Dan, I think some sports that we did well in London 2012 that seemed to have been dumped by both the BBC and The government are more deserving (so much for the 'Olympic legacy') of the attention and promotion that seems to have gone into this women's world cup.
Events like swimming, cycling (including BMX), martial arts, boxing, rowing, athletics (the diamond league meetings have been on recently, wouldn't have known if I didn't stumble on it by accident)..all sports that while they aren't as strong/quick as the men, the difference is not as major and therefore keeps its entertainment value more (unlike sports such as football and rugby).
I see what you are saying Gary but they have to strike a balance between 'deserving' and whether or not people would actually watch. I don't believe for a second the World Swimming Championships would pull in anything like half a million viewers on BBC3. BMX would be lucky to get 100k. Who cares if they are the best BMX'ers in the world? Folks in the UK would rather watch football...any football.
You can't deny that Womens Football is growing quickly in popularity. I think the BBC had every right to go bigger on it this time (and remember the majority is tucked away on BBC3 and late night BBC2...its not as though they are cancelling Eastenders and sticking it all over prime time BBC1)
And Womens football also played a big part of London 2012 remember. Over 600,000 people attended the various games.
You are correct...many people will just watch football because it's football and that's an easy way for the BBC to justify its agenda with viewing figures. When its over, the game will still attract less than 1000 people at its top level in this country. Personally, I'm one of the biggest football fans you will ever meet and I really struggle with watching it. I would genuinely rather watch women's swimming or cycling than women's football. Change that to men and obviously it would be no competition.
As I said, horse racing is a hugely popular sport in this country and one that's heavily influenced by females. The BBC just gave that up pretty easily.
But surely you could say exactly the same thing for most of the sports post London Olympics? People were going mad to get tickets for shooting/kayaking/dressage, anything they could lay their hands on and if they couldn't get tickets they were watching on TV even during prime time hours.
How many people have been going to watch this sports since then? I doubt it's significantly more than before.
The BBC has a wide remit as a public service broadcaster. They have to make entertainment for the masses but also more worthy stuff that has a smaller audience and has therefore been difficult for more commercial driven broadcasters to make. Take some of the output on BBC4 for example - there's some great stuff one there but not much of it exactly has the mass appeal of X Factor.
Covering this world cup will be much cheaper than making say a David Attenborough wildlife series, brilliant though they are. I thin most of the presenters/pundits are in a studio in the UK, pictures will be purchased form the host broadcaster, so really all you have to do is fly a couple of presenters and sound engineers etc to Canada and put them up in hotels.
The fact there are other sports struggling for TV coverage isn't a reason not to show this world cup, it's a reason to show more of those sports as well as this world cup.
They're different but increasingly less so, especially in the realm of sports, now that they're not being treated as second-class citizens by the majority of men (with a few lovely exceptions)
Women will play top-level men's sport here in England inside the next decade.
They're different but increasingly less so, especially in the realm of sports, now that they're not being treated as second-class citizens by the majority of men (with a few lovely exceptions)
Women will play top-level men's sport here in England inside the next decade.
Kate Cross the England Bowler and daughter of ex hammer David Cross, Played for Heywood in the Lancs League and took 3 for 19. Should have been 4-19 but her brother Billy dropped a dolly off her bowling.
Football and Tennis,(mixed doubles Ok But singles ?) i can't see it,
Horse Racing must be the nearest to a breakthrough as Show jumping where technique is important, seems a level playing field.
Charlton must have an equality agenda too, what with the womens team.
....and much like your TV licence money being squandered on the Womens World Cup, a chunk of your match ticket money is being thrown at this less entertaining brand of football played by ladies, in Charltons name no less!
They're different but increasingly less so, especially in the realm of sports, now that they're not being treated as second-class citizens by the majority of men (with a few lovely exceptions)
Women will play top-level men's sport here in England inside the next decade.
If a woman footballer plays above Ryman League football within the next 10 years I'll sit next to your girlfriend and let her commentate to me on the whole season of games at the valley.
They're different but increasingly less so, especially in the realm of sports, now that they're not being treated as second-class citizens by the majority of men (with a few lovely exceptions)
Women will play top-level men's sport here in England inside the next decade.
Imagine if they had spent the same amount showing the Kent Metropolitan Hangover Sunday League for a whole season, everyone would be going mental.
The Kent metropolitan hangover whatever league isnt the pinnacle of mens football, therefore it isn't shown. The womens world cup on the other hand, is.
Ergo, its on the telly to represent the highest level of womens football for people to watch.
Its part of the BBCs equality agenda.
So we could have saved ourselves sometime and you could have agreed with me when I said that the only reason the BEEB sound money on it, is for equality reasons. Brilliant.
No, the time would of been saved if we agreed that its perfectly reasonable and valid for the womens world cup to shown on telly, and an equality agenda is a good thing. Our own CEO would probably agree.
Er...but its not and its bloody insulting to women that the only reason its on the BBC is because they are women.
Greenie any chance we can get you to provide commentary on Charlton womens team games? Your insight and deep level of understanding of the world of womens football would make for great listening.
Will anyone be listening anyway???
Id not listen to greenies commentary but in his honour i will post many many times on a thread about it to get my point across on how uninterested I am in his commentary.
Going back to an earlier point in this thread..... spending millions on something (be it a drama, a film, a sport, a contract) guarantees entertainment and quality does it? *ahem* England v Ireland Mens friendly. *ahem* for example. What crystal ball does the bbc or any other broadcaster have that determines what will be a hit or not? Woe betide if they spend your money on a punt! And if it is to satisfy an equality demand who gives a ****. I'd be more concerned about a corporate social responsibility requirement personally as a lover of sports in general male or female.
Decent enough game this. Feels like an FA Cup match with the professional players coming up against a semi-pro side who are cutting their options and closing them down quickly. Worth watching
So equality is fine as long as you limit the amount of equality there is on television? Is that your point?
Isnt that....promoting inequality?
License payers rage about the BBC promoting equality via sport shocker!
No. My point was made in the sentence that you quoted, not how you interpreted it.
It was this, just so you get it, 'equality gone mad'
Lets be honest the only reason the BEEB are showing it is for equality reasons within the greatest sport in the world. What other reason can there be? There are dozens of sports that get very little coverage, British sportsmen/women partake in them who are at the top of their game.....and yet the UKs biggest broadcasting company cover this. Also, as someone once said, all the while men cannot give birth, men and women can never be equal.
Ok so.....
It seems youre arguing that the quality of the football is shit, and the BBC are only showing it because of their equality agenda. Supposedly they are ignoring other sports that have a higher level of quality, but are being ignored. Im guessing you mean handball or hockey or something?
But surely if they showed these others sports as well, you would then argue that this is also pushing an equality agenda? Im not interested in these sports but theyre showing them anyways and wasting my license fee, that bloody equality agenda!
With football being the worlds most popular sport, doesnt it make sense to show this on telly if there are more people who are receptive to the sport, as apposed to showing hockey where the women may be amazing at it, but generally less people are interested in hockey anyways regardless of the gender of the players? Besides, whats actually wrong with an equality agenda? Surely if a society is being progressive and we want equal rights/opportunities for all, isnt it good to push an equality agenda? Pushing an equality agenda helped combat racism and sexism.
Do you have an issue with the Charlton OWS posting stories about our womens team?
How is being able to give birth a measure of gender equality, like Leuth said what if youre infertile or something. Perhaps its a measure of equality in the sense that men cant give birth so they are unequal in that respect? But anyways, what does that have to do with womens football TV coverage???
It just says a lot for the BBC now, that they place agenda's like equality, ahead of actual entertainment.
So you think being entertained is more important then promoting equality?
When i watch TV yes!!!!!!!!!!
So a young girl seeing womens football on TV for the first time, and perhaps realizing for the first time ever that football isnt a sport exclusively played by men, and perhaps she could aspire to play in the womens world cup one day is unimportant if it gets in the way of a cracking episode of Eastenders....
Television is for entertainment!
If a girl wants to get into football, there are plenty of clubs that advertise on social media, in schools etc. If a girl thinks that football is exclusively for men then id be more concerned by what their PE Teacher and parents are telling them, not what they are or aren't watching on TV.
Do you say the same for other sports, both female and male, that don't attract the coverage this tournament has? 'How will my son/daughter know if they could become the next Luol Deng when the BBC doesn't show any basketball!!!'
It could be because basketball isnt even in the Top 10 most popular sports in the uk bbc.co.uk/sport/0/22806853
Football on other is, so its it that much of a stretch for them to show women playing it?
Could it be the massive fee the NBA would demand to show NBA on free to air TV, a fee so big even Sky gave up showing it??
Hey they could show the BBL I guess? But the quality of that league is far below that of the NBA so it couldnt be classed as entertainment then, and you wouldnt want that right?
And therefore once again it comes down to the BBC's agenda rather than actual entertainment, which was the original point i made, and why i understand why some people have got the hump.
The average attendance of a women's Premier League game last season. 728. Thats popularity for you!
The second point....you've just answered the question for me!
The BBC is a left wing organisation with its own agendas despite having a charter to be impartial.
None of that makes it wrong to show ladies football though.
World Cup attract more interest than league games in the mens game too incidentally. The casual fan will take an interest.
It will also be interesting to see whether that average attendance figure of 728 you quote is higher next season following TV exposure on terrestial channels which the majority can actually access.
They're different but increasingly less so, especially in the realm of sports, now that they're not being treated as second-class citizens by the majority of men (with a few lovely exceptions)
Women will play top-level men's sport here in England inside the next decade.
Kate Cross the England Bowler and daughter of ex hammer David Cross, Played for Heywood in the Lancs League and took 3 for 19. Should have been 4-19 but her brother Billy dropped a dolly off her bowling.
Football and Tennis,(mixed doubles Ok But singles ?) i can't see it,
Horse Racing must be the nearest to a breakthrough as Show jumping where technique is important, seems a level playing field.
Hayley Turner and others win their share of races against the men on the flat.
Regardless of the standard of football the games feel very flat. Watching the Germany v Norway game i can hear all the players and absolutely nothing from the crowd.
Comments
How many people have been going to watch this sports since then? I doubt it's significantly more than before.
The BBC has a wide remit as a public service broadcaster. They have to make entertainment for the masses but also more worthy stuff that has a smaller audience and has therefore been difficult for more commercial driven broadcasters to make. Take some of the output on BBC4 for example - there's some great stuff one there but not much of it exactly has the mass appeal of X Factor.
Covering this world cup will be much cheaper than making say a David Attenborough wildlife series, brilliant though they are. I thin most of the presenters/pundits are in a studio in the UK, pictures will be purchased form the host broadcaster, so really all you have to do is fly a couple of presenters and sound engineers etc to Canada and put them up in hotels.
The fact there are other sports struggling for TV coverage isn't a reason not to show this world cup, it's a reason to show more of those sports as well as this world cup.
Germany V Norway.
A higher standard ladies game.
Serena Williams would lose to the 100th Rated Men's player.
Breaking news..... Men and Women are different.
Try watching the Conference and Scottish football on TV when your a neutral.
exciting it's not.
I think i get it that some of you don't like watching women play Football.
Women will play top-level men's sport here in England inside the next decade.
Played for Heywood in the Lancs League and took 3 for 19.
Should have been 4-19 but her brother Billy dropped a dolly off her bowling.
Football and Tennis,(mixed doubles Ok But singles ?) i can't see it,
Horse Racing must be the nearest to a breakthrough as Show jumping where technique is important, seems a level playing field.
....and much like your TV licence money being squandered on the Womens World Cup, a chunk of your match ticket money is being thrown at this less entertaining brand of football played by ladies, in Charltons name no less!
Germany already tucking into Norway joyfully. They're going to win this thing, aren't they?
Going back to an earlier point in this thread..... spending millions on something (be it a drama, a film, a sport, a contract) guarantees entertainment and quality does it? *ahem* England v Ireland Mens friendly. *ahem* for example. What crystal ball does the bbc or any other broadcaster have that determines what will be a hit or not? Woe betide if they spend your money on a punt! And if it is to satisfy an equality demand who gives a ****. I'd be more concerned about a corporate social responsibility requirement personally as a lover of sports in general male or female.
;-)
Loved all the games of women's football I went to during the Olympics.
None of that makes it wrong to show ladies football though.
World Cup attract more interest than league games in the mens game too incidentally. The casual fan will take an interest.
It will also be interesting to see whether that average attendance figure of 728 you quote is higher next season following TV exposure on terrestial channels which the majority can actually access.
Come on Norway!
Like any mans game there are some poor moments but some moments of magic
I'd be interested to hear more of the female viewpoint.