Jump to content
IGNORED

England Women, Champions of Europe


phantom

Recommended Posts

Enjoyed the entire tournament, as much as mens, if not more so.

Thought the Lionesses were good value overall showing a range of qualities to achieve their victories. The Final was, perhaps, not as high quality as I had been expecting. The Germans were technically and tactically stronger on the day. However, the will-to-win, togetherness, bravery and sheer belligerence of the England team won the day. Bravo. 
 

Now if the men could instil some of those type-qualities in themselves, if Southgate would encourage them to play more positive, expansive, forward-thinking football we may have a chance in November. If we end up with the usual negative crab-like football, no chance. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RedRock said:

Enjoyed the entire tournament, as much as mens, if not more so.

Thought the Lionesses were good value overall showing a range of qualities to achieve their victories. The Final was, perhaps, not as high quality as I had been expecting. The Germans were technically and tactically stronger on the day. However, the will-to-win, togetherness, bravery and sheer belligerence of the England team won the day. Bravo. 
 

Now if the men could instil some of those type-qualities in themselves, if Southgate would encourage them to play more positive, expansive, forward-thinking football we may have a chance in November. If we end up with the usual negative crab-like football, no chance. 

If only! 
 

Sarina Wiegman is a very impressive manager and I’d love to see her in charge of the Englands mens team but no other woman has managed a professional mens team at any level as far I know so the chances of the FA doing something revolutionary are definitely zero!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I can’t think of any woman managing a professional mens team at any time.

If you have been watching the current tournament, you will no doubt have noticed the rather four looking French Coach, Corinne Diacre.

She was Head Coach of Clermont for several years.

There have been many others, mainly in Europe of course, but there was also a female coach in Scotland whose name I forget - I know you pay no attention to Scottish football, probably European neither, but you are wrong to say there have never been any female coaches of professional men’s teams.

Edited by PHILINFRANCE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

If you have been watching the current tournament, you will no doubt have noticed the rather four looking French Coach, Corinne Diacre.

She was Head Coach of Clermont for several years.

There have been many others, mainly in Europe of course, but there was also a female coach in Scotland whose name I forget - I know you pay no attention to Scottish football, probably European neither, but you are wrong to say there have never been any female coaches of professional men’s teams.

I’m talking female managers of professional mens clubs - not women working as coaches and before anyone points out that managers are also coaches they aren’t the one making the decisions.

Can anyone name a female manager of a professional mens team?…………..:dunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

I really don’t think tonight is the night for this. Can we not just enjoy a wonderful occasion and a fantastic achievement without this constant need to compare it with the men’s game?

Today is a day to celebrate victory for a team that represents our country. End of.

Totally agree . I really don’t get his point . When Laura Trott( Kenny) , Kelly Holmes , Nicola Adams etc etc won all their gold medals , did we question. Their value because they didn’t compete against Chris Hoy , Seb Coe or Flloyd Mayweather ?  Just share the joy and embrace it eh ! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

I really don’t think tonight is the night for this. Can we not just enjoy a wonderful occasion and a fantastic achievement without this constant need to compare it with the men’s game?

Today is a day to celebrate victory for a team that represents our country. End of.

 

Well said. 

To reiterate, not everything needs to be (or can be) compared to men.  Men hold all the furthest, longest, fastest world records, but that's a result of the natural advantages we were born with. Women have still given birth to all of us, and that is never gonna change.

No one can doubt our Lioness's were giving their all out there and from the 75 minutes of the game I saw - which sadly due to work was almost the only time I watched a full half in this tournament - they play a lovely, skillful, high-tempo passing game, which was pleasing to the eye. 

I felt quite emotional when we got the win as did my daughters, one of whom "doesn't like football".

It's a good thing for England, a good thing for football, a good thing for women's football, a good thing for women in sport, and for women in general.

Edited by Red-Robbo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I’m talking female managers of professional mens clubs - not women working as coaches and before anyone points out that managers are also coaches they aren’t the one making the decisions.

Can anyone name a female manager of a professional mens team?…………..:dunno:

Cherie Lunghi in the manageress

Edited by Super
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I’m talking female managers of professional mens clubs - not women working as coaches and before anyone points out that managers are also coaches they aren’t the one making the decisions.

Can anyone name a female manager of a professional mens team?…………..:dunno:

Maybe one day Thomas Tuchel and Antonio Conte can start making decisions. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

To be fair well done, bravo and all that but they haven't 'done something no men's team could do since 66', for men aren't permitted to play in woman's tournaments (at least not yet.)

Admittedly I only watched about 30 mins of the whole tournament, but that was sufficient. By all means celebrate a great achievement for woman's football but in all seriousness answer this: Against which City representative side do you think the Lionesses would remain competitive? I reckon they might give the boys U16s a game but by U19s they'd struggle. U23s they'd be played off the park. And that's City.

From the few bits I did see the Spaniards were technically light years superior to anybody else and attempted to play something resembling adult men's football. England may well be champions of Europe and good on them. But if comparing to men's football, lack of ball control, ball retention and kick and rush, there is no comparison. I trust their success has women and girls rushing to pull on their boots to get involved, for that can only be a good thing  Just spare any conflation with the men's game as the two have little in common. 

 

You’re right , the whole culture of the women’s game is different. However we need to wake up and learn from the women’s game rather than minimalise their achievements! A whole tournament without half the fans trying to kill each other . Very little of the blatant cheating and diving we see in the mens game . A game not yet wrecked by the greed of players , agents and TV companies plus openly gay and straight players in every team and it just doesn’t matter . I think our game needs to learn things from the womens game personally because all that’s good in their version of the game is what’s wrong with ours ! 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Tinmans Love Child said:

You watched 30 minutes of the whole tournament, deduced Spain were the only team close to the mens game, and then posted on here to tell us about it like some kind of footballing oracle.  Embarrassing.

It doesn’t matter whether they are better or worse than any standard of the mens game because it’s not the mens game, not that you would know as by your own admission you only watched 30 minutes of it.  Very poor post.

 

My 'very poor' post simply highlighted the blind adulation, bandwagon jumping  that pervades today, in this case the phrase 'done something no men's team could do since 66'. As I highlighted there is NO comparison, though clearly reading whilst wearing rose-tinted glasses is difficult for some.  For one the 'professional' men's game is required to publish accounts that meet certain criteria. The 'professional' women's game is that in name only. Wholly bankrupt, minimal revenue (why might that be,) and dependant upon funding provided by, er, the men's game.

I posed the rhetorical question if there was a comparison just how comparable are the two, then proffered my own answer? Few were brave enough to suggest an answer knowing they'd be shot down if so doing. That's the nature of debate these days.

I congratulated the woman several times for their achievements and for the impact they'll have on the development of woman's football.

But we'll leave it to the bandwagon jumpers who, if true to their word, will ensure a massive expansion in attendance at woman's football this season. They sure as hell need the money.

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

My 'very poor' post simply highlighted the blind adulation, bandwagon jumping  that pervades today, in this case the phrase 'done something no men's team could do since 66'. As I highlighted there is NO comparison, though clearly reading whilst wearing rose-tinted glasses is difficult for some.  For one the 'professional' men's game is required to publish accounts that meet certain criteria. The 'professional' women's game is that in name only. Wholly bankrupt, minimal revenue (why might that be,) and dependant upon funding provided by, er, the men's game.

I posed the rhetorical question if there was a comparison just how comparable are the two, then proffered my own answer? Few were brave enough to suggest an answer knowing they'd be shot down if so doing. That's the nature of debate these days.

I congratulated the woman several times for their achievements and for the impact they'll have on the development of woman's football.

But we'll leave it to the bandwagon jumpers who, if true to their word, will ensure a massive expansion in attendance at woman's football this season. They sure as hell need the money.

Jersey Shore GIF by Jersey Shore Family Vacation

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

My 'very poor' post simply highlighted the blind adulation, bandwagon jumping  that pervades today, in this case the phrase 'done something no men's team could do since 66'. As I highlighted there is NO comparison, though clearly reading whilst wearing rose-tinted glasses is difficult for some.  For one the 'professional' men's game is required to publish accounts that meet certain criteria. The 'professional' women's game is that in name only. Wholly bankrupt, minimal revenue (why might that be,) and dependant upon funding provided by, er, the men's game.

I posed the rhetorical question if there was a comparison just how comparable are the two, then proffered my own answer? Few were brave enough to suggest an answer knowing they'd be shot down if so doing. That's the nature of debate these days.

I congratulated the woman several times for their achievements and for the impact they'll have on the development of woman's football.

But we'll leave it to the bandwagon jumpers who, if true to their word, will ensure a massive expansion in attendance at woman's football this season. They sure as hell need the money.

This is incorrect. The sponsorship the womens game recieves is greater than the money that is received from the EPL that would never cover the costs of the WSL and its teams.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What an amazing achievement. I've covered women's football off and on for a number of years and the physical, technical and tactical improvement has been quite staggering. The top league going fully professional has made a huge difference.

I love that this team also seem so relatable - a mix of younger players interspersed with older players who, once upon a time, even had to hold down part-time jobs just to sustain their football career.

Personally, I do find this desire to benchmark everything against the men's game - including the media's insistence to trot out the "first since 66" line - only serves to create an even bigger divide and greater resistance.

Just a personal view, but I think the women's team winning their first major trophy is FAR more significant than it being a first major trophy for either gender since 1966. It's a feat worthy of standing on its own as a sign of progress and a moment to inspire a new generation of football fans.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I’m talking female managers of professional mens clubs - not women working as coaches and before anyone points out that managers are also coaches they aren’t the one making the decisions.

Can anyone name a female manager of a professional mens team?…………..:dunno:

Don't misinterpret the job title, she was the manager.

Clermont Foot appointed another female manager, Corrine Diacre in June 2014.

Diacre thus became the first women to manage a men’s team in France, and in any of Europe’s top two divisions when Clermont Foot lost 1-2 to Brest in a Ligue 2 game. Diacre managed Clermont Foot for 3 full seasons from 2014 to 2017, finishing mid-table, with her highest finish coming in 2015/16 where they finished 7th

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gazred said:

Don't misinterpret the job title, she was the manager.

Clermont Foot appointed another female manager, Corrine Diacre in June 2014.

Diacre thus became the first women to manage a men’s team in France, and in any of Europe’s top two divisions when Clermont Foot lost 1-2 to Brest in a Ligue 2 game. Diacre managed Clermont Foot for 3 full seasons from 2014 to 2017, finishing mid-table, with her highest finish coming in 2015/16 where they finished 7th

I take even less interest in French football than the Scottish version of the beautiful game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never ever have I seen a team see a game out more comfortably than England did last night. I winced when they started playing it to the corner at 124 minutes (8 left to play!) but my god did they prove me wrong. Never ever have I seen anything like it. Brilliant. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

What an amazing achievement. I've covered women's football off and on for a number of years and the physical, technical and tactical improvement has been quite staggering. The top league going fully professional has made a huge difference.

I love that this team also seem so relatable - a mix of younger players interspersed with older players who, once upon a time, even had to hold down part-time jobs just to sustain their football career.

Personally, I do find this desire to benchmark everything against the men's game - including the media's insistence to trot out the "first since 66" line - only serves to create an even bigger divide and greater resistance.

Just a personal view, but I think the women's team winning their first major trophy is FAR more significant than it being a first major trophy for either gender since 1966. It's a feat worthy of standing on its own as a sign of progress and a moment to inspire a new generation of football fans.

Absolutely spot on. And I've noticed a lot of the comparing is coming from people who'd seemingly barely watched a game of women's football until a couple of weeks ago and wouldn't have given yesterday's game a second glance if England weren't in it. Though I suppose it's no different to the people who attach themselves to the men's team during major tournaments then go back to not giving a shit when it's over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Robbored said:

I know what feminism is…………..….:cool2:

I don’t need it to be rammed down my throat tho. I have the same views on those who try to do the same with religion.

 

Religion is a belief in the irrational, used to control the feeble minded.

Feminism is plain decency and common sense.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

Absolutely spot on. And I've noticed a lot of the comparing is coming from people who'd seemingly barely watched a game of women's football until a couple of weeks ago and wouldn't have given yesterday's game a second glance if England weren't in it. Though I suppose it's no different to the people who attach themselves to the men's team during major tournaments then go back to not giving a shit when it's over.

But at the same time, the important thing is they are watching. I don't watch a huge amount of women's football, but I was really impressed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

This is incorrect. The sponsorship the womens game recieves is greater than the money that is received from the EPL that would never cover the costs of the WSL and its teams.  

Virtually all women's 'professional' football is funded by parent clubs. At the top end to the tune of many millions of pounds each year. I think it had been reported Chelsea, as WSL champions, to the tune of upward of £200k per week. Sponsorship is presently around £10m a year for the top two tiers, The Premier gave a similar amount from the last TV deal for the overall development of the women's game (all tiers,) not sure if the EPL contributes (other than allowing cross subsidy from men's football.) But if that last measure is all it'll outstrip all other sponsorships by miles.

In City's case and in the last accounts the women's team had debts of around £93k, of which around £22k were EBITDA in year and thereafter consumed within the overall losses. Small change? Oh the 15 employees, all their wages, all their costs and expenses were reported against the overarching account, not the women's team. The woman's game reports it's income but not it's expenses on the pretext the club offsets such losses from FFP/P&S calculations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Virtually all women's 'professional' football is funded by parent clubs. At the top end to the tune of many millions of pounds each year. I think it had been reported Chelsea, as WSL champions, to the tune of upward of £200k per week. Sponsorship is presently around £10m a year for the top two tiers, The Premier gave a similar amount from the last TV deal for the overall development of the women's game (all tiers,) not sure if the EPL contributes (other than allowing cross subsidy from men's football.) But if that last measure is all it'll outstrip all other sponsorships by miles.

In City's case and in the last accounts the women's team had debts of around £93k, of which around £22k were EBITDA in year and thereafter consumed within the overall losses. Small change? Oh the 15 employees, all their wages, all their costs and expenses were reported against the overarching account, not the women's team. The woman's game reports it's income but not it's expenses on the pretext the club offsets such losses from FFP/P&S calculations. 

And are these parent clubs self sustaining and well run monetarily, or do they for a large part also make eye watering losses and are mostly propped up by sugar daddy billionaires?

I'd also argue that something making money or not has almost NO bearing on it's legitimacy or worth.

Who cares if they currently need outside funding, and if the men's game is contributing? Surely the goal is for both to reach an equal footing, so anything which can aid that should be seen as a progressive and good thing rather than a stick to beat them with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

The mens game where most clubs are, er, mostly bankrupt and dependant on funding from billionaire owners?

Indeed. The difference being there are income streams whereby men's professional football could be made to pay it's own way. It isn't (yet) bankrupt and why it may keep trading.

That isn't the case for women's professional football where the rules allow larger clubs to pass costs to related entities but where those without patronage have been known to forfeit cup ties because an unkind draw has made the journey unaffordable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BTRFTG said:

Indeed. The difference being there are income streams whereby men's professional football could be made to pay it's own way. It isn't (yet) bankrupt and why it may keep trading.

That isn't the case for women's professional football where the rules allow larger clubs to pass costs to related entities but where those without patronage have been known to forfeit cup ties because an unkind draw has made the journey unaffordable.

I think it is generally acknowledged that women’s football has required investment, and why this cup run was important. It is hoped that it will drive more fans to the week to week games, more income, more sponsorship, higher TV revenues, that all give it a route forward. We shall see. I don’t also entirely buy the argument that men’s football is sustainable because Club X gets £200m from its owners, but if 0.5% of that goes to their women’s team it means they are not. It is self evidently compared to mens football in its infancy.

I also think it was one of the reasons for the sheer unleashed joy from the England team yesterday after the final whistle. This was their big stage, what gives them the profile, the biggest match of their lives. For a lot of world class men players the International side is important, but not all defining. Their profile, contracts etc come from domestic leagues and things like European competitions. Even for fans, would Man City fans prefer a Champions League win v England winning something? Or us, promotion?

Its interesting to compare the ETs in the final last night and Italy. Against a skilled but clearly tiring opponent last night, we got players forward at a corner. In daring to win they increased the chances also of losing. The manager was not thinking ‘who do I bring on for penalties’ in very similar circumstances, but even with tired legs trying to find a way win it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

And are these parent clubs self sustaining and well run monetarily, or do they for a large part also make eye watering losses and are mostly propped up by sugar daddy billionaires?

I'd also argue that something making money or not has almost NO bearing on it's legitimacy or worth.

Who cares if they currently need outside funding, and if the men's game is contributing? Surely the goal is for both to reach an equal footing, so anything which can aid that should be seen as a progressive and good thing rather than a stick to beat them with.

Self-sustaining? They have to have the potential so to be else immediately must enter administration.

Agreed /, profit and merit have no correlation.

Equal footing? Ah, to the point of my original response, you'll recall, the comparison that the Lionesses had done something no men's team had done since 66. Should they both have the opportunity to provide outlets for both sexes to play? Of course they should. Should success in both be recognised? Again, of course it should. Should the entertainment and skill levels across the sexes be considered equal? Historically the populous would suggest not. Doubtless a few more will have changed their opinion since yesterday, perhaps there will be a boom in attendances across the women's game and good if there is. But for those who demand equality in everything, even where it doesn't exist, there are always those who highlight that folly. Having spent a lifetime watching football, and not the greatest standard either, I've absolutely no interest in watching football of lower standard. Whether that's women, kids, walking or disabled unless one has a personal interest, why bother? England's women won a women tournament. Great. Congratulations. But no need for unfounded extrapolation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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