Women's World Cup

Everton midfielder Clare Wheeler is in the Aussie squad for the World Cup semi-final versus England in a few hours.

Based on the historic lack of stories or comments about the women's team, I'm assuming it's not something of great interest to Lyndon, Michael or the majority of us regular mostly old (40-year-old plus posters) but I do wonder if there are other Evertonians out there who more closely follow the women's game who might add a dimension to the site if it got more coverage?

I'm not volunteering as I'm the fairest of Fairweather fans for that aspect but I wonder if there are some out there among us?

Kieran, I'm sure the commentator last night mentioned we have/had 7 Everton ladies across various teams at the Women's World Cup. One of the Swedish lasses from last night's semi is a Blue.

I don't follow the female game at all but, as I live in New Zealand, it's been convenient to watch and I've watched heaps of matches. I have to say, it's been a great tournament and I've enjoyed the standard on display.

Personally, I am finding the women's team considerably more entertaining than watching England men who bore my tits off, frankly.

The women's standard has advanced massively in 3 or 4 years and for sure there are mistakes a-plenty but in a way that is enhancing by taking away some of the predictability.

I shall be watching this morning but we will have to up our game, certainly from the Nigeria game which we were fortunate to win.

Kieran.

Personally, I have no interest in the women's game and have not watched any of the World Cup. I think my resistance is due to the women's game being forced upon us like a politically correct media hammer.

It didn't happen naturally. It was not the slow organic growth of women's tennis or athletics, that was allowed to blossom over the decades. But that's just one guy's opinion!

John,

You mean the women's game that saw 53,000 people at Goddison on Boxing day 1920. Before the FA banned it for 50 years. Wasn't affiliated until 1984 and was deprived of funding.

Are you talking about that women's game because it looks like natural growth from where I am sitting.

John what would slow organic growth be? To completely ignore it and not promote it? In a world where sport is governed by media promotion and sponsorship, it either gets promoted or it dies.

The quality of football in the National League is not world class, but the increase in interest following the Wrexham story makes has brought more attention, and with the struggles to survive of many teams in the football league and below, this is welcome.

Sport is not just about quality, of course men's footy is a higher standard of performance, the players have had pretty much-dedicated coaching from the ages of 8, massive investment in all sides of sports science, nutrition and facilities.

Yet still the game is full of boring games, woeful corners, and players like Doucouré unable to trap a ball and shoot when 1 on 1.

Women's football has grown, has improved massively as investment has also, but the reason investment has happened is because there is a demand, there is an audience.

And personally, I really enjoy that my little niece can watch football and also dream of one day playing in the Women's World Cup Final. For her, watching England vs Australia today will be far more captivating and enjoyable than watching Everton vs Aston Villa on Sunday lunchtime. If you personally don't enjoy it, fine. Ignore it, no need to dismiss it tho.

I personally find cricket and golf incredibly boring and have no interest in it. I never feel the need to come out and say it's just media hype crap during The Ashes or The Open though.

The Women's World Cup has been shown in my work over the last few weeks and it 100% has been entertaining. I'd be lying if I said I follow the club football but the current state of the international teams has been interesting.

A few teams look really good. Spain and Sweden yesterday had some moments of real quality and I actually expect Australia to turn England over today, they've been really impressive.

However, from a neutral watching it, the game has some pretty big flaws. The goalkeepers are still non-league level for me. The amount of errors is a bit comical and you only have to look at the England goal against Colombia to see that really. Not sure if it's a physical aspect that holding them back or technically it's just behind.

Similarly to the men's international game, the teams look really good defensively and that's been a huge improvement over the last few years. Attacking wise on the other hand is a bit one-dimensional.

Overall, the game is taken huge leaps over the last 5-6 years. I will say the England team seem to be managed by the female Southgate though. Some players of real individual quality that are poorly coached.

Can we sign the England forward Lauren Hemp, she'd put most of our forward players to shame, works hard, uses her physicality and uses the ball ever so well, a proper player of the match performance.

What a difference watching the Lionesses compared to Everton. Every one of them was comfortable on the ball, looked to play out of tight situations, no diving, no arguing with refs, very few balls going astray, solid defending as a unit…

Compare that with Doucouré and Onana who the ball bounces off, Iwobi's crappy desicion-making, our defence getting pulled out of position etc…

The technical ability was in a different league to Everton players.

Alex, not sure if I misunderstand your comments about England players being poorly coached. This will now be the manager/coach's 4th final, she's won 2 already.

I agree about the goalkeepers.

I liked the Nigeria and Colombia's approach to playing, more attacking but then they're not in the final.

Whilst I don't think the current women's England team are the most exciting to watch, it's all about winning and setting up a performance to achieve that. With only 1 defeat in approx 40 matches, I would say the players are being coached well.

I did try watching a few games in the hope the female version might be more skill-based and elegant but it's a facsimile of the men's game with added pony tails, monumental errors, and the same drivel from pundits. Simply painful to watch.

Devotees will be up in arms at the suggestion but it's destined to go the same way as televised snooker and darts as a niche market sports backwater.

You say that, Barry, but England put 3 goals past Australia, and well-taken goals too.

The game is definitely getting better than a few years ago. More than we can say about Everton men's starting 11 over the last season or 3…

Sorry, but I can't take it seriously.

I quite enjoyed watching today's game and good luck to them in the final. There is certainly some skill, not least Kerr's goal, but of course the reality is, it's many levels below the men's game, a Conference team would quite easily beat them. Not so much on skill but basic pace and power.

I guess that reality is always going to place some constraint on its commercial potential. It is also the opposite of the men's game in that I only really care about Everton, not the international team, whereas with the women, it's the other way round. I couldn't tell you a single player who plays for Everton Ladies.

Women's football will become a niche market sports backwater with 75,000 attending tonight's match?

Sure buddy.

I agree with Ian. The Colombian, Nigerian and I think South Africans all played attacking football that appeared to be on the cusp of something new. I suspect coaches are partially to blame in a big tornament. The women are ready for their Messi-ah and it will be worth the watch.

Steve. That doesn't happen often.

Yeah Paul - it doesn't often happen in men's football either.

Anyone involved in grassroots football will tell you that women's football is not destined to become niche.

But hey, better to keep the rhetorical stigma's about women's football going rather than backing down and giving the national team the credit it deserves…

Ajay - comparing the manager to Southgate? That's a bit laughable.

Barry snooker isn't exactly a backwater it is on TV constantly and has been for years.

The 2023 FA Cup Final was watched by a "peak audience" on BBC1 by 1.3 million people. The snooker final this year attracted 4.5 million.

But the women's game is clearly growing also.

"New research by Two Circles has revealed that crowds in the English Women's Super League (WSL) in the first half of this season are up a staggering 267% on last season, driven by a strategy of playing big games in larger stadiums which is filtering down throughout the league.

Overall, average crowds in the WSL stand at 6,961 for the season up to January 21, 2023, more than two and a half times last season's average of 1,898. The total attendance throughout the league exceeded the quarter of a million mark after just 40 matches this season surpassing the total attendance for the whole of the previous campaign in a third of the time."

Kevin, what do you think the average attendance is in women's club football in this country?

Happy for any people following it but it's not for me.

Then again I couldn't care less about the mens team either.

Are we really going to need a Billie Jean King v Bobby Riggs event for the women's game to get respect?

Plenty of ex-Evertonians in the current Lionesses squad; Chloe Kelly, Lucy Bronze and Alex Greenwood all played for Everton early on in their careers. Esme Morgan also played on loan here a few seasons back. So the club should have some pride in what is happening.

I remember watching the occasional televised game of women's football from 25 years ago, back when Doncaster Belles were the leading club, Gillian Coulthard was the England captain, and the standard was nothing really to write home about. But there were encouraging signs; Arsenal and England had a player called Marianne Spacey who was genuinely brilliant, but ultimately the women's game was still recovering from years of being marginalised.

A generation on and women's football has properly exploded - in terms of profile, in terms of backing, and in terms of quality. Yes, it will always suffer in comparison with the men's game for fans of pace and power, but the strides that have been made in the last 25 years are pretty astounding, and not just in the UK but all around the world.

In the last 25 years England have had some really fantastic footballers that today's success was really built on the back of, and what a time it must be for them - to see the game grow to the level it has.

In particular I think Kelly Smith did so much for women's football just by her sheer excellence - she really was (in my eyes anyway) comfortably the best women's footballer in the world for a good few years, and even in spite of having a horrendous time with injuries she must have inspired so many of this current group of players. I truly think she was one of England's greatest ever players, including the men's game, as she was absolutely head and shoulders apart from pretty much everyone she was on the field with. A true natural footballer.

I wouldn't be buying a season ticket or even a single ticket to watch any of the women's teams but it seems that many folk seem to enjoy watching those games and that's fine, each to their own.

What I do worry about is that men's game is becoming less of a contact game than it used to be, and that may just happen to coincide with the recent rise of the Women's game.

Another reason for the rise in the Women's game is that the rich clubs can use their exploits to market the club that the women play for and gain valuable TV exposure for the Brand. Most of the usual suspects at the top of the women's game match those at the front of the Premier League.

Everton Ladies used to be quite good, a good while ago - before the money arrived - and even added silverware to our extremely bare trophy cabinet, but they haven't managed to reach those heady levels in recent years, which has been the story of our club for too long.

I've been following the Women's World Cup, not avidly, but when it happens to be on the telly. The levels of skill and passing are excellent, but it is slower than the men's game and 'keepers can be too small.

But so what? Men's and women's tennis are two different games with the same rules and are both watchable.

And Alessia Russo is some finisher – Everton could do with someone of her ability.

I did an internship with US Soccer during the summer of 1999 when the Women's World Cup was happening in the US. That was the US team of Mia Hamm, Brandi Chastain et al.

I went to Soldier Field to watch the US vs Nigeria and Mia Hamm was exceptional. She scored a goal from just inside the 18-yard box that was simply brilliant after a defence-splitting through-ball.

That US team was light-years ahead of anyone else at that tournament. Great to see the women's game develop so much in so many other countries that we now have World Cup semi-finals without the USA.

Paul - No one made any reference to average attendances - you said that 75,000 people attending a women's football match doesn't happen very often. I said that it also doesn't happen very often in the men's game.

If you do want to talk about average attendances – these are up nearly 200% in one year and this will continue to rise after the World Cup – partly due to the increased number of games played at men's stadiums (Goodison etc). Man Utd and Arsenal's average attendance is now in excess of 10k. Indeed, due to the popularity of the game, more and more games are now being played at men's stadiums as the attendance figures are so encouraging.

Not really sure what your point was Paul – other than trying to justify your own stigma – but I hope that's answered your question.

My own stigma? What a silly comment, Kevin.

For you're information, I do watch women's sports. Tennis and golf as an example. Just because I don't enjoy their football doesn't mean I'm demeaning it.

You know that women's football has arrived. The women commentators this morning were on a par with the EPL pundits. Banal, cliché ridden bollocks.

Switched on to hear someone quoting Kylie Minogue "lyrics". Jesus wept!

You should be so lucky, Alan - Oops sorry!

Alan #31.

So no different to the men's game then. :-)

I have watched some of the games but I too was impressed that the England team could pass to team mates with both long and short passes, to be honest they made our lot look inferior when it comes down to the nitty gritty.

My only grumble, well, two actually: 1. That shrieking woman commentating – she'd smash glasses with the pitch of her voice. 2. The fact that teams don't change shirts at full-time.

Totally agree with the shrieking woman who is doing the commentary. She is awful and if she was my missus and like that at home, it would be divorce almost instantly – providing our relationship lasted long enough to have married her.

Does she ever listen to what she sounds like?

Wow there's some delicate souls on here today

Steve Brown 15

Does the term "will" suggesting the future completely elude you? Get a grip.

Kieran Kinsella 20

Snooker may be on the telly and well received by it's niche market but no one beyond that enclave has a clue when it's on nor who the players are. Very different to the halcyon days of Alex Higgins, Steve Davis, Cliff Thorburn, Dennis Taylor etc when its novelty value was still high.

Women's footy is at its peak right now, particularly in England, and – apart from showpiece games – the average attendances are miniscule.

This from the BBC:

"In the Women's Super League, Europe's only fully professional women's division, Chelsea and Manchester City enjoy the biggest crowds, averaging 1,864 and 1,409 respectively last season.

In France, newly-crowned champions Lyon are a dominant force, and their success makes them the best-supported team in France with an average of 1,428 fans last season, while second-placed Paris St-Germain averaged 1,010.

In Germany, two-time Champions League winners Wolfsburg are the best supported team with 1,689 fans on average last season, but there are also four other teams whose average is more than 1,000."

For anyone who does not enjoy ladies' footy, I suggest that you watch an England game carefully and consider it to say, an Everton performance, and what you might like us – Everton – to do better.

What I see when I watch the Lionesses is quick ball to feet, great running off the ball, close pass control and link-up play, quick on the ball and feet, intelligent passing, corners that nearly always go past the first person, excellent communication, some genuine trickery and neat skills, and I haven't yet started on the defence which is marshalled and positioned ten times better than our current crop of defenders watching that Fulham game and goal.

I do find it sad that, erm, "men" cannot or – more to the point? – will not engage with the ladies' game.

I find the skill set, joy, passion, and commitment utterly exhilarating in this England team and wish that we – Everton – had one-half of what these extremely skillful ladies have in their tanks.

I would have Russo at Everton in a heartbeat, she is a joy to watch with an aptitude, skill-set, and awareness that perhaps one of our current crop of strikers possesses. She would score more goals than Maupay, guaranteed.

Barry 37 - where are you getting your stats from? Is it just for games not played at bigger stadiums?

Average attendances last year were…
1 Arsenal 17,501
2 Manchester United 10,174
3 Manchester City 7,195
4 Chelsea 5,804
5 Liverpool 4,758
6 Aston Villa 4,199
7 Tottenham Hotspur 4,113
8 Brighton & Hove Albion 3,427
9 Everton 3,187
10 Leicester City 2,901
11 Reading 1,935
12 West Ham United 1,524

Obviously boosted by playing in bigger stadiums for a minimum number of matches. (Some clubs have the foresight to go beyond the minimum number of matches.)

Many are looking for alternative venues due to existing venues being too small, for example I think Walton Hall Park only holds about 4,000 and does not exactly have brilliant facilities.

Man City, for example, play their games in a decent venue that is also used by the U21s and is over the road from the Etihad – subsequently more people go to watch them.

Kevin 39

Admittedly the piece is from 2019 nonetheless it supports the view we are seeing a crest of a wave popularity phenomenon almost certainly down to the Euros victory. England aren't going to be winning tournaments forever at which point tv will lose interest and the bubble will very likely burst.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47871431

I really enjoyed today's game, two teams battling like hell for a place in a cup final. There was certainly some skill on display, particularly in the strike for Australia's goal and the midfield play leading to one of England's 2nd-half goals.

I have regularly seen 7- and 8-year-old girls playing for or against my grandsons' teams, or on pitches alongside them, and they have plenty of talent and don't give way in tackles.

The girls tend to move to all-female teams around the age of 9, which is understandable, and from what I see their leagues are thriving.

I watch a quite a bit of women's sport, but there are a few on here who I think are trying to compare apples and oranges.

Paul 38, if Russo was upfront for us, she would barely get a kick. That is the reality of the difference in physicality and pace. A non-league side would comfortably beat England women and Maupay, however useless he is, would be the all time highest goal scorer if he played in their game.

And this one from Dale @23 earlier:

"Are we really going to need a Billie Jean King v Bobby Riggs event for the women's game to get respect?"

Riggs was well into his 50s when he played King, the best woman player at the time. This is no meaningful comparison, he had retired two decades earlier.

The Williams sisters in their prime played a set each against the 300-ranked ATP player Karsten Brach. He wiped the floor with both. Legend has it, with only one serve.

They wanted a re-match against the player a few weeks later. Ironically Brach had slipped down the rankings and was at that point the 400-ranked player. The follow up match never took place.

I'm wondering here if it's a case of 'woke' blokes making these claims, because I'm not convinced women would. It's a different sport. There's a reason why we segregate competition and it's also why transgender involvement is so controversial (unfair).

You can still enjoy women's sport for what it is. I do. Especially women's golf, which is a bit closer to the average men's club game than the freaks on the PGA tour.

I was being a tad tongue-in-cheek Mark (Taylor), though I stand by every word in the other paragraphs.

'Woke blokes" sounds a little incongruous, think about it. I was waiting for someone to bring 'Woke" into the conversation and you didn't disappoint me, Mark.

In 2008, my Army team decided on a "one club" principle. The female team was part of the club, had representatives on the committee, went on joint pre-season training camps & tours and we used to help out with the coaching sessions.

I think the standard of the female game has improved no end in recent years. Initially it was the likes of the US and Norway who seemed to dominate, but England are obviously and most definitely starting to rise.

One of my friend's daughters started at Cambridge United and has been captain of the Tottenham U21s.

I've enjoyed watching the few games I was able to.

My wife commented on the poor standard of women's football when we switched on a game, which I took as a green light to reply with "Yes, when you told me we were watching 22 lesbians rolling around in the mud, I didn't think it'd be this shit"...

It seems that I misjudged the situation, but tbh the doghouse is quite cosy.

In all seriousness, I think the recent hype around the women's game is a good thing. It's great that my daughters can see these players as role models – rather than wanting to dress like Cardi B etc.

Barry @37. Here is a few more statistics you may be unaware of:

"The Matildas' clash with England attracted a national average audience of 7.13 million viewers. Seven West Media says the match was the "most streamed event ever in Australia".

The Matildas' quarterfinal win over France recorded an average audience of 4.17 million. 5 hours ago".

Also in Spain, Barcelona women set all-time attendance record in UWCL win over Wolfsburg. Barcelona broke the attendance record in women's football for the second time in a month as 91,648 supporters watched them beat Wolfsburg 5-1 at Camp Nou in the first leg of their Champions League semi-final, 22 April 2022.

Australia has taken to the women's game, like they will do with any sport – men's or women's – as long as they think they have a chance of winning.

Now they're out, with only the 'losers cup' or bronze medal as some call it, which has got to be the most pointless fixture ever. It will be interesting how many turn up at Brisbane.

6 months is a long time when you're a kid. It will be interesting to see how many young girls sign up next February for the new season.

Of course the politicians were all over it ("Sing when we're winning, we only sing...") after the quater-finals – their grinning scarf-draped grids on the box and in the paper, promising public holidays.

No sign of them this morning in the cold light of defeat.

More grass roots funding would be a better solution win lose or draw.

As for the whole trans people in women's sport thing - No - it's just not fair on the women

My Grandson is 13½ now, 2 years ago, there were 2 girls in his team and they were good. Fast forward to now and the same 2 girls are in the team and it's like playing with 9 men.

Australia lost due to two common mistakes:

1) Fannying about (no pun intended!) in your own box for the 2nd goal;

2) Ball-watching (again, no pun intended!!) for the 3rd.

(Finbar Saunders – Google it – eat your heart out!)

I simply don't have the capacity to watch any more sport than I already do, so the best thing for me about the women's game is that it seems to be getting more women into football, both playing it and watching it.

Once the World Cup is over, I'm guessing most men won't start watching women's football on a regular basis, but hopefully a lot of women will.

One thing I don't understand though is why they don't make the pitches and the goalposts slightly smaller than in the men's game, to allow for the difference in average height.

Michael... you make the point that I have banged on about for a while.

So often in the women's game, a relatively harmless effort on goal simply eludes the reach of the keeper. By and large, women are smaller than men, after all.

Then again, look at the men's game. I stand to be corrected (as usual) but weren't the dimensions for the size of the goal laid down in the 19th century? Few people stood over 5'-9" tall in those bygone days. These days, if a keeper in under 6' 5" you have doubts.

On another matter, I've only one thing to say to Derek (47):
Fnnaarrrr!

The problem I have with the Lionesses – and it is exactly the same with the England men's team – is that people jump on the bandwagon as the tournament progresses. For the diehard fans who have followed the game through all weathers and defeats, good luck to you and I hope you enjoy the tournament.

However, where were these fans when the USA were winning everything? You see countless people in towns and cities across the country getting gripped by football fever. Some go and buy a replica shirt or a tee-shirt from Top Shop. Sweet Caroline starts getting aired every 5 minutes (I despise that song, especially the new addition of "so good, so good, so good") and the cries of it 'coming home' are sung everywhere.

The nightly news starts sending reporters to training sessions and canvassing fans' opinions. As soon as the national team crash out, those new-found football fans revert back to thinking football is a game for saddos and they move on to something else until the next tournament comes around.

For me, there is Everton and that's all I care about. The national team has always been a massive distraction.

Paul 43

The rest of your post suggested the women's game is on a par with the men's game, indeed the Lionesses are a better team than Everton, with the implication a contest might be an even affair. Obviously that is not true. Woke may not be the perfect word to use, but it does seem to me that some, it seems especially males, get hyperbolic. See also the rather silly King/Riggs match being alluded to as proof the games are comparative. They aren't. There are good reasons why we have segregated sport and I support efforts to keep it that way.

However that does not necessarily imply that women's sport should always trail badly in commercial appeal. I mentioned tennis, one of my passions. There is, to be blunt, a bit of rigging of the game to allow for the women's game to enjoy equal prize money at certain events. The fact is, the commercial appeal is still some way behind the men's tour. But one should not miss the point that it is not that far behind and is probably the women's sport franchise that has been most commercially successful. It could in theory even overtake the men's game. It doesn't matter that the 400 ranked man would thrash any top 10 woman, it is a sport that can be enjoyed on its own terms. For a start, you might get to see a few more rallies. There was even a time in the 90's, when the game was so serve volley, that I found myself watching women's tennis more.

For football, I can see the women's game growing, maybe even quite quickly, but it's from a low base. You only need to see the difference in TV rights, with FIFA complaining they were 50 or even 100 times less than the men's world cup. That is the current reality. The way to change that is for people to watch a bit more, as I do, not so much with football (other than euros and WC) but with golf, tennis, cricket and even rugby.

I watched the semi-final yesterday and I'll watch the final on Sunday.
I have watched some dire football over the years (not all EFC related) and can see the effort and commitment they put in, they are playing for each other.
Ok so there's a few mistakes and soft goals, but plenty of athleticism, skill and great finishing ( are you watching Maupay, Docoure etc ? ).
So credit to all the players and the coaches, if you work hard most of the time you get what you deserve in football.
Yes the usual club suspects will dominate as it's a money game now, I just hope they don't mirror the men's games diving and cheating and keep some identity of their own.
Also tone down the screeching punditry and sweet caroline stuff.
If they win it they deserve it, and will be nice to see England win something after so many disappointments.

I watched Everton Women a few times last season, including a 1-1 draw against Liverpool Women at Goodison, which was watched by over 22,000 and had all the intensity and tension of a men's derby.

But last night I went to see South Liverpool win 2-1 at Jericho Lane in front of maybe 250 and the sheer physicality and pace of a men's game, even at level 7 on the pyramid, makes you realise that the two games are just completely different sports and should never be considered on a par with each other.

Each have their own merits and when we realise that, the women's game will grow on its own merits rather than being constantly compared to the men.

Incidentally, they had sin bins at South Liverpool, 10 mins cooling off for dissent. Who knew?

Stephen – I agree, judge women's football on its own merits.

One major positive about it, is that it has yet to pick up all the bad habits of men's football – the diving, the screaming at refs, the lack of sportsmanship, the ridiculous salaries, the nasty chants about your opponents, the horribly pissed up animals masquerading as fans trying to fight at the match etc.

Will these come in time to the women's game? Probably.

Paul 46

Your figures are for one-off showpiece events for the countries and clubs involved – hardly a gauge of popularity on a long-term basis.

A bit like proffering the huge attendances at Six Nations rugby games and falsely concluding rugby is the most popular sport in the UK.

Stephen (53) I agree entirely with your post.

By the way, there was over 28,000 at the women's gerby game at Anfield.

I enjoy watching the girls playing on TV but, to be honest, I have never been to a live women's game even though I live a short bus ride from Goodison and a short walk to Walton Hall Avenue. My loss I suppose but, as you say, Stephen, they are two different games, men's and women's football.

I watched that game and enjoyed it. I was quite surprised how England knocked the ball around and that girl Hemp is a smashing footballer. Best player on the pitch.

Exactly that Steve,

About a year ago, I saw that the Arsenal women lost to an U-15 male youth team.

You can't compare the two.

South Liverpool. A blast from the past. Jericho Lane at Otterspool on open fields? I remember their ground on what is now part of the Liverpool South Parkway station.

Danny, The Jericho Lane ground is quite nice, artificial pitch but well fenced with standing on three sides and a very small seating area behind a goal. Nice clubhouse but no bar. £3 for entry which is great value, loads of parking as well.

God, I remember the old South Liverpool ground, Holly Park. Used to go to all the all-star games there. I remember one in the late '60s when 10,000 people turned up to see a team captained by Ferenc Puskas. My Dad took me because his hero Dave Hickson was playing.

In the spirit of the thread, South Liverpool Ladies play there as well.

Dave, you should go, free entry with your season ticket or membership. It is a very pleasant experience, if you can put up with schoolgirls screaming everytime we win a throw in.

Hi Mark,

I did not have the idea of a game versus us or any other male team in mind. In fact, I think the comparison with the male game that is so elemental to your post and others is utterly misplaced (question: why, why does one have to be better than the other?).

If you read what I say it is about attitude, intent, and approach for the most part. There is nothing in my post to even suggest any of this that you tell me it is doing:

"[that] the women's game is on a par with the men's game, indeed the Lionesses are a better team than Everton, with the implication a contest might be an even affair".

There is not a word on comparison in what I wrote. I did say, however, that I see things in the way England play that would make us - Everton - better. I also said that I found the "skill set, joy, passion, and commitment utterly exhilarating in this England team" and wish that we - Everton - could make me feel even half of this and that we - Everton - could learn things from what I see.

No comparison anywhere. The thing that stands out in this thread is that those who are making comparisons - erm, your excursion into King/Riggs and the Williams' sisters for goodness sake - are the posters who want to downplay the womens' game and make sure that we all know that it is yes "physicially inferior". Let's make sure that masculinity is safe and sound and alive and kicking and in vibrant health! Everton, indeed any male non-league team, would put those uppity women firmly in place.

These women are not left to be judged on their own merits, Mark, posters like you have to make meaningless comparisons and have them as the nub of your post with, needless to say, a string of platitudes about how good "the girls" are doing (pat on female heads).

No one, repeat no one, who said that they enjoyed the games down under made not even a fumbling effort to use them as comparison fodder. Please do not turn my post into a comparison of the male and female game. Your position could be construed as a reflection of anxieties and uncertainties (not necessarily yours, I add) about Everton, for instance, or masculinity.

I mention things that I thought I saw in the Australia game (and others) that I wish we - Everton - did better and that if we did we would do better (comparison?). They included drilling defence, quick ball to feet, link-up play, and corners that nearly always go past the first person. Aspects of the game that you felt needed to be compared to the male game, not as I suggested, things that would make us - Everton - better.

Maybe you could answer these questions: why did you feel a need to turn this thread into comparisons between the male and female game and why do you feel the need to point out at great length that men are "physically" more capable and that Everton would crush any team of women?

Would you have Sarina Wiegman as our - Everton's - coach Mark? I think that I might.

Remember when Perugia tried to sign Swedish female player Victoria Svensson? It was the same time they signed Al-Saadi Muammar Gaddafi whose Dad was a well known Libyan dictator. Stupid publicity stunt that neither she or the Italian FA had any tolerance for.

Back to the point of watching, enjoying, skill, tactics etc since a few mentioned women's tennis. I personally prefer to watch it versus men's. Since the late 90s the men's games are decided on double faults. It's basically hold your serve and ace every one or you double fault a few and lose. The women's has much longer rallies which require different skills. I would suggest some of the women are better at getting around the court and having an array of different hits versus many of the men who never really have to utilize those skills. But clearly each is completely different so there is no point making comparisons as to which is better or worse but you can make comparisons on which is better to watch.

The first women's game I saw was in the mid 1960s, at the Dockers Club, in Liverpool. The game was banned and clubs and officials faced punishment if they helped stage a game. The referee was Tony Kay who was already banned for life, anyway.

I've been watching the Women's WC when I can and some of the games have been quite entertaining. The standard sometimes leaves a bit to be desired but as more girls take up the game and coaching is made available this will surely improve.

Yes, some of the goalkeeping is poor but that, too, is partly due to a lack of coaching. A former England 'keeper was saying on the radio that she received no goalkeeping coaching or advice, at all.

At the WPL level it's very difficult to gauge the real level of interest. Attendances are often very low despite tickets being cheap and, in many cases, free. I've no idea of the admission prices for the WC but the TV coverage will attract sponsorship and finance which will help those coming through.

The women's game is always going to be different; much slower and much less physical. Not better, or worse; just different.

Bill Watson,

Serious question, why was the women's game banned? Was that a government thing? or the FA flexing muscles for some bizarre reason? What was the rationale?

Kieran @64
Perhaps the link below will help to explain the ban?

How The FA banned Womens Football in 1921 and tried to justify it

Paul, @61, I agree with your post, however, I would never, however, have Sarina Weigman as our coach. Simply because, regardless of ability, she wouldn't have a chance. In my view the day of an EPL club having a woman as coach is some distance away.
Strangely, I loved the last women's world cup but watched little of the last men's world and very little of this one. I think it is a growing weariness of professional sport, apart from Everton which is much more than sport to me.

The World Athletics Championships starts on Saturday, will some of you be switching on and off when the women's events are on?

Paul 61

Hi. I think you will find I was responding to posters who tried making this comparison. If you recall, you said this in your post prior to mine:

"I would have Russo at Everton in a heartbeat she would score more goals than Maupay, guaranteed."

What is that if not a comparison, even if you did then subsequently tactically withdraw it?

Before that a post from Dale23:

"Are we really going to need a Billie Jean King v Bobby Riggs event for the women's game to get respect?"

How can it not be a comparison if it refers to a male v female match, and one that is invariably taken entirely out of context. McEnroe got into hot water for pointing out Williams would get hammered by the top men. For what? Pointing out the obvious?

As you say it's silly to conflate the different sports. One can enjoy them on their own merits. I point out elsewhere that I do, especially women's golf. As for the rest of your post, I'm afraid the pseudo pyschology well and truly passes me by and I have no idea if Wiegman would be a good coach in the club game but I know I'd give Southgate a miss.

Andrew, I am in no way sexist. Curmudgeon that I am, I will be switching off when either are on. Oh, for the days of Wilson, Tupper and Pansy Potter.

If you watch a men's football team regularly and then watch the Lioness's in the WC there's going to, naturally IMHO, be a comparison.
It doesn't make you a mysoginist, or otherwise sexist and some peope who come on here to "fly the women's flag" come across as just virtue signalling.
I've watched all our WC games. Most of the football has been brilliant, small passages of it somewhat poor.
I cheered like fuck for all our goals especially Toon's opener.
I don't need to say a men's team of a certain level would batter our women's England team. Why would I, it's obvious.
I'll be watching the final on Sunday and I won't see women I'll see England players and when we win I'll go ballistic.
No need to turn this into a "look at me I'm so woke" thread.
COYL. COYB. UTFT.

It seems that people who enjoy or praise the women's game are accused of only doing so to be part of the 'fashionable' woke thinkers, but those who don't particularly enjoy it, but aren't really arsed about it, belong to the caveman, misogynistic tribe. Culture wars, don't you just love 'em! I remember a time, when you didn't have to belong to a 'tribe' or be the enemy of another 'tribe' in order to give an opinion, but it seems in the internet age, that's no longer the case.

Barry, it's almost like comparing to enjoying the Tennis or Athletics.

Admire the talent but accept the physical differences.

Whoever the 100m female champion of the time was never going to beat Usain Bolt (who could?).

But they are talented players and athletes.

I think you've highlighted the "extremes" there Barry but there are many of us who enjoy watching the England women's team for no other reason than we just actually enjoy it.
Personally I don't give a fuck what people think about me enjoying it. 💙

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/soccer/news/uswnt-wrexham-live-score-updates-highlights-soccer-tournament/g98m9tkvztd2fkqhb6hnpse9#:~:text=Their%20defeat%20at%20the%20hands%20of%20Wrexham%20was,for%20the%20Ryan%20Reynolds%20and%20Rob%20McElhenney-owned%20club.

This may settle a few arguments!!!

Based on the quality, or to be more accurate the complete lack of, that we've all become accustomed to from our team, we shouldn't get too “sniffy” about others, whether male or female. I watched the England game against the Aussies & got behind our team, just as the Aussies got behind theirs, which is as it should be, irrespective of gender and what struck me most about the England performance, was they could teach us a thing or two about game management, coz it was way better than ours & that Lucy Bronze at RB was streets ahead of Patterson in terms of her positional play & completely reliable at all times in doing the right thing at the right time 🙄

Dennis 22, sums up my feelings pretty much.

I watched the semi-final and they play well, for women.
I've no time for any sport now that entails flag waving, we should have progressed passed that, but havn't.
We still belong to tribes the world over, big and small the cause of all conflict.

I'm 67 now. I vaguely remember as a lad in the 60's that there were moves to try move football to accept that women may actually like to “ have a go” themselves. Younger people may read about the many cultural changes that went in the 1960's but it was - in the main - a myth. Sure there were groundbreaking changes in certain scenes but - by the 1970's a lot of things for women had not changed greatly. They were. In many professions doing the same work as men but earnt less. So -spin forward to today- and I'm as pleased as punch of the current support of the “ Lionesses “. ( another media condescending strap line to then). My love of Everton will never change but the pain is because I'm numbed by everything about modern football. So I've watched these Women's games and they remind me of the times I got football. And I look at today's shite and media waxing. I see effort…. I see expression… I see not falling all over the place as if a sniper has hit them… I see a fairness yet dedication and desire… I see no crowding the referee… and on and on and on. What's not to like???? One day- maybe- the world of ladies football will be bought off and commercialised and go down the drain. But until then… it shows something about the game I used to love and I have no qualms about nailing my colours to the mast and saying… Women's World Cup- restored my interest in the game and- Long May You Run

Raymond

"I've no time for any sport now that entails flag waving, we should have progressed passed that, but haven't.

We still belong to tribes the world over, big and small the cause of all conflict."

Doesn't that apply to any team sport with the exception of "franchises" in US sport that move around all the time, teams are based in a city/town/area and the majority of their fans are from said place and identify as such. West Ham fans = Eastenders, Newcastle fans = Geordies and so on. They all wear their tribal colors and are as animated if not more so then fans of national teams. In the Netherlands the national team fans are generally family oriented, the club fans don't support the national team because of their club level "tribalism." Ditto in Scotland with Rangers/Celtic. It seems a bit weird to boycott women's international football on the basis of "tribalism" when you're on an Everton website. Surely, the issue isn't flag waving etc it's how you interpret identifying with your team be it the Welsh women's football team or Galatassary. If you celebrate your team and enjoy meeting other fans and watching the game what's the problem? The problem is when you make racist remarks about Spurs fans or nasty comments about scousers or beat up WHU cause you're from Millwall.

Paul # 38

I enjoy the women's game and have been to a few Everton Women's games.

In an earlier post I said the women's game is different; not bettor and not worse than the men's but different.

Your assertion that; "I would have Russo at Everton in a heartbeat, she is a joy to watch with an aptitude, skill-set, and awareness that perhaps one of our current crop of strikers possesses. She would score more goals than Maupay, guaranteed" is ludicrous.

The reality is that Russo wouldn't get near the ball in the men's PL and Maupay would be sensational in the French women's team.
That's the reality just like it is in athletics, tennis, cricket and boxing etc etc.

I wanted Everton to go for the England women's manager TBH. What I saw was amazing, They basically became better than the USA who were dominant at the time.

Was thinking for Everton to be creative, what's the word, innovative possibly?

Instead of FL, nothing ventured, simply to put us level with big clubs (mas), like spurs, at least relevant again.

Obviously we'll wait until someone else does it, maybe.

Well put Kieran. At least in international football fans have a link to the players in that they're from the same country.

In club football you can have a Manchester United fan from Dublin calling a Liverpool player from Egypt a scouse bastard.

Danny (58), that's got me thinking about the football pitches at. Jericho Lane, Tony, my son, used to play for his school Nugent on those open fields at the bottom of Jericho Lane, however on the opposite side of Jericho Lane not as far down as the open fields his school played two one three games against Bluecoat School in an enclosed field with just one football pitch, I'm wondering if that is the spot where South Liverpool play now.

As for Holly Park where South Liverpool used to play wasn't there a match played between a Nigerian team who played in their bare feet against another team, maybe an all star team which included Dixie Dean, I think it was in the late 1940's. Mind you it could be me just losing the plot!

Hi Mark,

Forgive me but I already said that I was being tongue-in-cheek about Russo/Maupay, in the spirit of the stick that poor old Neal has been getting on here but not thankfully in vile Twitterland (is it Xland now?].

I genuinely don't think that you will find comparisons anywhere else in that first post and I stand by what I said: the comparisons started with posters who wanted to emphasise the superiority of the male game and make sure that we understood that a non-league male team would trounce the Lionesses (Dale, I think, was responding to that, he did not initiate it).

Anyway, let's all think positive thoughts about a win or at least a draw on Sunday.

Hi Paul,

Sure I know you explained that subsequently but I am not a mind reader and your original post did not read like tongue-in-cheek. Dale brought in the tennis analogy, not me, and as a tennis lover, it is utterly a red herring. They were reasonable examples for me to use, on the face of it.

To be clear, and to repeat, I enjoy women's sport and I am pretty sure I watch way more of it than average, and probably more than you. The point where I think we do both agree is that it has to be judged on its own merits not against the men's versions.

There are very few sports where women are the equal of men or ever could be. Non-physical sports like darts or snooker ought to be feasible. Golf actually could be too. Although they don't hit it quite as far, it is not that, bizarrely, which is the weakness in the women's game so much. It's the short game and putting. That would be fixable with more practise.

But even then, it doesn't really matter. Women's tennis could actually end up having a higher commercial profile than the men's game even if they would be thrashed by any top 500 man.

If they were canny, they would promote a kind of big 3 story, which has driven the men's game for close to two decades, but which is now ending. But they put too much effort into 'equality' – so called equal pay-instead of finding ways to overtake the men's game by their own merit.

I will indeed be cheering on the Lionesses on Sunday. It's been a fun tournament even if the match timings are pretty negative for us over here. And despite what I say about where they would fit in with the men's game, which is all pretty factual, it is true there is no little skill.

I noted how very little added time there is (a good measure vs the men's game) and the game has come on a mile in the past decade or two, from when I went to watch Arsenal Ladies at the old Barnet stadium back in the 2000s on a 'What do I do this weekend'.

I'll open up the Live Forum early today in case there's something worth talking about…

Cmon Ingerlund! 10 minutes cmon!

I saw the biggest difference between woman's and men's football at the end of today's World Cup final, tears, I've seen less tears at a dozen funerals than I saw at the end of this game, Spain deserved to win, they were much better than England, brains versus brawn.

Some of the English Ladies(?) lived up to to their name “ Lionesses “ they played like bleedin' animals.

They would have received £210,000 each if they had won, not sure what they get for losing. I wish Iwobi had some of their bottle though!