate me please, hardcore soccer fans. We all know they should keep playing until a team scores a legit goal, and only TV scheduling prevents this)
I can absolutely respect that because I view other sports in a similar fashion, like handball. I also never played handball. As of now I truly can’t stand women’s soccer as entertainment. It’s not only the lackluster physical aspects of it but more the major technical errors in their game. It’s so prevalent for everyone that played that their touch is off and their strikes are graceless. What they’re on par with is their structure and tactical abilities but I don’t watch the sport for that. Maybe I’ll dial for the gold medal game when we’re in but it’s not out of admiration of their game.
But if you enjoy sunday league tier football you’d be fine with women’s football. If it’s entertainment for you then by all means watch it. I used to make my coin in the sport so my input values may be very different to yours.
Absolutely very different. I played union and watch league.
Soccer is only for big international events. I'd never claim to understand any of the finer points of technique.
Only that the games seem more...open? Like anything might happen. Possibly because the defence isn't as good, and the attackers might mess up and lose possession more often?
I can enjoy t-ball. I just wouldn’t pay hundreds of dollars to see it. What is the price of admission to a women’s Aussie Matildas game? What about the men’s?
Good question, and I can't say I know the answer.
I found that adult tickets "start at" AUD$35 but that would obviously be the worst nosebleed seats with the worst views.
I found that the men's State of Origin rugby league Tix start at $49 and that's the biggest sporting event other than the rugby league grand final. The women's State of origin start at $15 so that's obviously priced to entice a crowd.
Best guess would be $35 to a few hundred? Scalping is a whole other market.
TL; DR: not sure, but not cheap either.
It's not that interesting, the main reason is just that men's sports are more interesting, not because eof "women" but because the top male athletes in any given sport will generally be much better than women in pure physique.If memory serve me right the funny part is that the women's football teams often play better in a strategic sense, because of the physical differences and personality differences. But that could be wrong I don't really care for the sport I just recently had this exact discussion with a friend and his viewpoint were interesting to me.
As someone flicking between Denmark vs Serbia and England vs Slovenia in the euros last night... The men's games are certainly not always more interesting
Yeah, that is true. Similarly in fighting sports the most popular category is heavy weight because everyone knows the best in that category pretty much bodies the best from the others.
What’s interesting tho is shooting. Where men and women have extremely close capabilities. (And seemingly it favors women from what Iv heard) but we still divide the sport by gender.
That's just convention, hell chess had a women's and men's league. In modern times these divisions often come down to people harassing female athletes or convention or. A mixture of both.
Not necessarily true at all. Look at the UFC when Connor McGregor, khabib jose aldo were around. And look now with adesanya, islam, alex pereira, sean strickland etc etc. None of these guys are heavyweights but they made their weight divisions very popular. It all depends who is fighting, when connor was fighting the lightweight division was most popular, when JJ was fighting light heavyweight and heavyweight would be more popular.
True, it became more and more personality and celebrity driven.
Mcgregor in his early days was super flashy which gained him his popularity and in turn his divination became popular. You’re right, idk why I hadn’t thought of it.
Maybe the people in charge of marketing are just a bit behind them times same way my
Comment was.
A number of professional female soccer teams have lost against teenage boy teams. The men are on a different level of speed, skill, etc. There is a reason the Paralympics doesn't have the viewership of the Olympics. People don't want to just see the best of something. They want to see the best, period. High school soccer doesn't get the viewership that college sports gets, and college doesn't get the viewership that professionals do, so it is about watching the best athletes do amazing things.
There are plenty of areas in the US especially where college sports absolutely dominate professional sports. Go down to Atlanta and so how many people care about the Falcons compared to the Bulldogs lol. It’s about connections with the team, and for years the USWNT has had a far deeper connection with their fans since soccer has mostly been considered a feminine sport in the US.
It's more because you don't get these ridiculous scores of like 10-0. In men's football that's incredibly rare at the highest level because the skill is fairly matched even in the worse teams.
I don't think it's the only reason. Football supporters are generally male, especially the extreme supporters. Football is often seen as symbolic warfare, something you do for your nation. Football matches between traditional rivals are often very tense, with clashes between fans. Supporters identify with the playing team, and it's easier to identify with the people of the same sex. The team is on the front line, you're kind of logistics and support.
When i played rugby the girls would come watch out matches but they wouldn't come cheer on any other matches for the female teams.
When i asked my friend why she said "who the fuck watches female sports? I definitely don't!" Which shocked me (I don't watch sports at all only like playing them) so i asked her why.
She told me it's like watching children play football, sure they have the time of their life but the match is boring as hell, the men at least have a higher form of skill the only thing that is fun is "watching" the woman not the sports (once again, her words not mine)
Definitely gave me some perspective
You're right, the womens England team is so much better to watch than the men's.
No offence to the men's team. They're good, they're just playing so darn boring at the moment.
Also, just want to quickly point out how much more motivated and entertaining to watch the England women's team is than the bunch of drips currently playing in the Euros.
Last night was absolutely diabolical.
I mean it's pretty common to refer to the men's team without adding "men's team". It's not technically correct but I think correcting someone on it comes off as pedantic
Maybe, because typically men watch men's soccer, and women don't watch soccer.
And maybe the reason for men's lack of attention to women's soccer is related to fact women's world cup 4th team gets obliterated by under 15 year old boys from a city level team 0-7.
But there's another question people need to consider, maybe if women would spend their own money on women's soccer team memorabilia and tickets and watching it same way some men do with soccer then there would be money in women's soccer. Unfortunately for female soccer players and male models there's a disparity in where each gender spends their money, and attention.
There are two main possible perception of a sport.
1. It's the very best against the very best. A high stakes competition that excites people
2. Everything below that. People show up to support their local teams more often than not to display their support rather than genuinely enjoying the level of the sport in question.
Women sports will always be less popular than men sports because there is no higher competition than to beating a man at the peak of their strength.
The thing is, most people watching sport are not really into the ins and outs of the sport. Their understanding is often scoring = good, winning = great. If they were in to watch the highest level of competition, they would stop watching their local teams and start watching the best teams. It really boils down to sexism in most cases, except in the case of sports fanatics who are really into the details - the rules, the records, etc. But they are a small percentage of sports fans.
Don’t worry. Americans *only* care about you guys. You get out there, play harder, enjoy the game more, and you do it for the love of the game. The men’s team is just a bunch of “big” names that don’t give a shit.
When I hear US soccer, I think of the women’s team.
"football (soccer)" isn't for men only. It's just that no woman is good enough to compete with elite level male players.
"Women's football (soccer) is for women only.
So you don't make the distinction between "men's football" and "women's football", but between "football" and "women's football"
Hi, just a loving reminder that "the reigning world cup champs" have been beaten before by an under-15's boys team
That possibly might be why they're not properly known as "US Soccer"
There are many sports where the women teams/athletes are comparable in popularity and relevance to the big audiences
Football just isn't one them. No one is ignoring anything, women's football is just an afterthought for the majority of people
In terms of team sports volleyball reigns supreme in that regard, but also diving, high jump and other athletics disciplines, the myriad of swimming disciplines.
Most of them aren't mainstream sports in the first place, so if people are interested in them they end up being interested in both male and female ones
And for a good reason too. Its a sport in which there exist a precedence of one of the top national teams losing to 15 year old boys. You can watch better football by going to see your local school compete against another.
I mean yes I get your point but to be the devils advocate:
- while feminine football is developing fast, especially in the us, football is still regarded as a masculine sport, as it has a larger audience and a bigger level
- if feminine team qualifies and masculine team doesn’t, they’ll talk more about masculine because it’s obvious that the feminine team would qualify as it is one of the reigning feminine football nations, while the masculine team is still up and coming, and it’s disappointing if they don’t qualify. Thus masculine team not qualifying is more shocking then feminine team qualifying. If the feminine team didn’t qualify I think (and I hope) it would be a bigger news since the feminine team is way better in feminine football than the masculine team is in masculine football
Yes, there is still a problem about football being considered only a masculine sport, but it’s evolving in the right direction. Sadly the level gap between masculine and feminine doesn’t play in favour in feminine football, but I hope it will improve.
If more women would step up and watch womens football whe wouldnt need to have this discussion. I only ever see people complaining about no one caring about womens sports but the same people couldnt even tell you the names of 3 teams.
Nice rage bait though.
I know this is old but still - is she referring to the same team that got absolutely dunked on by Wrexham FCs retirees?
I'm all for it, but it's not the same 😂
The only time anybody ever thought of women's soccer in the US was when they were on TV complaining and making themselves look stupid. They've gone back to being irrelevant now.
Isn't it also the U20s or something at the Olympics since professionalism isn't allowed? Which means it wouldn't have been the defending champions anyway, it's a different team.
Particularly interesting as soccer is the only sport that qualifies “men” or “women” in standard naming convention (USMNT & USWNT) where ever other sport I can think of assumes men (ex NBA v WNBA).
Everyone decide by themself which sport they will follow. Am I sexist because I don’t follow a single one of female sports? Because I don’t follow 99% of male sports…
I mean, it will take decades for women football to be at the same level as men's football. Not hating on women, but they need some catching up to do in terms of technique and football insight. Watching women football is fun, but it's on a very low level. So it's no surprise that women football doesn't get the attention men's football get.
It's never been called male football and female football. It's always been men's football and women's football. Female football sounds like you're saying the sex of the ball itself lmao
>Ignoring the World Champions because "women"
OOOOOOOORRRRR, not everyone enjoys women's soccer. I don't understand why not, since they play better soccer than the whiny crybaby actors that the male soccer consists of.
Hmmm they can say they play better football when they beat a mens team. Not a top mens team. Not even a professional mens team. Just a regularly playing mens team
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is a 2021 post. Now Spain is the world champs :) :) :)
So basically op's just karma farming. Got it.
Yes. Especially since the men's team actually qualified for this year's Olympics
I was having a mini freak out, I've followed the team pretty closely and was so confused on how this happened and how I missed it
Point of view!!
Yes and happy cake day.
It’s also a tweet of someone talking to themselves. A straw man if you will
What's karma farming?
Gutted we didn't take the chance to bring football home on the sly while nobody was paying attention lol.
Australia coming for you guys!
USA also lost against Sweden in the first cup match after winning only one game in the group stage. Their worst result ever, I believe.
>Reposting 2021 tweets for rage bait. Anon...
Wrong site.
Is it tho?
Errm. The reigning world champions of women's football (soccer) are Spain. Sorry, my bad, repost tweet was from 2021, Spain won in '23, the USA did win in '19.
A reporter made a similar gaff in an interview with Serena Williams a couple of years ago and she gave him a verbal backhander for it.
Wasn't it Andy Murray who corrected the reporter and wasn't it because he wasn't including doubles medals and not because she was a woman?
Yeah, it was Muarry. Reporter said You're the only player to have won an Olympic Gold in both, singles and doubles. And Murray interrupted to say, MALE, I'm the only male player to have done it. Serena and Venus have done it already. Not the only time Muzza has done this, either. He's a true ally. Also, when people were criticising Amelie Mauresmo as his coach, he said, when I had a male coach, my losses were my fault. Now that I have a female coach, suddenly they're her fault?
The quote was actually that you're the first tennis player to win two Olympic golds. He never came close to winning an Olympic doubles medal so that doesn't make any sense. He then brings up Serena Williams which most non tennis fans will assume was forgotten because she was a woman but it's more likely that she was forgotten because the reporter wasn't only counting singles medals. I mean it's pretty common in tennis to only refer to singles grand slams. If anything he was sticking up for doubles tennis, not women.
He has won a doubles medal. But yeah, not Gold, it was Silver. (Mixed Doubles with Laura Robson) But no, Murray was sticking up for women. He literally said no, I'm the first Male player, women have done this already. It wasn't about doubles vs singles.
Oh sorry, I wasn't looking at mixed doubles. He might have said it to stick up for women, but the reason for the mistake was likely that he wasn't including doubles (reasonable) Murray could have easily responded with "First player to win two SINGLES gold" and it probably would have been a less viral but more helpful correction
There are several instances of this sort of thing. Another example is when a journalist said Sam Query was the “first American” to reach a major semi final since 2009 - completely ignoring multiple women who had. In the instance mentioned in your comment, if Serena Williams was a man with two Olympics gold medals, I’d bet that the journalist would not have said Andy Murray was the first to win two Olympic golds. This is not a singles vs doubles misunderstanding, and I don’t get why some men do mental gymastics to try and prove something isn’t just plain sexism
Well you'd very clearly lose that bet as Massu won 2 golds in 2004 but also wasn't included as 1 was in doubles tennis. So there clearly wasn't a double standard in genders here. It's not mental gymnastics.
Except this post was in 2021 when USA were the world champions. So OP has this one wrong on this occasion. But i remember the Andy Murray comment; completely shut the reporter up haha!
I don't think it's relevant whether they're world champions. If I say Chelsea missed out on the champions league this season and someone replies "well actually Chelsea women's did qualify for the champions league", I would think it's pedantic. You can say these rules are unfair but 99% of people refer to the men's team without any qualifier so correcting somebody seems overboard And as I've said, the Murray correction wasn't about men vs women. It was about singles vs doubles tennis which again is a normal thing in tennis.
But I would consider Serena closer to Federer than Us woman's team to Argentina
I don’t know about that. > Venus and Serena Williams took on then World No. 203 Karsten Braasch at the 1998 Australian Open, in an exhibition event named "The Battle of the Sexes." The event came about after the Americans allegedly claimed that they could beat any male player ranked outside the top-200. Karsten won, easily.
And they both are still closer in skill level to the best men’s tennis player than the USWNT is to any male side
It must be kind of depressing for former Nr. 1 Steffi Graf, who probably would not even be able to beat all the men in her family. :-D
The fact they felt the need to clarify "outside the top 200" to begin with says a lot, doesn't it?
US women team got embarrassed by high schoolers, lmao.
Not that I think the Williams sisters are that close to Federer, but idk if I put that much stock in a result from 1998 given that they were 16 and 17 at the time. I imagine a similar match-up in 2005-2010 would go much differently.
Serena's own words are something along the lines of "I would lose 6-0 6-0 if I had to play Andy Murray"
The serves alone from a male player would be so difficult for a woman to return at that level.
And she still is closer in talent level to him than the USWNT is to Argentina’s men’s side. Or any male team for that matter
The US national women practiced against the U-16 boys a few years ago and they stopped because they were so overmatched. Doesn't matter though, they are the world champions in their sex bracket and they deserve respect
I found this interesting fact: >The 2019 Women's World Cup final had an average TV audience of **82.18 million**. The 2022 Men's World Cup final achieved a global reach of almost **1.5 billion** viewers.
And they want to be paid the same.
The US womens team negotiated a deal which was equitable at the time. Mens international teams are paid purely on performance with the expecation that they are already getting paid well from their respective clubs, The womans team rejected this deal and negoatiated salaries etc for a reduced performance bonus on wins. Thats the uncomfortable truth that when the womens team won the world cup and started to demand equal pay on performance bonuses they were trying to proveriably have their cake and eat it too because after winning the performance bonus was more lucrative.
The us women want to be paid the same as the US men. Those are the relevant numbers to compare. Us woman's viewership v us mens viewership. And domestic attendance. Us women have won lawsuits against the ussf twice resulting in pay increases.
They were offered the same package multiple times, and they declined it and wanted more. It's not equality. Edit: Found a vid that explains it fairly well. Women were offered the same as men, declined it, got something else, realised it sucked, then wanted to change again. https://youtu.be/LLeAWuRbObQ?si=CRlXwG4oON0Sqyd1 In short, the women's team wanted to be salaried, while the men's team is play to get paid. The women's team has reliable income, and the men's team gets almost nothing from the USSF.
>In short, the women's team wanted to be salaried, while the men's team is play to get paid. Its incredible that the media has been completely ignoring this fact for simple outrage journalism. "Sexism" news sell quite well nowadays.
They wanted to be paid the same* *but unlike the Men, they wanted the benefits the package THEY AGREED UPON but without the risks the men had. The men get paid PER GAME, so if they don't play, no pay. They also weren't given Healthcare, 401k, and such in their package. The women's deal was they got a GUARANTEED pay regardless of time on the field, plus Healthcare, 401k, and such. The women were OFFERED the same deal the men had but denied it. They wanted the same PAY as the men AND the benefits on top of that pay, which would make them get paid MORE than the men.
Which lawsuits did they win? The cases were either dismissed or settled out of court.
which lawsuit did they win? Pretty sure they had multiple lawsuits thrown out, and then finally settled out of court. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/sports/soccer/us-womens-soccer-equal-pay.html > U.S. Soccer was under no obligation to settle with the women’s team; a federal judge in 2020 had dismissed the players’ equal pay arguments, stripping them of nearly all of their legal leverage, and the players’ appeal was not certain to succeed.
>The us women want to be paid the same as the US men. No. US women initially signed a contract giving them a fixed amound of money and benefits, not linked to their performance. They specifically rejeted the same contract that men have where they would have been paid according to games played and won. Only AFTER their good perfromance during the past few years they realized they coudl get more and started complaining. There are countless experts on Youtube breakign teh whole thing down. This whole thing had nothing to do with sexism.
So how many people are attending regular games in the top division in the US? In Germany women usually play for an average of ~1000 people while men play for ~40000. While the top teams average 3k for women and 81k for men.
Another interesting fact: the Aussie Matildas team has been consistently achieving sellout crowds in big venues like Sydney's Olympic Stadium and attracting some of the highest annual TV ratings. As an aside, the interstate women's rugby League fixtures are also doing very well. It does take time to generate an audience though - get to know the players, become a fanboy/girl, understand the other teams and their tactics & strengths. Can't say I buy into the argument about "less skill" much, because it's about entertainment and women's games are easily as entertaining as men's IMHO. I'd always prefer a women's international that ends up 3-2 than a dull men's slugfest for 0 or 1 all followed by a turkey shoot at goal (don't hate me please, hardcore soccer fans. We all know they should keep playing until a team scores a legit goal, and only TV scheduling prevents this)
I can absolutely respect that because I view other sports in a similar fashion, like handball. I also never played handball. As of now I truly can’t stand women’s soccer as entertainment. It’s not only the lackluster physical aspects of it but more the major technical errors in their game. It’s so prevalent for everyone that played that their touch is off and their strikes are graceless. What they’re on par with is their structure and tactical abilities but I don’t watch the sport for that. Maybe I’ll dial for the gold medal game when we’re in but it’s not out of admiration of their game. But if you enjoy sunday league tier football you’d be fine with women’s football. If it’s entertainment for you then by all means watch it. I used to make my coin in the sport so my input values may be very different to yours.
Absolutely very different. I played union and watch league. Soccer is only for big international events. I'd never claim to understand any of the finer points of technique. Only that the games seem more...open? Like anything might happen. Possibly because the defence isn't as good, and the attackers might mess up and lose possession more often?
I can enjoy t-ball. I just wouldn’t pay hundreds of dollars to see it. What is the price of admission to a women’s Aussie Matildas game? What about the men’s?
Good question, and I can't say I know the answer. I found that adult tickets "start at" AUD$35 but that would obviously be the worst nosebleed seats with the worst views. I found that the men's State of Origin rugby league Tix start at $49 and that's the biggest sporting event other than the rugby league grand final. The women's State of origin start at $15 so that's obviously priced to entice a crowd. Best guess would be $35 to a few hundred? Scalping is a whole other market. TL; DR: not sure, but not cheap either.
It's not that interesting, the main reason is just that men's sports are more interesting, not because eof "women" but because the top male athletes in any given sport will generally be much better than women in pure physique.If memory serve me right the funny part is that the women's football teams often play better in a strategic sense, because of the physical differences and personality differences. But that could be wrong I don't really care for the sport I just recently had this exact discussion with a friend and his viewpoint were interesting to me.
As someone flicking between Denmark vs Serbia and England vs Slovenia in the euros last night... The men's games are certainly not always more interesting
National team matches are usually lower quality as well. Club tournaments have the advantage of having the players train and play together much more.
Yeah, that is true. Similarly in fighting sports the most popular category is heavy weight because everyone knows the best in that category pretty much bodies the best from the others. What’s interesting tho is shooting. Where men and women have extremely close capabilities. (And seemingly it favors women from what Iv heard) but we still divide the sport by gender.
Interestingly shooting was originally a combined sport at the Olympics and was only divided by gender when women started winning it.
Same with skating lol
Figure skating? Men don't look as pretty in those tutus it's not fair 😤
That's just convention, hell chess had a women's and men's league. In modern times these divisions often come down to people harassing female athletes or convention or. A mixture of both.
Not necessarily true at all. Look at the UFC when Connor McGregor, khabib jose aldo were around. And look now with adesanya, islam, alex pereira, sean strickland etc etc. None of these guys are heavyweights but they made their weight divisions very popular. It all depends who is fighting, when connor was fighting the lightweight division was most popular, when JJ was fighting light heavyweight and heavyweight would be more popular.
True, it became more and more personality and celebrity driven. Mcgregor in his early days was super flashy which gained him his popularity and in turn his divination became popular. You’re right, idk why I hadn’t thought of it. Maybe the people in charge of marketing are just a bit behind them times same way my Comment was.
A number of professional female soccer teams have lost against teenage boy teams. The men are on a different level of speed, skill, etc. There is a reason the Paralympics doesn't have the viewership of the Olympics. People don't want to just see the best of something. They want to see the best, period. High school soccer doesn't get the viewership that college sports gets, and college doesn't get the viewership that professionals do, so it is about watching the best athletes do amazing things.
College football is wildly popular in the US, though
There are plenty of areas in the US especially where college sports absolutely dominate professional sports. Go down to Atlanta and so how many people care about the Falcons compared to the Bulldogs lol. It’s about connections with the team, and for years the USWNT has had a far deeper connection with their fans since soccer has mostly been considered a feminine sport in the US.
It's more because you don't get these ridiculous scores of like 10-0. In men's football that's incredibly rare at the highest level because the skill is fairly matched even in the worse teams.
I don't think it's the only reason. Football supporters are generally male, especially the extreme supporters. Football is often seen as symbolic warfare, something you do for your nation. Football matches between traditional rivals are often very tense, with clashes between fans. Supporters identify with the playing team, and it's easier to identify with the people of the same sex. The team is on the front line, you're kind of logistics and support.
When i played rugby the girls would come watch out matches but they wouldn't come cheer on any other matches for the female teams. When i asked my friend why she said "who the fuck watches female sports? I definitely don't!" Which shocked me (I don't watch sports at all only like playing them) so i asked her why. She told me it's like watching children play football, sure they have the time of their life but the match is boring as hell, the men at least have a higher form of skill the only thing that is fun is "watching" the woman not the sports (once again, her words not mine) Definitely gave me some perspective
Sad, infantilizing her own gender and incapable seeing women as capable of being as skilled as men
It wouldnt change much your point but i feel average should be compared to average.
And yet I couldn’t tell you a damn thing about the US men’s team.
[удалено]
That wouldn't be the combined total, it would be for the final match.
She's quoting nothing though? No source...
Welcome to twitter
OP baiting with a tweet from 2021. Be better.
old news reposted so many times, they lost the world cup fyi.
Is that the side that got smashed by Wrexhams reserve side?
They were 40 years old retired players, even worse
Yes, reminds me how pointless womens football is.
...dont want to be offensive but there is Football and "Football"
There’s chips and fries same thing different name
You're right, the womens England team is so much better to watch than the men's. No offence to the men's team. They're good, they're just playing so darn boring at the moment.
Silly twitter, we all know women don‘t exist
the ~~reigning~~ former \**women's* World Cup Champs.
It’s also the former champs, they’re not the reigning champs anymore.
Or because "soccer"
How old is this ?
That’s from 2021. That’s the facepalm.
Stop upvoting these farmers
Congratulations for the 8 countries that actually have women’s soccer!
And although it might hurt: almost nobody cares.
Also, just want to quickly point out how much more motivated and entertaining to watch the England women's team is than the bunch of drips currently playing in the Euros. Last night was absolutely diabolical.
Olympic soccer is a Joke sind No one Cares.
I mean it's pretty common to refer to the men's team without adding "men's team". It's not technically correct but I think correcting someone on it comes off as pedantic
Maybe, because typically men watch men's soccer, and women don't watch soccer. And maybe the reason for men's lack of attention to women's soccer is related to fact women's world cup 4th team gets obliterated by under 15 year old boys from a city level team 0-7. But there's another question people need to consider, maybe if women would spend their own money on women's soccer team memorabilia and tickets and watching it same way some men do with soccer then there would be money in women's soccer. Unfortunately for female soccer players and male models there's a disparity in where each gender spends their money, and attention.
There are two main possible perception of a sport. 1. It's the very best against the very best. A high stakes competition that excites people 2. Everything below that. People show up to support their local teams more often than not to display their support rather than genuinely enjoying the level of the sport in question. Women sports will always be less popular than men sports because there is no higher competition than to beating a man at the peak of their strength.
The thing is, most people watching sport are not really into the ins and outs of the sport. Their understanding is often scoring = good, winning = great. If they were in to watch the highest level of competition, they would stop watching their local teams and start watching the best teams. It really boils down to sexism in most cases, except in the case of sports fanatics who are really into the details - the rules, the records, etc. But they are a small percentage of sports fans.
Don’t worry. Americans *only* care about you guys. You get out there, play harder, enjoy the game more, and you do it for the love of the game. The men’s team is just a bunch of “big” names that don’t give a shit. When I hear US soccer, I think of the women’s team.
Those same women’s world champ’s lost 5-1 to an under 15 boys team. 🤷♂️
Why don’t people get it or understand, nobody gives a single flying fuck about women’s “soccer” other than the people that play it?
Fucking yawn. Stop the desperate need to be a victim constantly.
"football (soccer)" isn't for men only. It's just that no woman is good enough to compete with elite level male players. "Women's football (soccer) is for women only. So you don't make the distinction between "men's football" and "women's football", but between "football" and "women's football"
Hi, just a loving reminder that "the reigning world cup champs" have been beaten before by an under-15's boys team That possibly might be why they're not properly known as "US Soccer"
Now lets all grasp our hands. Did anyone in this comment section watch a single game of womens' soccer during the kast 4 years?
Woman soccer isn't a valuable show whether you like that or not it's the truth.
There’s nothing wrong with men preferring to watch men. The issue is that women don’t watch women.
There are many sports where the women teams/athletes are comparable in popularity and relevance to the big audiences Football just isn't one them. No one is ignoring anything, women's football is just an afterthought for the majority of people
and they suck for that
And that's all well and fine. But then it should say "US men's soccer fails". Not US soccer, because that would mean both teams.
And those sports are what?
In terms of team sports volleyball reigns supreme in that regard, but also diving, high jump and other athletics disciplines, the myriad of swimming disciplines. Most of them aren't mainstream sports in the first place, so if people are interested in them they end up being interested in both male and female ones
And for a good reason too. Its a sport in which there exist a precedence of one of the top national teams losing to 15 year old boys. You can watch better football by going to see your local school compete against another.
Just a reminded that a bunch of 15 year old boys beat the womens team.
Competition is slimner but hopefully its fixed with more eyes on it
Beware of the Australians.
in 2019 yes.
Football*
No us team isn't world champions maybe educate yourself
I mean yes I get your point but to be the devils advocate: - while feminine football is developing fast, especially in the us, football is still regarded as a masculine sport, as it has a larger audience and a bigger level - if feminine team qualifies and masculine team doesn’t, they’ll talk more about masculine because it’s obvious that the feminine team would qualify as it is one of the reigning feminine football nations, while the masculine team is still up and coming, and it’s disappointing if they don’t qualify. Thus masculine team not qualifying is more shocking then feminine team qualifying. If the feminine team didn’t qualify I think (and I hope) it would be a bigger news since the feminine team is way better in feminine football than the masculine team is in masculine football Yes, there is still a problem about football being considered only a masculine sport, but it’s evolving in the right direction. Sadly the level gap between masculine and feminine doesn’t play in favour in feminine football, but I hope it will improve.
The reigning World cup champions in the FIFA Women's world cup is Spain
Did she just make up that headline to rebuke it?
The same "world champs" that lost to U15 boys? Cool.
And how many tickets has the person making the tweet bought I wonder?
Now our men’s team is ranked 11th in the world and is advancing past the group stage in the COPA América
Spain is the current champion, yet in the 33 years of the existing tournament, the USA has the most succesful team with 4 titles.
Spain are the current champs, but this is a really old tweet from 2021, when the US were champs, so was correct at the time.
If more women would step up and watch womens football whe wouldnt need to have this discussion. I only ever see people complaining about no one caring about womens sports but the same people couldnt even tell you the names of 3 teams. Nice rage bait though.
Literally less people care about womens football than mens football.
I know this is old but still - is she referring to the same team that got absolutely dunked on by Wrexham FCs retirees? I'm all for it, but it's not the same 😂
The only time anybody ever thought of women's soccer in the US was when they were on TV complaining and making themselves look stupid. They've gone back to being irrelevant now.
Isn't it also the U20s or something at the Olympics since professionalism isn't allowed? Which means it wouldn't have been the defending champions anyway, it's a different team.
2021 twit. Congrats on your hard search for good info, OP
Soccer mums agenda finally bearing fruits.
Just a loving reminder that the "world cup champ" team once got beat by a group of high-school boys.
With a new British coach, Emma Hayes 👍🇬🇧
So umm , how is this the facepalm ??? Wouldn’t them not being there be the facepalm ?
Sorry I don't care if it's men or women, I just don't like football lol
Because U.S. soccer team is not the same as Women's National.
This was a genuine oversight. Valid
Particularly interesting as soccer is the only sport that qualifies “men” or “women” in standard naming convention (USMNT & USWNT) where ever other sport I can think of assumes men (ex NBA v WNBA).
Did… anyone actually watch it though?
Everyone decide by themself which sport they will follow. Am I sexist because I don’t follow a single one of female sports? Because I don’t follow 99% of male sports…
I mean, it will take decades for women football to be at the same level as men's football. Not hating on women, but they need some catching up to do in terms of technique and football insight. Watching women football is fun, but it's on a very low level. So it's no surprise that women football doesn't get the attention men's football get.
Nobody cares about female football. Sorry to burst the bubble. When people talk about our national team we have the men in mind
LMAO "female football" jesus christ
What?
It's never been called male football and female football. It's always been men's football and women's football. Female football sounds like you're saying the sex of the ball itself lmao
The women's world cup last year was one of the most watched sporting events in Australian history because our team was so much better than usual.
>Ignoring the World Champions because "women" OOOOOOOORRRRR, not everyone enjoys women's soccer. I don't understand why not, since they play better soccer than the whiny crybaby actors that the male soccer consists of.
Hmmm they can say they play better football when they beat a mens team. Not a top mens team. Not even a professional mens team. Just a regularly playing mens team
I didn't say they were more skilled. I said they played better games than the actor crybabies.
Would this be the same team that lost a scrimmage to a bunch of fat fetired guys from Wales by a score of 12-0?
Doesn’t count - it’s a lower level of play.