Jump to content
IGNORED

Do you also support the ladies City team?


reddogkev

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, reddogkev said:

Wow, can't believe how low the average attendance is, it does make you question how on earth it survives. 

I can. It's generally a really poor standard to watch. Excruciating at times afaic., but perhaps I'm a sterner judge than some.

If you took away friends, family, and coach loads of schoolgirls with free (or very cheap) tickets being bussed to matches whether they want to go or not, you wonder how many others are enthused to go and watch?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
28 minutes ago, When the river runs said:

..... a lot of the ladies playing, would have ran rings around most of the posters criticising. 

But I guess most posters are not professional footballers?

From what I have seen it seems more on a level with kids football, they have all the poses and moves, but just lack the strength.

But like others have said the keepers for some reason seem to be light years behind the rest of the squad, some of the mistakes the top level keepers make are shocking

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn’t care less...

as an aside did anyone see Lucy bronze and Toni duggan two of our top lionesses who play for Barcelona and Lyon respectively attempt volleys on soccer am over Xmas?? if you haven’t then watch on youtube, one kicked it out of the park the other fell over before she could even kick the ball.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, reddogkev said:

Agree with all you've said, apart from them not having anything to do with Bristol City FC.  They are the women's version of the same team, so I can't figure out what you mean!

 

1 hour ago, AshtonPark said:

Why do they have nothing to do with Bristol city?

I did say that I keep an eye out for them because they represent us. 

They don’t have any bearing on our first team, or any part of the men’s club. 

Yes, they are under the BS umbrella and I wish them well because of that, but they are nothing to do with the Bristol City Football Club that I support, other that representing our name. 

Their success or failure will have no bearing whatsoever on us as a club, so that’s why I see them as not having anything directly to do with us. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always happy when they do well, but not sure how I feel about funding for women's teams. It seems unreasonable that they might be funded when they aren't generating the support that the men's sport does. The question is whether thats just me being backward or whether there genuinely isn't as big an audience for women's football. Personally I can't see it growing anywhere near the size of the men's team, but I guess it's good to create female role models in sport. Does anyone think women's football attendance will grow much over the next few years (up to the 5,000-10,000 mark) as it gets more exposure?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, When the river runs said:

I follow them,  obviously not as much as the men but the standard is better than you think and a lot of the ladies playing, would have ran rings around most of the posters criticising. 

A lot of these women haven't been academy trained as well, but the girls coming through will have been. So the standard will rise again.

I'm a bit buyiest though

When I did one of my coaching badges one of the students was a Yeovil player. This women ran rings around some of the ex semi pros and pros on the course. 

 

52 minutes ago, phantom said:

But I guess most posters are not professional footballers?

From what I have seen it seems more on a level with kids football, they have all the poses and moves, but just lack the strength.

But like others have said the keepers for some reason seem to be light years behind the rest of the squad, some of the mistakes the top level keepers make are shocking

I would put some of the Bristol City ladies technically easily at Southern league level and some higher. Its insulting to compare their football to kids football. 

In answer to the opening poster. Yes I sort of do. The ladies play at the same venue as Bristol City's academy. I have a family member playing at that level so have got to watch both the academy and ladies play. They can be playing and training at the same time.

29 minutes ago, Williams' Penalty said:

Always happy when they do well, but not sure how I feel about funding for women's teams. It seems unreasonable that they might be funded when they aren't generating the support that the men's sport does. The question is whether thats just me being backward or whether there genuinely isn't as big an audience for women's football. Personally I can't see it growing anywhere near the size of the men's team, but I guess it's good to create female role models in sport. Does anyone think women's football attendance will grow much over the next few years (up to the 5,000-10,000 mark) as it gets more exposure?

 

How much support doe the men's game have at lower levels? Western League games see players being paid and gates being below 100. Melksham have the highest gates at Southern one with 350+. Premier South its 800 at Dorchester and much lower and players at that level can get paid … Well its all sorts hundreds a week depending on who they are and at etc.

Could the women's game surpass and equal that? It already is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, reddogkev said:

Nope I don't go, but would go to see a game if the stadium was a bit closer (no idea where the Stoke Gifford Stadium is, mind you).

Does anyone on here go to see any of their games?

Think all the women's teams in the top flight are full-time.

Yes I go on occasion. They played fantastically well versus Man City earlier in the season. Technically very good but game is slower than men's.

I have enjoyed the games I have seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, phantom said:

But I guess most posters are not professional footballers?

From what I have seen it seems more on a level with kids football, they have all the poses and moves, but just lack the strength.

But like others have said the keepers for some reason seem to be light years behind the rest of the squad, some of the mistakes the top level keepers make are shocking

I would be astonished if City U14's couldn't beat them. There is the well documented instance of the US national team which is I believe considered one of the best being thrashed 5-0 by Dallas boys U15's pre world cup.

My point being I look at the standard, rather than the notion that the club simply must have a professional women's team. I encouraged my daughter to play, and I say fair play to anyone who plays at the highest level, but it is very poor in my view in comparison to available alternatives.

People talk about technical excellence - go watch a City boys Under 10's game and tell me its any worse technically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I've got a daughter I might pay more attention. 

If my girl one day wears the City shirt as a player it would make me immensely proud. 

I want women's football to keep gaining momentum so that our daughters can follow the football dream/City dream too. 

Big up City women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

When I did one of my coaching badges one of the students was a Yeovil player. This women ran rings around some of the ex semi pros and pros on the course. 

 

I would put some of the Bristol City ladies technically easily at Southern league level and some higher. Its insulting to compare their football to kids football. 

In answer to the opening poster. Yes I sort of do. The ladies play at the same venue as Bristol City's academy. I have a family member playing at that level so have got to watch both the academy and ladies play. They can be playing and training at the same time.

How much support doe the men's game have at lower levels? Western League games see players being paid and gates being below 100. Melksham have the highest gates at Southern one with 350+. Premier South its 800 at Dorchester and much lower and players at that level can get paid … Well its all sorts hundreds a week depending on who they are and at etc.

Could the women's game surpass and equal that? It already is. 

Western league average wage is about £50 per game and kick offs are in competition with more senior football. We are talking about professionals here playing with the benefit of massive marketing and no worries about paying the electric bill..

Absolutely daft to even try to compare it, and equally daft to try and tell people how good it is and get annoyed when they beg to differ.

My boy played for years at City Academy and Southern league level and I beg to differ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

I would put some of the Bristol City ladies technically easily at Southern league level and some higher. Its insulting to compare their football to kids football. 

Go along and watch Clevedon U18's against Bristol City tonight, I'd bet every player on show tonight is of a better standard

Of course the game is improving, but is still a long way behind an incomparable male standard

6 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Western league average wage is about £50 per game and kick offs are in competition with more senior football.

My boy played for years at City Academy and Southern league level and I beg to differ.

and some players still pay to play for these teams, the womens game will never be on a par with the mens for attendances etc, but I'm not sure that is to be sniffed at

Is there ANY sport where the female equivalent gets a higher following?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
58 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

How much support doe the men's game have at lower levels? Western League games see players being paid and gates being below 100. Melksham have the highest gates at Southern one with 350+. Premier South its 800 at Dorchester and much lower and players at that level can get paid … Well its all sorts hundreds a week depending on who they are and at etc.

Could the women's game surpass and equal that? It already is. 

You can't compare the top level female sides against tier 7/8 of the mens leagues as a level playing field

I'm guessing support for the lower levels of the ladies sides is next to not existent, I know the two sides in Weston don't get any following of any significant numbers

On the flip side, the female World Cup later this year could do massive things for the female game, new role models for young players and potentially putting players in the shop window for interest to be supported when back at their local clubs

Back to our womens team, may sound daft but where they play it never quite feels like it is a Bristol City side, need to get them over to South Bristol  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Western league average wage is about £50 per game and kick offs are in competition with more senior football. We are talking about professionals here playing with the benefit of massive marketing and no worries about paying the electric bill..

Absolutely daft to even try to compare it, and equally daft to try and tell people how good it is and get annoyed when they beg to differ.

My boy played for years at City Academy and Southern league level and I beg to differ.

No some Western league teams e.g Wellington pay nil and some pay players £150+. The following parts of your post there I do not understand. 

Its cocks out now … And I can beat that but its a bit ner ner ner.

Your earlier point regarding U10's is silly. Technical ability is a reflection of an individuals training. A dedicated ten year old may have created more competency that a dedicated twelve year old or fourteen year old or … The generalised point you were is getting thinner and thinner. Females can put in thousands of focussed hours intense integrated training and be more skilful than male peers doing the same and less work - This ability to learn is the same for both genders, our brains there unlike our physical abilies function the same.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Alan Dicks' Barmy Army said:

 

Is there ANY sport where the female equivalent gets a higher following?

Gymnastics and synchronised swimming.

Little or no difference for equestrian and tennis.

The main reason for the second place generally taken by women's sport is not intrinsic to the sports or to women's technical ability to do it but that a lot more men are prepared to spend money watching sports than are women; and those men will usually choose to watch the men's version.

I can't see why that would ever change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cowshed said:

No some Western league teams e.g Wellington pay nil and some pay players £150+. The following parts of your post there I do not understand. 

Its cocks out now … And I can beat that but its a bit ner ner ner.

Your earlier point regarding U10's is silly. Technical ability is a reflection of an individuals training. A dedicated ten year old may have created more competency that a dedicated twelve year old or fourteen year old or … The generalised point you were is getting thinner and thinner. Females can put in thousands of focussed hours intense integrated training and be more skilful than male peers doing the same and less work - This ability to learn is the same for both genders, our brains there unlike our genetic physics function the same.

I said average Toolstation league wage of £50, and I ain't getting my cock out fella, you started the "I watch both academies" malarky . If you don't understand my post allow me to enlighten you. You were saying that Western league players whilst being paid attract smaller crowds than BCFC ladies so the latter has therefore overtaken the former. That is true in terms of wage bill and reported attendances because those Toolstation/Hellenic clubs don't have billionaire owners with marketing budgets to match, plus they play at the same time as higher level teams. If BCFC women play at 3pm on a Saturday then apologies, my mistake.

I wasn't referring to any under 10 as I suspect you know. I mean a Bristol City academy under 10 who is dedicated and well trained and if they maintained both they would continue to be superior in footballing terms to their female counterrpart. That isn't being in any way demeaning, it is simply a fact, which deters me from watching an inferior product in my opinion, an opinion that appears to be shared with the vast majority of both male and female football fans across the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, phantom said:

You can't compare the top level female sides against tier 7/8 of the mens leagues as a level playing field

I'm guessing support for the lower levels of the ladies sides is next to not existent, I know the two sides in Weston don't get any following of any significant numbers

On the flip side, the female World Cup later this year could do massive things for the female game, new role models for young players and potentially putting players in the shop window for interest to be supported when back at their local clubs

Back to our womens team, may sound daft but where they play it never quite feels like it is a Bristol City side, need to get them over to South Bristol  

City's women players are top level only in name. Its not top level training. City women's staff are part time. Hours coached reflect the teams status. I think its quite fair to make a loose comparison to the Southern league and upwards where players similarly train 2/3 times a week and their abilities. That is women's football in general. 

Some of City's women are highly competent technical football players. That takes attitude and hard work as it does for males. It can be viewed that to get to the levels they do they have had less opportunity often due to the type of mindset that is being displayed on this thread. Well done them.

8 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

I wasn't referring to any under 10 as I suspect you know. I mean a Bristol City academy under 10 who is dedicated and well trained and if they maintained both they would continue to be superior in footballing terms to their female counterrpart. That isn't being in any way demeaning, it is simply a fact, 

You have altered your earlier point regarding technical. Could you explain why a male doing the same amount of training from the same age as a female would be technically superior? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cowshed "I would put some of the Bristol City ladies technically easily at Southern league level and some higher. Its insulting to compare their football to kids football. "

I disagree im afraid Cowshed, last year the Women's football world cup winners (USA) lost to an Under 15's boys team 5-2. They were comfortably outplayed, out maneuvered in each and every way. The standard is very poor compared to the men's, but I do wish them well and hope it encourages more women/girls to play

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

City's women players are top level only in name. Its not top level training. City women's staff are part time. Hours coached reflect the teams status. I think its quite fair to make a loose comparison to the Southern league and upwards where players similarly train 2/3 times a week and their abilities. That is women's football in general. 

Some of City's women are highly competent technical football players. That takes attitude and hard work as it does for males. It can be viewed that to get to the levels they do they have had less opportunity often due to the type of mindset that is being displayed on this thread. Well done them.

You have altered your earlier point regarding technical. Could you explain why a male doing the same amount of training from the same age as a female would be technically superior? 

 

With all due respect, the mindset of some on this thread has absolutely zero affect on the ability of women footballers to get trained at Bristol City or for any number of girls teams to be established.Academy coaches for both boys and girls are still  part timers aren't they?

I don't believe I have altered my position at all about the capability of Academy level Under 10's boys football either incidentally.

The evidence of superiority is when someone tries to compare both games. The speed of execution, the ability to cover ground with the ball at speed the ability to hit a better range of pass or free kick.

Or are we going to put all that down to sheer physical strength ? I look at sports such as tennis, and whilst the mens game is more powerful, the women have exactly the same technical ability to hit the same shots, which is why it is a spectacle worth watching as much as the mens.

You are clearly well informed on the subject so do you maintain that there are 18/19/20 year old female England internationals, all of whom have trained since the year dot, who have the same level of technical ability as their male counterparts who swept all before then at European and world level over the past couple of years ?

If so, I disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
23 minutes ago, RUSSEL85 said:

@Cowshed "I would put some of the Bristol City ladies technically easily at Southern league level and some higher. Its insulting to compare their football to kids football. "

That reply is partly my fault, this was originally in response to a comment I made, which I see now didn't come across correct, when I said "kids" I meant U18's and higher, not younger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

With all due respect, the mindset of some on this thread has absolutely zero affect on the ability of women footballers to get trained at Bristol City or for any number of girls teams to be established. Academy coaches for both boys and girls are still  part timers aren't they?

I don't believe I have altered my position at all about the capability of Academy level Under 10's boys football either incidentally.

The evidence of superiority is when someone tries to compare both games. The speed of execution, the ability to cover ground with the ball at speed the ability to hit a better range of pass or free kick.

Or are we going to put all that down to sheer physical strength ? I look at sports such as tennis, and whilst the mens game is more powerful, the women have exactly the same technical ability to hit the same shots, which is why it is a spectacle worth watching as much as the mens.

You are clearly well informed on the subject so do you maintain that there are 18/19/20 year old female England internationals, all of whom have trained since the year dot, who have the same level of technical ability as their male counterparts who swept all before then at European and world level over the past couple of years ?

If so, I disagree.

With all due respect the mindset of some of this on this thread is prevalent in wider society and this does lead to females having less opportunity to play football and have similar coaching opportunity as males do.  

1 hour ago, Loon plage said:

People talk about technical excellence - go watch a City boys Under 10's game and tell me its any worse technically.

The above was your earlier quote. It would be pretty odd if kids at nine are generally superior to youth and adults who also are being trained to a advanced level. regardless of gender. Kids at that age are still at the foundation stage, still gaining physical literacy, lacking the comprehension abilities of elders and are forming their technical base. A technical  base that increasingly becomes neurological and requires individuals being taken far outside their comfort zone to broaden it. Kids can't and should not be subjected to the same training as youths and adults are. And this includes females. If I took that quote entirely out of context I apologise. 

22 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

The evidence of superiority is when someone tries to compare both games. The speed of execution, the ability to cover ground with the ball at speed the ability to hit a better range of pass or free kick.

Or are we going to put all that down to sheer physical strength ? 

Yes its physical strength. Females can achieve the same target functions and their key performance aims as males but will lack the physical strength .. Mother natures female athletes get broadly beaten by the males even if they have superior technical ability. 

 

29 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

 

You are clearly well informed on the subject so do you maintain that there are 18/19/20 year old female England internationals, all of whom have trained since the year dot, who have the same level of technical ability as their male counterparts who swept all before then at European and world level over the past couple of years ?

 

Not yet. I would not rule it out. Its also subjective what technical ability is. Indie Cowie is a insanely skilled American footballer and freestyler that latter is a technical ability that does not transmit itself wholly to football. 

Is Lucy Bronze better technically than some male pros? Yes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...