WHO Poll
Q: 2019/20 With seven games to go will West Ham stay up
a. Our demise was sealed when the idiots on the Board appointed Moyes, we're down
b. Despite the efforts of Moyes and the players, we will stay up by the smallest of margins
c. I'm beyond caring & couldn't give two hoots either way

twoleftfeet 1:12 Wed Mar 6
England Ladies vs Japan
Female commentator, female host, female analysts.


Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

East Auckland Hammer 11:06 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
twoleftfeet 10:42 Thu Mar 7

So how elite do you want your sport to be?

Just the very top tier of all the men's sports, or just the very top tier of some of them?

East Auckland Hammer 11:03 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
Crassus 10:30 Thu Mar 7

How is the SH trying to hijack the 6N?

Yes the NH club scene is a big concern for the SH. It's not the top level players going that is the problem, it's the fringe players. Very rarely does a top drawer All Black leave in his prime, unless it's for a sabbatical, but the fringe players are going regularly.

See, I don't understand how some funds being diverted to the West Ham Ladies side is an issue for you.

I mean, they're not taking the last 20 quid out of YOUR wallet to give them are they?

twoleftfeet 10:42 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
Basically yes.

Why flog a dead horse?

Crassus 10:30 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
East Auckland Hammer 10:13 Thu Mar 7

So if revenue and it's distribution, is of no interest to you blokes in the SH, why are you trying to hijack the 6 Nations gravy train?

And whilst no expert in the general egg chasing, it does appear a common Southern whinge that the magnet of NH salaries draws players to the detriment of the SH game

Now as far as football goes, I take exception that funds are taken from WHUFC and diverted to the birds, if they want a kick about fine, if they want to 'grow' the sport fine, self fund it, but leave the proper game where it is, with it's money

East Auckland Hammer 10:13 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
twoleftfeet 10:10 Thu Mar 7

Does that matter?

If you're giving over half the population something to watch and aspire to?

Should they just shelve all coverage of women's sports altogether because they're not as good as men or don't attract as large an audience?

East Auckland Hammer 10:11 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
I mean, let's be honest, so far you two have used football in Australia and the FA Cup as your examples for pay parity.

I don't know what that prize money is for the FA Cup, but the only clubs it makes a difference to are the lower league ones, and it's generally all about getting a plumb draw away from home against a big team that does that.

As for Australia, I presume Ronald is talking about the senior international sides and not the A League and W League players? Obviously the A/W League players are all on individual contracts with their clubs and not paid out of an overall FFA pool of money so I don't really understand what the issue is.

twoleftfeet 10:10 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
It’s had money chucked at it for years, it’s been advertised heavily and still there are no bums on seats.

Let it go.

It’s a hobby for women no more no less.

East Auckland Hammer 10:06 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
You're missing my point completely.

It doesn't HAVE to be about revenue generated = pay earned.

What about growing the game?

What about it being an investment in the future of the sport?

We all know that women's sport is probably growing overall more than men, so that would be a sensible approach to take wouldn't it.

You guys are the ones turning it into a basic financial equation when it is more than that.

If anything, they should be worrying about how to REDUCE the spending on the men's game rather than worrying about increasing spending on the women's because THAT is the bigger problem with football.

Football, and especially the top level in England isn't a great place to look for comparisons, given the way the game is structured and the obscene amounts of money involved.

But, do you really think that chucking a couple of million more quid at the women's game each season is going to destroy football on the UK?

twoleftfeet 9:58 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
If I employed someone who was bringing in £1m worth of business a year why would I pay them the same as someone bringing in £100k a year?

They both have the same company car, they both have the same opportunities but one is clearly more superior at bringing in income.

Sven Roeder 9:35 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
That's what I am saying
The top performers who bring in the revenue get the benefit
Womens football is growing and maybe in the future there will be sponsors who want to support it to sell their LADY PRODUCTS and fans who want to pay ££££££ to watch it live and on tv.
THEN there can be talk of more money for the players.

Ronald_antly 9:29 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan

It's about the marketability of the product, which is demonstrated by 'bums on seats' and sales of merchandise.
The men's game is in another galaxy compared to the women in that regard.

If, at some point, the women are pulling in the crowds and TV audiences, and shirts bearing the names of the top players are selling like those of Messi, Ronaldo and Neymar, then they deserve to be paid accordingly.

Until such time .......

East Auckland Hammer 9:06 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
This is a completely hypothetical scenario you have invented though Sven.

I'm assuming that you don't know the ins and outs of the NZRFU contracts system so I'll explain it a bit to you.

Basically the top 200 or so, rugby players (men) are paid by the NZRFU. That's the All Blacks, the Super Rugby players below them and the Mitre 10 Cup players below them.

They're all paid a retainer of some description and match fees, expenses, travel etc.

They're not all paid the same, particularly the All Blacks as the top guys all have individual contracts with various clauses etc.

Kieran Read might earn a million bucks, Beauden Barrett might get the same, but they don't ALL get a million dollars.

Now, contrast that with the Black Ferns. Only about 30 women receive any money at all from rugby currently. Paying them the same as the men and that's pretty much adding another Super Rugby side including All Blacks.

Is that sustainable? I don't know. Again, it's a hypothetical scenario so who can say.

Sven Roeder 8:50 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
The rugby union has a certain amount of income and pays out to male and female players.
Its not a bottomless pot of money.
I am guessing the men get the vast majority of that pot because they generate the broadcast , sponsorship and ticket revenue.
If every player (male and female) gets the same there is only one place that comes from.
Unless you want the u21, u19, u17 male and female teams to all earn the same wages as the All Blacks as well.
If not why not?

East Auckland Hammer 8:37 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
So you're assuming that the men's payments would decrease?

How come?

Why would the men be forced to make sacrifices to pay for the female players?

Which other sport does that happen in?

Sven Roeder 8:29 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
And if the All Blacks decided understandably that they didnt like having half their wages given away to a team watched by family and friends and decided to leave for European clubs?

East Auckland Hammer 8:20 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
Wouldn't bother me in the slightest. I don't pay their wages, I don't take part in their negotiations, and don't have any skin in the game whatsoever. They're just sporting teams I watch on the TV and occasionally live.

Sven Roeder 8:16 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
I’m just explaining the business model and the way it works.
Giving away revenue earned by one game to another part is fine as part of development.
That other part wanting an equal share is unrealistic and unfair.
How would you react if the NZ rugby union announced they were splitting their player payments between the All Blacks and the women’s All Black team equally.

East Auckland Hammer 8:09 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
But Sven, why does it matter to YOU where the money comes from?

Does it affect you in any way?

East Auckland Hammer 8:07 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
Ronald_antly 6:25 Thu Mar 7

NZ Football recently agreed to both the men's and womens international sides being treated the same when on international duty. Both sides will now travel business class (previously only the men), both will be paid the same in expenses and both will earn the same from any image rights.

Our multiple world champion women's rugby players are now getting paid too. Nothing like pay parity, but enough to cover them for loss of earnings from work. They're transitioning over into full professionalism.

I think that's fantastic.

Girls now have a very real opportunity to make a career out of sport.

They also have genuine, decent role models to look up to.

It doesn't have to be based purely on the revenue they can generate, sometimes it's about doing the best thing for the sport, the best thing for the participants and the best thing for the future.

Sven Roeder 8:06 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
It’s about prominence given to something that is inferior.
Sport and entertainment are money based businesses. Players get millions in the Premier league because Sky and other pay billions to televise them and fans pay through the nose for tickets.
League 2 players get average wages because none of the above applies.
Women’s football is currently financed by men’s football.
I think it was announced recently that the league in the UK had its first independent sponsor just for the women’s game.
That should be encouraged and once they develop more income streams they can reward the players and reduce their dependence on MEN.

East Auckland Hammer 7:59 Thu Mar 7
Re: England Ladies vs Japan
Very rarely (on WHO anyway) is money mentioned when discussing women's sport coverage.

It's generally some sort of combination of "they're shit", "lesbians", "ugly", "why would anyone watch that rubbish?", "fucking high pitched screeching" etc etc

Why shouldn't the women's FA Cup have the same prize money?

Why does it have to be linked to revenue generated?

Why can't it just happen?

Not like it will make any difference to the FA will it?

Page 1 - Next

Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: