|
|
Post by Dane B on Feb 18, 2020 11:14:14 GMT
Just looked at BBC Sport online.
Main Headline.
Breaking News....
Everton striker Kelly named in England squad for SheBelieves Cup.
Who gives a fuck? I've nothing against women trying to play a man's game, but it's hardly breaking news that some dizzy bint from Everton is in the England squad.
Is it just me, or does anyone actually give a toss about women's football?
|
|
|
|
BBC Sport
Feb 18, 2020 12:01:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by savo on Feb 18, 2020 12:01:24 GMT
BBC are quite cringe worthy in their attempts to force women's sport down our throats in the name of 'inclusion'. Sky do it a bit too with their insistence on female pundits
|
|
|
|
Post by charliecheswick on Feb 18, 2020 13:06:06 GMT
I tried watching women's football and I think if they made the goals and pitches slightly smaller it could be pretty good instead of a bit shit. Unless those things happen I'm not checking back in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Feb 18, 2020 21:35:57 GMT
Agree about the goals but the rest of this thread just smacks of sexism. The bbc often has headlines about all kinds of relative minority sports and I never see anyone mention it yet women's football regularly attracts negatives comments  And complaining about women on tv coverage is mental when the standard of male pundits is so dismal. I saw BT Sports for the first time tonight and alongside Gary Lineker, who is apparently seeking additional work to supplement his obscene BBC salary, there was that dope Rio Ferdinand and football's most boring man (and there's a contest with severe competition) Michael Owen. There must be women working backstage who'd do a better job. |
|
|
|
Post by corncobguy on Feb 19, 2020 17:28:24 GMT
I've become more accepting of woman's football over time, purely because it doesn't hurt anyone, and I actually think some of the female pundits have been a breathe of fresh air.
My bugbear is that i wish it was easier to distinguish between the two on the BBC sport website. There should be separate sections for each sport.
Other than that, the site tries to do too much. Theres a lot of inane fat to trim, hopefully addressed with the scrapping of the TV license
|
|
|
|
BBC Sport
Feb 20, 2020 0:28:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by savo on Feb 20, 2020 0:28:24 GMT
Agree about the goals but the rest of this thread just smacks of sexism. The bbc often has headlines about all kinds of relative minority sports and I never see anyone mention it yet women's football regularly attracts negatives comments And complaining about women on tv coverage is mental when the standard of male pundits is so dismal. I saw BT Sports for the first time tonight and alongside Gary Lineker, who is apparently seeking additional work to supplement his obscene BBC salary, there was that dope Rio Ferdinand and football's most boring man (and there's a contest with severe competition) Michael Owen. There must be women working backstage who'd do a better job. The standard of the male punditry, particularly on BT Sport is awful I agree but at least those involved have played at the highest level. Seeing Alex Scott saying De Bruyne or someone should've squared it instead of shooting isn't something I can take seriously. Just as I wouldn't if Robbie Savage or Clinton Morrison was having a pop. I could care less about watching women's sport to be honest. In every way it's inferior to the men's version so to watch it on telly just leaves me with a complete lack of excitement and that's probably wrong in today's society to say but fuck it. I'm fairly sure I'm not alone in the country in thinking it so that's why the BBC Sport website should reflect it's popularity. Tonight is a bad example to look as there's been premier league and champions league games involving an English club but normally you look on there and it has a weirdly high number of articles on the women's game. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Feb 20, 2020 5:05:38 GMT
Fair enough but I don't think the implication from Scott or Morrison is 'I'm as good as De Bruyne, so I’m giving him some advice', although Savage probably does regard himself as on the similar level. If the BBC replaced their main man to talk films Mark Kermode with say Guy Ritchie, would he be better as he'd worked at the highest level? (He definitely wouldn't).
I just don't see talking about football as having anything to do with their playing ability. I just want someone reasonably knowledgeable who can talk with a degree of enthusiasm and eloquence, maybe even come up with an original thought or make a joke? I’d actually prefer it if they abandoned the policy of having former players being involved altogether.
|
|
|
|
BBC Sport
Feb 23, 2020 7:44:54 GMT
via mobile
Post by mrsmith on Feb 23, 2020 7:44:54 GMT
I am not interested in women's football and have no objection with it receiving coverage. What pisses me off is how it is not effectively filtered from the men's football and serves as click-bait. It's also annoying as fuck that women's football gets a disproportionate coverage (relative to supporters) than the lower leagues in the mens game.
|
|
|
|
BBC Sport
Feb 24, 2020 13:32:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by corncobguy on Feb 24, 2020 13:32:56 GMT
BBC sports coverage of the women's cricket World Cup is absurd. Where has this interest been for the men's game over the past 15 years 😁
On Saturday West Indies beating Thailand was getting more headlines than the 6 Nations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Mar 1, 2020 8:32:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by nemesiz on Mar 2, 2020 7:36:09 GMT
Agree about the goals but the rest of this thread just smacks of sexism. The bbc often has headlines about all kinds of relative minority sports and I never see anyone mention it yet women's football regularly attracts negatives comments And complaining about women on tv coverage is mental when the standard of male pundits is so dismal. I saw BT Sports for the first time tonight and alongside Gary Lineker, who is apparently seeking additional work to supplement his obscene BBC salary, there was that dope Rio Ferdinand and football's most boring man (and there's a contest with severe competition) Michael Owen. There must be women working backstage who'd do a better job. Sexism? Not really the standard of Professional women's International football is equivalent to top non-league football. Why do you think the National US Women's Football team was beaten by an U-16 Men's Side? If BBC televised Non-League, grass roots football then it would be understandable to promote Women's Football to the same degree. Unfortunately what we're seeing is that BBC cannot afford or desire to promote any sport as emphasized by non-renewal of the F1 contract, and now British Athletics unless it is cheap or encouragement of Women's sport in general. This smacks of BBC's Cronyism agenda, and equity. In a few years though when Women's football develops, the standard and professionalism will improve drastically with more young girls take up the sport, only then should media avenues promote the sport. The question is would Women's Football develop further without this incentive or promotion? Concerning Women pundits, cricket has emphasized that their standard of knowledge is excellent and their oration and presenting skills are on-par with other male professional colleagues. Unfortunately in general football BBC Male and Female Presenters chosen for match presentation are severely limited by their insistence of choosing ex-Internationals, whinny Liverpudlians / Scousers, Glaswegian's or a Foreign Manager to disguise their incompetence, and lack of knowledge   . The annoyance is the quota or equality system of insisting that minority presenters who lack basic knowledge, presentation, elocution and pronunciation skills to put their valid viewpoints across. Yes it sounds harsh, but 'YOU KNOW' doesn't cut it when discussing the particularities of an off-side or a foul. Of course this is definitely changing but are they choosing the wrong candidates? |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Mar 2, 2020 9:24:25 GMT
Sexism? Not really the standard of Professional women's International football is equivalent to top non-league football. Why do you think the National US Women's Football team was beaten by an U-16 Men's Side? If BBC televised Non-League, grass roots football then it would be understandable to promote Women's Football to the same degree. Unfortunately what we're seeing is that BBC cannot afford or desire to promote any sport as emphasized by non-renewal of the F1 contract, and now British Athletics unless it is cheap or encouragement of Women's sport in general. This smacks of BBC's Cronyism agenda, and equity. In a few years though when Women's football develops, the standard and professionalism will improve drastically with more young girls take up the sport, only then should media avenues promote the sport. The question is would Women's Football develop further without this incentive or promotion? I imagine they lost to the U16 men’s team because they were men, and therefore much stronger and faster. I assume the best U16 male sprinters would beat the top women, and the best U16 male tennis players would beat the top women, and the same for rugby, and for boxing, and for everything. Not really the point though is it, because women will compete against other women. I never see anyone complain about women's tennis or athletics or whatever getting media coverage yet the tiniest bit of coverage for football and always some bloke pops up moaning about it. And in this case it's DaneB I don't think the comparison with non-league football makes sense. To be honest I suspect the top non-league sides would beat the best women's teams quite comfortably but it's not really about the standard. I've seen non-league men's football on tv before and nobody watched whereas England in the women's world cup got 12 million viewers. Just among women I know there was a real interest in football during the women's World Cup whereas I don't believe there are any men out there who ignore all the current football coverage just waiting for the chance to one day see Bedworth United taking on Nantwich Town. I agree women's football will improve considerably over the coming years, due largely to the increased media coverage. Would women's Football develop further without this incentive or promotion? Almost certainly not, and therefore I'm pleased it's getting it. |
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Mar 3, 2020 8:08:33 GMT
Some time in the early 90s when I was still at school and Channel Four used to show women's football we were having lunch and the topic of the women's football coverage came up. Someone commented that they really liked it as you could 'watch football and look at tits at the same time'. The phrase 'all those tit bouncing up and down' was used, which developed into a sort of song, which he enthusiastically developed and several more kids then took up.
After about a minute there were six or seven kids singing 'All those tits bouncing up and down' while bouncing up and down in their seats. At this point the house master* arrived accompanied by who I assume were the parents of a potential new pupil he was showing around the school. He was really quite annoyed.
Not really anything to do with anything but I thought I'd post something.
*It's been brought to my attention that the term 'house master' could give give the impression I was at some posh private school. I wasn't. In fact it was so non-posh that this incident took place in the sixth form block even though we were about 14 because we'd been moved in there as our actual house had been burned down in an arson related incident.
|
|
. The annoyance is the quota or equality system of insisting that minority presenters who lack basic knowledge, presentation, elocution and pronunciation skills to put their valid viewpoints across. Yes it sounds harsh, but 'YOU KNOW' doesn't cut it when discussing the particularities of an off-side or a foul. Of course this is definitely changing but are they choosing the wrong candidates?