As snobbish as calling Stoke players orcs. It's not exactly polite but then football discussion shouldn't have to be.

What have I just read 😆

Of course its football, much like kids play football down the street in the park.

The biggest issue in my opinion is that there isn't a serious women's league in the world. So in between world cups these players are spread around the world plying their trade in essentially amateur leagues. None of the teams look like they have played together routinely, and it hurts the game as everything is so forced.

I'm also at loss as to why there aren't any freak athletes in the mold of Theo out there. Have yet to see any next level speed (for women) that lets them separate themselves from defenders. They all look the same 5'8 almost stocky player.

Probably because anyone who is truly rapid would just go into athletics, they'd earn more money (I'd imagine).

jones wrote:

As snobbish as calling Stoke players orcs. It's not exactly polite but then football discussion shouldn't have to be.

You've pretty much dismissed the whole women's game as being "barely football".
That's not footy banter, it's not your regular feud driven insult, it's not the same as picking on a few Stoke players, particularly given our history with Stoke.

Nothing to do with our history with Stoke, I and many others say the same about Sunderland Burnley and the likes.

Think you're trying to find an angle here when there is none. I'm not one for comments like "they aren't women", I said the quality even at the highest level is shocking at times, hence "barely football".

I'm not trying to find an angle.
As I've said twice before, referring to the women's game as "barely football" is an insult.
For me it's an insult that's not on the same level as the insults we cast around against individual players and rival teams.

It always amazes me how dudes seem to glorify other dudes who devote their lives to supporting two-bob local teams who'll never be good enough to even qualify for league football, and yet they somehow reserve the right to categorically reject and belittle female footballers.

Norway is a piece of shit country in football terms when they line up next to Brazil or Germany. It's barely schoolyard level compared to the European powerhouses. I'm pretty sure people over there would still argue that they don't "barely play football", and that it still matters to them. Just like Dagenham & Redbridge matters every bit as much to their supporters as Arsenal does to us.

If football was only about top quality then nothing outside the two Spanish giants and the 3 major imperialist nations would be relevant.

Sweden is arguably one of the most advanced countries in the world when it comes to equality between men and women. Despite that, girls in their teens have nowhere near the same resources available to them regarding training, money, facilities and good, experienced coaches when compared to boys the same age. As they grow older, the differences in resources grow exponentially. Even at top level most women footballers are, at best, semi professionals.

I think it is just silly to compare men and women in sports. Top level women teams play 15-17 year old boys because it is better competition for them than to play lower league women's sides, and that's it. No one in their right mind watches an Olympic women's 100 meter final and goes "yeah, but there are thousands of men who would beat them all". No one watches a tennis game, a basketball game, alpine skiing and another thousand sports with that mindset either. To say 'it's barely a sport' is extremely insulting and derogatory.

On a different note, someone in Camp Sweden needs to get fired. Apparently, someone came up with the slogan 'Clap for Sweden' for this tournament. Lots of North Americans find it very amusing... 🙂

Klaus wrote:

It always amazes me how dudes seem to glorify other dudes who devote their lives to supporting two-bob local teams who'll never be good enough to even qualify for league football, and yet they somehow reserve the right to categorically reject and belittle female footballers.

Norway is a piece of shit country in football terms when they line up next to Brazil or Germany. It's barely schoolyard level compared to the European powerhouses. I'm pretty sure people over there would still argue that they don't "barely play football", and that it still matters to them. Just like Dagenham & Redbridge matters every bit as much to their supporters as Arsenal does to us.

If football was only about top quality then nothing outside the two Spanish giants and the 3 major imperialist nations would be relevant.

Alright steady on Klaus, the last time we faced Brazil in the World Cup we gave them a right bollocking.

Rucks wrote:

Sweden is arguably one of the most advanced countries in the world when it comes to equality between men and women. Despite that, girls in their teens have nowhere near the same resources available to them regarding training, money, facilities and good, experienced coaches when compared to boys the same age. As they grow older, the differences in resources grow exponentially. Even at top level most women footballers are, at best, semi professionals.

I think it is just silly to compare men and women in sports. Top level women teams play 15-17 year old boys because it is better competition for them than to play lower league women's sides, and that's it. No one in their right mind watches an Olympic women's 100 meter final and goes "yeah, but there are thousands of men who would beat them all". No one watches a tennis game, a basketball game, alpine skiing and another thousand sports with that mindset either. To say 'it's barely a sport' is extremely insulting and derogatory.

Good thing then nobody said it. Way to go off on a tangent.

Rucks wrote:

Sweden is arguably one of the most advanced countries in the world when it comes to equality between men and women. Despite that, girls in their teens have nowhere near the same resources available to them regarding training, money, facilities and good, experienced coaches when compared to boys the same age. As they grow older, the differences in resources grow exponentially. Even at top level most women footballers are, at best, semi professionals.

I think it is just silly to compare men and women in sports. Top level women teams play 15-17 year old boys because it is better competition for them than to play lower league women's sides, and that's it. No one in their right mind watches an Olympic women's 100 meter final and goes "yeah, but there are thousands of men who would beat them all". No one watches a tennis game, a basketball game, alpine skiing and another thousand sports with that mindset either. To say 'it's barely a sport' is extremely insulting and derogatory.

Exactly. My daughter has played at a high level in Australia and there are no way near the resources or supports in place in comparison to what the boys get. 

I also don't get the need to compare men's and women's football, nor the analogy with Cattermole/Stoke. The women's game is of course different to men's, and in some ways I find it more enjoyable  (less theatrics and carry on for instance...interestingly!). Cattermole/Stoke get stick because a) it's banter; and b) they play at the highest level/same level as our team so the comparisons are valid (but obviously somewhat biased). 
Don't see why women's football can't just be enjoyed without the need for such meaningless comparisons.

And go Matildas!

jones wrote:
Rucks wrote:

Sweden is arguably one of the most advanced countries in the world when it comes to equality between men and women. Despite that, girls in their teens have nowhere near the same resources available to them regarding training, money, facilities and good, experienced coaches when compared to boys the same age. As they grow older, the differences in resources grow exponentially. Even at top level most women footballers are, at best, semi professionals.

I think it is just silly to compare men and women in sports. Top level women teams play 15-17 year old boys because it is better competition for them than to play lower league women's sides, and that's it. No one in their right mind watches an Olympic women's 100 meter final and goes "yeah, but there are thousands of men who would beat them all". No one watches a tennis game, a basketball game, alpine skiing and another thousand sports with that mindset either. To say 'it's barely a sport' is extremely insulting and derogatory.

Good thing then nobody said it. Way to go off on a tangent.

No but it was pretty clearly inferred in Kel's post that sparked the discussion. You don't have to scratch too far below the surface of such comments to unearth the latent sexism. 

"It's not women."

Gotta love Kel.

Or not.

Kel trolled you all in one post. 😆

Personally I only see a problem with half Kel's post.
If you asked me to watch the Scottish Premier League or the Kenayn Premier League, I might turn my nose up at it and say "it's not football".
The second part of Kel's statement though... only he can explain