Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Would CAFC Mens 1st team beat all the Women's teams at the World Cup?
Comments
-
Sir Keir Starmer.Covered End said:
It's obvious that men and women are different, no one has suggested that they aren't.soapboxsam said:ValleyGary said:I wish the men’s/women’s comparisons would stop from both sides.
I wish it would stop and then I wouldn't have to keep saying the fucking obvious that men and women are different.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/keir-starmer-says-vast-majority-of-women-dont-have-a-penis-and-need-safe-spaces/0 -
I don’t think it’s “terrible”, I’ve enjoyed what I’ve seen of the knockout stage of this World Cup and the Euros last year got pretty good towards the end. There seems to be a big gulf in quality between the top 8-10 teams and everyone else so the group stage matches were a bit of a slog.bolloxbolder said:Surely a wind up post? Just for clarity Women's football is 8th tier non league terrible.1 -
Covered End said:
It's obvious that men and women are different, no one has suggested that they aren't.soapboxsam said:ValleyGary said:I wish the men’s/women’s comparisons would stop from both sides.
I wish it would stop and then I wouldn't have to keep saying the fucking obvious that men and women are different.
Going on about how men or boys can beat women at football is a ridiculous comparison. The Pope is a Catholic.
Hollie Doyle is in a sport where women can compete on equal terms. Show jumping as well.
0 -
I think any league and national league side would beat them with ease.0
-
It isn't that good.bolloxbolder said:Surely a wind up post? Just for clarity Women's football is 8th tier non league terrible.3 -
So, a much better question would have been "Would CAFC Mens 1st team beat all the Women's teams at the World Cup at golf, archery or horse riding?"sam3110 said:What about in sports where accuracy and skill is more important than speed, power and strength?
Golf, for insurance (no 600 yard par 5s please)
Or archery, or horse riding? More relevant to look at sports that have a more even base point I think.
Irrelevant anyway, yes I'm sure even our youth teams will win against them0 -
Who would win in a fight between flu and heavy cold?0
-
Depends on whether it's on a man or a woman.CAFCTrev said:Who would win in a fight between flu and heavy cold?1 -
Im sure we’d lose to Millwall Lionesses.9
-
What's a "typical male narky foul"? I mean, seriously?KingKinsella said:Well anyone old enough to remember Billie Jean King vs Bobby Riggs? That worked out differently to the way some expected.
I've watched bits and pieces of the Women's World Cup and been impressed by the standard on display- the quality of passing in particular, the organisation
of the teams on the pitch. I've also also enjoyed the lack of the negative tactics/gameship employed by losing teams. Open flowing games free from cynical fouls. Maybe they went on the cutting room floor- I have seen mainly highlights. Sadly James lets the side down with typical male type narky foul, maybe they should have clamped down on her harder than 2 games. Our Men's would be faster and more physical but for entertainment value......I'm finding it hard to say...but I female (International) game has a lot to offer (bottled it-I meant I prefer it)
Yet not one of my sons have even mentioned the competition to me.
I've never been to the CAFC women's game, but maybe that bridge will be crossed soon.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Obviously a wind up article based on a question presented to him in those terms, but only quoted on his reply.clive said:
Sir Keir Starmer.Covered End said:
It's obvious that men and women are different, no one has suggested that they aren't.soapboxsam said:ValleyGary said:I wish the men’s/women’s comparisons would stop from both sides.
I wish it would stop and then I wouldn't have to keep saying the fucking obvious that men and women are different.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/keir-starmer-says-vast-majority-of-women-dont-have-a-penis-and-need-safe-spaces/
If you want to do party politics go to the HOC.3 -
I think the one thing we can say with any certainty is that the Charlton Mens first XI would carry the most injuries.3
-
Yes and we could get them to wash and iron the kit afterwards win/win
( I’m joking before I get lambasted)2 -
Man flu is a bit wimpy whereas Bird flu is very dangerous, a proven killer.superclive98 said:
Depends on whether it's on a man or a woman.CAFCTrev said:Who would win in a fight between flu and heavy cold?0 -
MaaaaaaaaateAndyG said:Yes and we could get them to wash and iron the kit afterwards win/win
( I’m joking before I get lambasted)1 -
A few years ago when Usain Bolt was the fastest(27.33 MPH) man on earth he had a race against a female Cheetah over 200 metres.
All the money went on Charlene the Cheetah who had reached 75 MPH.
No contest you would imagine but unfortunately Charlene ran out of her Lane on the bend and was Disqualified.
3 -
It won’t ever be an issue unless they play against men’s teams, which they won’t. Why would they?fenaddick said:
The height thing is interesting. In every other aspect women's football is improving rapidly but obviously height will always be an issue. The goalkeeping this tournament has been brilliant but obviously that's where the majority of the taller players are I imagine.SouthWest_Addicks said:How would you expect a women’s team to defend any set piece of aerial battle against Miles Leaburn. Every cross/set piece would be an automatic short on target. I don’t watch any women’s football but I guess there aren’t many 6ft 4 centre back playing.
Vive la difference!
And if you just want to compare women’s football with the men’s game then of course the women’s game will lose out. But if you won’t watch the women’s World Cup as a result, then imho you’re missing out. It’s very entertaining.Another sport where it’s pointless to compare the men and women is road (or track) cycling. Laura Trott’s Olympic wins were just as exciting as any of the men’s, possibly more so. The fact that she’s travelling slightly more slowly that the men is irrelevant when you’re watching. It’s all about the personalities and the sporting narrative. And those only come across with exposure; on tv, radio, printed and social media.I watched Eurosport coverage of a biathlon once, not something I’m at all interested in normally. But there was a great back story of one of the competitors having come back from a couple of years out of the sport because of a personal family tragedy, which got me hooked in, especially when they went on to win the race in a very tight finish.The race was followed by the men’s event, but I ended up turning it off because there happened not to be be a compelling story to latch on to, and of course I’d never heard of any of the participants.In contrast, with the women’s football, we’re beginning to get to know some of the players’ back stories, and that makes it so much more watchable and engaging.
The fact they’d all struggle against Miles at corners becomes something you don’t think about after a time.
In Jimmy Seed’s sister’s day (WW1 and just after) the women’s game was just a novelty at first, and if their skills hadn’t improved the large crowds they attracted (40k+ sometimes) would have trailed off. But in the end the press coverage switched from being about the novelty and controversial aspects, to actually being about the game itself and women as footballers, rather than oddities and plucky fund raisers, because the level was improving. And the crowds actually grew until the Spanish flu pandemic kicked in. Minnie played a regional match at St James’ Park in front of 48,000, and shortly after Jimmy played for England against Belgium at Highbury in front of only 14,000 (1921).Had the FA not effectively banned women from playing at football league grounds (a ban which remained in place from 1921 until the 1970s I believe) then their game would probably be at a higher level than it is now, (or an even higher level, some might say).
11:30 ITV Colombia v England4 -
Manic_mania said:Didn't Wrexham play the US earlier this year and won something like 12 - 0
NO they didn't
https://www.indy100.com/sport/us-women-lost-wreham-football-26609914880 -
Good win today. Looking forward to the semi final.1
- Sponsored links:
-
Was funny that he was asked a similar question about six months ago and forgot his GCSE Biology knowledge, so it required clarification, given that he is likely to be the next PM.Wheresmeticket? said:
Obviously a wind up article based on a question presented to him in those terms, but only quoted on his reply.clive said:
Sir Keir Starmer.Covered End said:
It's obvious that men and women are different, no one has suggested that they aren't.soapboxsam said:ValleyGary said:I wish the men’s/women’s comparisons would stop from both sides.
I wish it would stop and then I wouldn't have to keep saying the fucking obvious that men and women are different.
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/keir-starmer-says-vast-majority-of-women-dont-have-a-penis-and-need-safe-spaces/
If you want to do party politics go to the HOC.
Funnily enough, he appeared to have changed his tune when he commented on the appearance of men in women's sporting events recently, having apparently been briefed with the latest Labour 'focus group' info gathered from prospective voters. Funnily enough, they are not of the same mind as Twitter. The fact that this needed to be spelt out to him doesn't fill me with confidence, TBH.1 -
Bet you watched X FactorJamesSeed said:
It won’t ever be an issue unless they play against men’s teams, which they won’t. Why would they?fenaddick said:
The height thing is interesting. In every other aspect women's football is improving rapidly but obviously height will always be an issue. The goalkeeping this tournament has been brilliant but obviously that's where the majority of the taller players are I imagine.SouthWest_Addicks said:How would you expect a women’s team to defend any set piece of aerial battle against Miles Leaburn. Every cross/set piece would be an automatic short on target. I don’t watch any women’s football but I guess there aren’t many 6ft 4 centre back playing.
Vive la difference!
And if you just want to compare women’s football with the men’s game then of course the women’s game will lose out. But if you won’t watch the women’s World Cup as a result, then imho you’re missing out. It’s very entertaining.Another sport where it’s pointless to compare the men and women is road (or track) cycling. Laura Trott’s Olympic wins were just as exciting as any of the men’s, possibly more so. The fact that she’s travelling slightly more slowly that the men is irrelevant when you’re watching. It’s all about the personalities and the sporting narrative. And those only come across with exposure; on tv, radio, printed and social media.I watched Eurosport coverage of a biathlon once, not something I’m at all interested in normally. But there was a great back story of one of the competitors having come back from a couple of years out of the sport because of a personal family tragedy, which got me hooked in, especially when they went on to win the race in a very tight finish.The race was followed by the men’s event, but I ended up turning it off because there happened not to be be a compelling story to latch on to, and of course I’d never heard of any of the participants.In contrast, with the women’s football, we’re beginning to get to know some of the players’ back stories, and that makes it so much more watchable and engaging.
The fact they’d all struggle against Miles at corners becomes something you don’t think about after a time.
In Jimmy Seed’s sister’s day (WW1 and just after) the women’s game was just a novelty at first, and if their skills hadn’t improved the large crowds they attracted (40k+ sometimes) would have trailed off. But in the end the press coverage switched from being about the novelty and controversial aspects, to actually being about the game itself and women as footballers, rather than oddities and plucky fund raisers, because the level was improving. And the crowds actually grew until the Spanish flu pandemic kicked in. Minnie played a regional match at St James’ Park in front of 48,000, and shortly after Jimmy played for England against Belgium at Highbury in front of only 14,000 (1921).Had the FA not effectively banned women from playing at football league grounds (a ban which remained in place from 1921 until the 1970s I believe) then their game would probably be at a higher level than it is now, (or an even higher level, some might say).
11:30 ITV Colombia v England0 -
The Wrexham thing was a 7-a-side tournament with no offsides, throw ins etc.Manic_mania said:Didn't Wrexham play the US earlier this year and won something like 12 - 0
And I think a few years back they played an under 15 boys team and lost 5 -2
Game was also a bit of a mismatch in terms of players as well.
"While the women’s team consisted solely of retired USWNT International players, Wrexham brought along a few club legends, some seasoned veterans, and even a few players from their current roster.""this meant that former USWNT player Lori Lindsey, who retired in 2014, came up against Scott Butler, a fresh-faced 20-year-old who signed for Wrexham just last season."
0 -
That's not to say that Wrexham wouldn't beat the USWNT anyway, as of course they would quite easily, but just adding some context.0
-
Of course the men would win, but the England women’s team would probably put better corners in !!0
-
I’m not sure we would score0
-
Alfie mayAFKABartram said:I’m not sure we would score1 -
Nope we'd struggle to hit the target 🎯0
-
MrOneLung said:Of course the men would win, but the England women’s team would probably put better corners in !!
Andersson the Sweden left back is so accurate with corners from the right. She messed up her first one in the semi final after her masterclass during the Tournament.
With the Swedish girls being a fairly tall side this has helped them reach the semi final where they will play the best passing team team left in Spain.0 -
Not many teams are gonna get a result against England’s women team this season, tough place to go to0
