Get down to Goodison Park to support Everton Women

If I was up there, I'd get down there but will have to make do with watching on TV - BBC 1:15 - 3:30

COYELs

I was planning on going to this. It's my cousin's 40th wedding anniversary. Plan was for a party in the Metal Box in Speke last night (don't know if it's actually still called that, but we refer to it as that!!) and then a day with the family.

But they went down with Covid so all postponed until November now. I'll tune in and watch.

Is it too 'Woke' these days to say you don't like Women's football? I've tried, but find it such an inferior product to the men's football. This is reflected I think by its attendances.

The average WPL attendance is 3,400 with Everton's being 2,800. This is with ticket prices averaging only £5 for a single ticket and £35 for a season ticket (£30 at Everton).

In my opinion, the political push and over subscribing of women's football on the BBC and Sky is completely unmerited. Despite the overwhelming free publicity and constant drive to promote the women's game, the numbers clearly tell us there is relatively little demand for the product.

Anyway, that's just one guy's opinion, and if expressed views such as this bring criticism and outrage in this PC age, 'Well frankly my dears'.

Is it too 'Woke' these days to say you don't like Women's football?

I think that would be "anti-woke" maybe, John?

John,

It's hard not to agree with you and, as you say, a 'political push'... but it's probably not a bad thing, is it? Little girls can now dream of playing for Everton too.

I don't suppose you agree with Megan Rapinoe and her push for equal pay? Although l'm still getting over tennis players getting the same when one match takes up to 5 hours and the other between 20 minutes to an hour.

Brian (4). Yes, 'anti-woke' indeed!

Dave (5). Look at the attendance figures in the WPL and its subsequent revenue. If the income justified equal pay for women footballers then yes. If not, no.

The British Army and it's Corps teams (good standard) adopted a "one club" approach. We used to have the coaches take sessions with the female team and there was a real push to promote the female game.

You have to start somewhere and it is progressing no end if you compare it to 10 or 20 years ago.

Without being disrespectful, it's also a good opportunity for coaches who may otherwise not get the chance, to get involved.

I'm all for promoting it and it's continuing progression.

I would also add and link to another thread, the US in particular have been pioneering in the female sport.

Not for me, thanks, I find the men's game barely entertaining enough nowadays.

The media are pushing women's sport because it's cheap, pads out their woeful programming, and there's more women view media than males.

Having watched on TV Women's Football it is worth watching not always for it's high standard but to see what they do wrong and how the same is apparent in Men's football. That is, the speed of passing and movement and when you recognize what good men's football sides do and also see what the poorer men's teams do. In other words test your own judgement on what you think is good football or if you actually know anything other than the score.

Excellent participant sport. Daughter of a friend made a decent living playing semi pro in both USA and Australia. I would encourage any young woman to take it up.

A spectator sport? Not for me. No doubting the talent of the players but whenever I've seen it on TV there is generally a goal scored as a result of a big hoof going over a relatively diminutive keepers head. Just my opinion... keep on playing, females.

I have to agree with John – there is no point in saying you enjoy the WSL if you don't but one thing it has over the men's game is the lack of diving and play-acting to get opposition players sent off. However, I'm sure this undesirable insistence on fair play can be eliminated from the women's game as more male coaches are recruited into it.

Mike - 12. Seconded. I was going to post something along the same lines. There is (thus far) considerably less of the simulation we see in top flight mens football which is quite refreshing.

As I type I am watching an AFL semi final on btsport. This has to be one of the most physically demanding sports on the planet. A massive ground (pitch) almost non stop, brutal physical contact, absolutely NO simulation, a bit of blood and quite entertaining once one has grasped the fairly simple rules and scoring. They even have their equivalent of VAR (ARC - not sure what it stands for) mainly, it seems, for determining a "goal" or a "behind" (look it up) which seems to work well.

Surprisingly there is even a semi-pro AFWomen'sL also.

I'd nip down to Goodison if I lived locally. Women's football is OK for relaxed watching, but it's generally not tremendous entertainment, but then often the men's game also lacks entertainment value even though it's elite compared with the women's game.

The women's game is also fairly free of cheating and diving, but of course that will no doubt change if and when they ever become good enough to attract massive amounts of money like the men's game.

Saying the women's game is what it is, as above, is neither woke nor anti-woke, but is simply factually correct (non-woke?). Any attempt to pretend otherwise is arguably patronising towards women, as is of course any talk of equal pay given the disparity in quality and level between the men's and women's games. But there will always be folks prone to false virtue-signalling.

Looks like a decent turnout.

6,000 Darren. Just gone 1-0 down.

Seen and heard a few interviews of the players before the match. Seemed maybe a bit over confident over today's game. Long way to go. Not sure the names but it looks a good standard.

3-0. Playing shite.

The Everton box seems to be a defence-free zone!

Everton proving they're not good at Football at any level.

Given up on watching this, absolutely shambolic.

Has Michael Keane grown a ponytail? So slow the centre half.

City have had all kinds of space down our right. Thought though Everton looked okay for the first half-hour with our No 7 looking a bit better than what is around her.

9 new players bought in to try to push for the Champions League places. Kind of sounds familiar playing catch up to Man City and Chelsea... although Man Utd perhaps have a bigger pull, again as they started from scratch not so long ago.

God, if we think the men's team are struggling for a right-back, the women's team must have left theirs in the dressing room.

Is it too much to ask Seamus Coleman to play the women's games too? Or maybe whoever the Everton manager can offer some help to his right-back, wherever she is.

David. Apparently he's a bit of a dour jock who dampens big expectations and know his place. Sounds familiar.

I'm sorry but there's better entertainment in the park on a Sunday morning.

John Burns #6, David #5 and Stan #14,

The Rapinoe-led women's crusade for equal pay is only at the national team level, where the US women's team has traditionally not only drawn bigger crowds than the men but vastly outperformed them. The US women were winning four World Cups and numerous other trophies while the men generally ranged from decent to absolute crap. Yet the men have been paid more (about double the per-game bonus), played and trained in superior facilities and gotten charter flights for transport versus commercial flights for the women.

The USSF previously justified that by saying the women deserved inferior pay because they were inferior players to the men. Many of the inequities are now being addressed, if not entirely eliminated.

Stan #14, I have no idea what "false virtue-signaling" means (as opposed to true virtue-signaling, perhaps?), but while it's obviously ridiculous to speculate about equal pay for women's footballers versus men, it's not unreasonable to point out that the women's game cannot develop without resources.

And I say that as someone who doesn't watch women's professional soccer but once refereed women's college and high school games and was often dazzled by the quality.

Paul Hewitt @ 13, best post on the thread. No condescension. Some really unintentional humour on here. How about a separate ToffeeWeb for" the ladies". The girls can comment on "their" game and perhaps swap the odd recipe; while we can talk about the "real man's game" and look back fondly to the games without supporters. The games where we could actually hear the men squealing like pigs when someone made them fall or smirked at their top knot.

Mike@28: False as opposed to true virtue-signalling is when it's done because it's fashionable or some other attempt to look good whilst not actually believing in the relevant cause. It's a form of bull-shitting.

Yes, there is quality in the women's game, hence why I'd nip to Goodison if I were local. But it's generally relatively shite compared with the elite men's game.

Shame that TSN in Canada is starting to show the women's game on tv this afternoon and I just read that they lost 4-0. Don't suppose I will watch it.

Stan, you are a voice of reason on this site, but come on, you would "nip to Goodison if it was local". I am absolutely sure you don't mean to be condescending, but...

Andy, when I lived near Goodison I went to see most Central League games, and youth games, and I'd do similarly today, including Everton women's games.

I don't see the women's games as being particularly good compared with the elite men's games, but they'd still get my support.

I've no doubt they will improve over time. I prefer women's elite tennis to men's elite tennis, and perhaps one day I'll feel similarly about football, but not today!

I would shut the curtains if it was on my front lawn. The 8/1 available suggested a thrashing also.

"But it's generally relatively shite compared with the elite men's game."

Of course it is, Stan. The men's game has been around for more than a century longer. Did you know women were banned from playing on Football League grounds until 1971? The women's national league in England was first established only 30 years ago. Naturally the performance quality would be less developed on a relative basis.

I have no problem watching women's football,it's still a game of football and I appreciate the many qualities shown, as well as some of the ridiculous efforts, no different to a lot of the men's game and former Everton player Lucy Bronze is a standout all round footballer who plays full back for England and the effort skill and ability she shows is a credit to football no matter which sex is playing, although she would have looked better playing for Everton than Martina ever did!!

An interesting game for a personal perspective, would be the best women's team in the world, ie, current World Champions, against a decent Sunday league men's team, say the National Cup winners. Am I being completely naive here by saying it's a win for the men?

One of the many problems with women's footy is the size of the goals – a shot not straight at the keeper inevitably goes in, hence ludicrously high scorelines akin to pub leagues.

Physique, not agility, is the problem; it's a marvelous participation game for females – just not a spectator sport.

To think one of the most successful teams that started the women's game off, Doncaster Belles, are now playing in the 4th tier of English football, while teams like Man City, Arsenal and the likes are turning Women's football into a simular pattern of the men's game, buying the very best players, state of the art training grounds.

Already the Women's super league has a familiar look to it with the likes of Man City, Arsenal, PSG, Lyon women dominating, Everton have since invested in quality players, but no match for the likes of Man City, Lyon, PSG.

What chance have the likes of Birmingham City, Reading etc got, against the mega-rich teams?

Like I say, women's football will go the same way as men's football, same teams dominating, for years to come.

The women's game is different; not better or worse but just different. Much slower, little physical contact and often lacking in even basic tactical awareness, even at the top level.

Having said all that it's often very skillful and entertaining. If you watch it from the perspective of the men's game you're always going to be disappointed.

I was at the game, today and I thought we were well in the game until they scored. City were using the flanks very well and running us ragged down their left. This was the fault of the way Kirk had set the side up rather than the players. Very disappointingly, he didn't change things until the second half but the game was out of reach by then.

The last time I saw a women's game was in the mid 1960s, at Edinburgh Park,Townsend Lane. (The docker's club). A girl I knew was playing and the referee was Tony Kay. As Mike said, the FA imposed severe sanctions on any club which dared (to my knowledge none did) stage a woman's game and any players or officials faced sine die suspensions. As Tony was already banned for life they couldn't touch him.

I chatted to some of the players after the game and for many it was the first time they'd ever played on a marked out pitch with proper goals.

Before we criticise the women's game, too much, we must remember it's coming from a very low (in some cases non existant) base but I'm sure it'll improve as more girls start playing at school.

I don't have the slightest interest in women's football, rugby or cricket but Sky and BBC push it because it's cheap TV. And of course it's fashionable for all the 'woke' people out there

It is the same with a number of sports that men and women participate in. In most of the more physical sports, the men are stronger and quicker. To watch women's football, you have to watch a lot of it and treat it as a different class than men to appreciate it.

The Americans who believe that it should be equal pay as the men should go on their attendance. The last World Cup for women attracted an average of 21,756 where the men had an average of 47,371.

Is it worth watching? As long as you realize the level it is and don't compare it with the men's standard, yes.

Allen, this was a great thread. Uncomfortable men (me included, by the way) treading on eggshells and being awkward, (apart from Barry; you don't do 'awkward', Barry).

And then, Allen, you just throw cold water over our New Man efforts. Shame on you! Next thing you'll be saying that men would be better at synchronised swimming.

Anyway, just have a look at corners in a women's game and compare it to a men's game. One is about football, the other is about coached, utterly lamentable, pseudo macho cheating.

Undoubtedly the levels of quality, fitness and team performance generally are not up there with watching the Premier League, although frankly some of the men in them are far more fragile than women in the WSL – you only have to make contact and they are pollaxed! Such abuse those poor men have to take in the EPL!

Of course the playing levels are light years apart, but what on earth do you expect? You cannot compare the structure, playing staff or coaching as in the men's game, never mind the money, facilities or opportunities for improvement. Men and women cannot play in the same team, even if the were good enough, and it's farcical to believe that there never will be a female player who could hold her own in a men's team. But, as it stands, there is little opportunity for change and, while that exists, women's football has a reinforced glass ceiling.

Interesting article in Wired.co.uk: "Why are elite female footballers banned from playing with men" (Behave! Stop the titters at the back!)

Afraid you will have to Google (obviously I don't have the same intellectual capability as you wonderful guys!) it but worth the read. It's from a couple of years ago but it puts it in perspective.

It highlights the incredible levels of condescending attitudes in sport when it comes to mixed-gender teams, in any level, in any sport! Even if we had a brilliant female player, no matter how good, how strong, how competitive, she would be banned from playing in a men's team. Given the way some men play like a "big girl's blouse", the ban should be extended to them!

ps: I would add that some of the best national teams, like the US, Sweden or even England, would give teams playing in the EFL a good run for their money!

Mike @35: Yes, I did know that. I realise you understand the background to all of this disparity, but that background is not really the issue here. The issue is whether we feel attracted enough to watch women's football.

In my case, and many others on this thread, we might watch it, but it doesn't really float our boat. Simply because it's not very good. But that doesn't necessarily mean we won't support it. It will improve, no doubt, but at the moment it's fairly mediocre.

I have made a living as a youth coach in San Diego since 1995 and have seen some terrific girls playing to a high level. The skill level is really good and will only get better with the quality of coaching that they get over here. The women's leagues around the world will get more quality and more fans as a result of that.p>Christine 44,

Not sure about that yet, one of my brothers who coaches here as well in San Diego had his boys U15 team play the women's national team back when Mia Hamm was playing and beat them 4-2. Also, I think the National team lost to a U15 boys team last year 3-0. It really is a great sport for women and the girls here in San Diego love playing.

I do sometimes wish the dogs would occasionally differentiate a Sunday from a weekday, but here I am. Good morning everyone.

Christine @44, I do not for one minute think we'll see mixed teams, certainly not at the professional level. I think the only sport that comes close to that is Hockey???

That said, I am old enough to remember when the Army didn't employ females in most jobs whereas, by the time I left a couple of years ago, there were only the last bastions of the Infantry that were elusive. And even that was being discussed. Totally different, I appreciate, but a parallel and demonstrates that if you're good enough to do the job, well, you're good enough.

The girls' game has developed massively. Look where it is now compared to even 10 years ago. We can't and shouldn't directly compare to the men's game, as it is literally 100 years behind. But it is evolving and has progressed and continues to do so.

I think the shout about goal size is a good one. Regardless of equality shouts, the biological fact is that on average, females are smaller than males. It was the same when we used to take kids to their first season at 11-a-side on full-size pitches. More than half of the goals scored were because the keeper was too small. I know that's changed and we have started to follow the Dutch model of intermediate pitches. Maybe something to consider for the female game. And that is not meant to sound derogatory.

David, I work for a Texas company and have spent a fair bit of time in San Antonio. I've always been impressed with the enthusiasm and standard of football in the area, girls included.

Christine (#44);

Not quite football but I really enjoyed the mixed relay teams at the Olympics which brought another dimension to team swimming.

I doubt that it could, would or should translate to football but even Alan Ball, as a teenager, was turned down by a couple of clubs because of his size.

Alan @48. I maintain that Messi would not have made it had he been born in Coventry or Sunderland. I can hear it now. "Yeah, nice skills lad, but you're just too small".

It's Sunday. Don't start me!!!!

Danny (#49);

Playing with ideas, imagine teams made up of both sexes and both sides had to have the same... 'split' is not the word... breakdown, say maximum 6 male. If one team substituted a male with a female, then the other would need to do the same. It would probably give greater powers to the fourth official, not to mention the Board carriers and mind games.

Anyway, just off for another anti-inflammatory and a lie-down.

Oh, and Peter Beardsley was no giant.

What was that song about Gordon West's handbag?

Mind you have you seen the size of some of England's women's rugby players?

Or Peter Reid. And one of my favourite English players of his generation, Paul Scholes, Alan.

I think they were identified by a generation of managers who focussed on footballing ability. Since then, we've become obsessed with size, pace and power.

I do actually believe we're coming through that now, but I'd still love to be minister for overhauling our grass roots football!!

Danny @ 49, spot on. Someone like David Speedie or Archie Gemmill wouldn't get a chance these days and, like them or not, they were decent players.

The comments about footballers being bigger and more athletic are spot on. There's too much emphasis on high intensity pressing and running, and an often dismissive attitude towards players who don't work as hard but make the ball do the work through their footballing brain and instincts.

There is clear scope for the game using more of the latter, and coaching talented youngsters accordingly. The women's game could play a role in this, with less emphasis on raw physical power and more focus on clever ball-playing. Analogous to elite tennis, where the women's game is often more subtle and entertaining than the raw power of the men's game.

So although the women's game is currently nowhere near the men's at the elite level, the gap could close in a way that produces a women's game that is more entertaining than the current incarnation of the men's game.

Christine.

My dad used to go beserk at West for not grabbing hold of that kopite and not flattening him or at least handing him over to the plod. Different times eh.

Great post, Stan.

Back to basics almost. As a young player, one of the things I always remember being taught was to make the ball do the work. If I'm being self-flattering, it was how I ended up being a converted midfielder turned centre-back who could play in a 3-5-2.

You can run around all you want, but clever players do exactly that; use the ball and their brain. See it, play it as I was taught. Your first instinct is mostly the right one. Not always as football is a game of gambles and mistakes. It's not science. Guardiola says it in the documentary "Take the ball, pass the ball".

You obviously need a bit of both, but definitely one of the stand-out memories of my footballing development was to let the ball do the work. "Chickens run around headless" – as my German coach used to explain to me!!

Stan,

What you're describing is being seen in cricket. Women's cricket is a bit like men's cricket in the 50s. Clever bowling, especially spin, and subtle batting with placement and timing.

Men's cricket under the influence of T20 is much more about power and fitness and the influence can be seen, especially in the fielding throughout the game. Women are playing this style of cricket of course and the influence is there too.

Football is a great game for boys & girls, I would recommend anyone playing it for the fun and social side.

That aside and speaking as a qualified FA Coach, Women's football shouldn't be on national TV, it just isn't ready and we will always compare it to the men's game which I believe will damage it. Women's football has to be a standalone product; what the woke brigade is doing is fast-tracking a sport that is an inferior product.

In time, I agree it could have a place but we should be seeing more Netball and Women's hockey, they have passion, aggression and most of all competition. This is an easy and most importantly lazy decision by the broadcasters; building up Netball & Hockey would have taken more due diligence but given more back long term.

Women's grassroots football tends to die out at the age of about 14/15 and it's very rare you see adult women's football; it's clinging to the club brand of the men's team.

I lasted about 5 minutes on Saturday and turned over to watch Racing from Haydock. last time I watched Everton Women was in the FA Cup Final in Milton Keynes. I lasted until half-time – and that was only because my niece was the Everton Physio!!

I have no real interest in women's football but I, obviously, wish them well. I'm pretty sure they can expect a massive increase in attendances in around 3 years time as we all want to go to Goodison as often as we can before it's gone forever.