Manchester United refuse to launch female team

The trouble with moral arguments is that there's always a greater need or a greater justice to appeal to. There's no chance of us resolving the, "why are footballers paid more in a week than some people earn in a year, or a lifetime." There's no way I can justify £1000s being spent on season tickets and TV contracts, when I know that could be saving kids eyesight or providing clean water.

There's no moral high ground in football (at least not in watching it) but I can look at the local equation. I, as a United fan, wanted to hear United's name when they read out the England women's team names. I, as a United fan, am more likely to watch United women Vs City (or whoever) women than another women's game.

Promoting women's pro/semi-pro sport encourages more girls to get off their backsides and participate. It gives them something to aspire to as teenagers. Crucially, it might even encourage some of them to continue enjoying sport in adult life. Us fat, lazy, rich Europeans subscribe to health services that are struggling through a crisis of obesity and diabetes. Anything that makes people enjoy running around is to be welcomed.

Why United? Why not? The PL clubs are uniquely placed to support women's League teams. They've got the training facilities, the expertise, the logistics support and the PR and marketing know-how. The costs involved are minimal compared to their overall budgets and the impact of their names is huge.

Of course, United don't have to do it. But then they had a women's team once, and they got rid of it, and they didn't have to do that either. At some point, I believe that the net benefit in terms of PR, good will and marketing will make the commercial decision for United easy. Meanwhile, if the press want to add to the PR pressure to accelerate the process then I welcome it, it's one of the less harmful examples of the press abusing its power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveJ
jojojo said:
The trouble with moral arguments is that there's always a greater need or a greater justice to appeal to. There's no chance of us resolving the, "why are footballers paid more in a week than some people earn in a year, or a lifetime." There's no way I can justify £1000s being spent on season tickets and TV contracts, when I know that could be saving kids eyesight or providing clean water.

There's no moral high ground in football (at least not in watching it) but I can look at the local equation. I, as a United fan, wanted to hear United's name when they read out the England women's team names. I, as a United fan, am more likely to watch United women Vs City (or whoever) women than another women's game.

Promoting women's pro/semi-pro sport encourages more girls to get off their backsides and participate. It gives them something to aspire to as teenagers. Crucially, it might even encourage some of them to continue enjoying sport in adult life. Us fat, lazy, rich Europeans subscribe to health services that are struggling through a crisis of obesity and diabetes. Anything that makes people enjoy running around is to be welcomed.

Why United? Why not? The PL clubs are uniquely placed to support women's League teams. They've got the training facilities, the expertise, the logistics support and the PR and marketing know-how. The costs involved are minimal compared to their overall budgets and the impact of their names is huge.

Of course, United don't have to do it. But then they had a women's team once, and they got rid of it, and they didn't have to do that either. At some point, I believe that the net benefit in terms of PR, good will and marketing will make the commercial decision for United easy. Meanwhile, if the press want to add to the PR pressure to accelerate the process then I welcome it, it's one of the less harmful examples of the press abusing its power.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying this just because you're a moderator, but this is probably the most intelligent and reasonable post on this thread. If MUFC does form a womens team, it should be for some reason other than this "moral obligation" argument or because they don't want to look bad. And if MUFC chooses not to, it shouldn't be a sign that MUFC is some sexist, outdated organization.
 
Stack said:
Girls and women care.

What you have said says more about you as a person than it does about girls and womens football.
Click to expand...

People don't seem to understand that we are not at that level yet. By we, i mean humans. Sexism, racism, etc., still exist and will for some time. I wish i could be a waiter at hooters but i can't. I will demand them to establish a "HooMaleters" so i can fulfill my lifelong dream.

Those who care care, those who don't well don't. Forcing a club to do something just because is a bit...forceful
 
Ji_Maria said:
This is precisely what I think should happen. Hold open tryouts for 6-8year old girls in Africa or somewhere, form a league there or import those girls to youth academies back home. Right now access is the biggest problem because most girls dont even have access to give football a try.
Click to expand...

I'd like to commend you on that proposition, because I think it's a very good one. Experience from other fields of solidarity aid might suggest it would be best to find people already trying to create better opportunities for girls in said countries locally and support them with what they think would help. Hey, maybe even MUFC ladies team could have twin teams in different parts of the world where women are barely even allowed to participate in the sport currently? It would be a good cause, and I'll back you all the way on it.

I don't think that should prevent us from letting boys or girls play football for Man United though, regardless of their parents funds. Especially as I think the two things have nothing to do with each other.
 
walkinhop said:
People don't seem to understand that we are not at that level yet. By we, i mean humans. Sexism, racism, etc., still exist and will for some time. I wish i could be a waiter at hooters but i can't. I will demand them to establish a "HooMaleters" so i can fulfill my lifelong dream.

Those who care care, those who don't well don't. Forcing a club to do something just because is a bit...forceful
Click to expand...

To me it is important noting that the argumentation above was exactly the same used to oppose the lift of segregationism in for instance South Africa and The United States. But I honestly don't think the girls playing at MUFC is a good comparison to HooMaleters imao, even as an exaggeration to make a point.

I don't think anyone should need to force MUFC to let their 18+ girls play for the club. I think the club should choose so on it's own accord. And I do think MUFC should care.
 
Last edited:
Grande said:
To me it is important noting that the argumentation above was exactly the same used to oppose the lift of segregationism in for instance South Africa and The United States. But I honestly don't think the girls playing at MUFC is a good comparison to HooMaleters imao, even as an exaggeration to make a point.

I don't think anyone should need to force MUFC to let their 18+ girls play for the club. I think the club should choose so on it's own accord. And I do think MUFC should care.
Click to expand...

This is quite a nice post actually.
 
jojojo said:
The trouble with moral arguments is that there's always a greater need or a greater justice to appeal to. There's no chance of us resolving the, "why are footballers paid more in a week than some people earn in a year, or a lifetime." There's no way I can justify £1000s being spent on season tickets and TV contracts, when I know that could be saving kids eyesight or providing clean water.

There's no moral high ground in football (at least not in watching it) but I can look at the local equation. I, as a United fan, wanted to hear United's name when they read out the England women's team names. I, as a United fan, am more likely to watch United women Vs City (or whoever) women than another women's game.

Promoting women's pro/semi-pro sport encourages more girls to get off their backsides and participate. It gives them something to aspire to as teenagers. Crucially, it might even encourage some of them to continue enjoying sport in adult life. Us fat, lazy, rich Europeans subscribe to health services that are struggling through a crisis of obesity and diabetes. Anything that makes people enjoy running around is to be welcomed.

Why United? Why not? The PL clubs are uniquely placed to support women's League teams. They've got the training facilities, the expertise, the logistics support and the PR and marketing know-how. The costs involved are minimal compared to their overall budgets and the impact of their names is huge.

Of course, United don't have to do it. But then they had a women's team once, and they got rid of it, and they didn't have to do that either. At some point, I believe that the net benefit in terms of PR, good will and marketing will make the commercial decision for United easy. Meanwhile, if the press want to add to the PR pressure to accelerate the process then I welcome it, it's one of the less harmful examples of the press abusing its power.
Click to expand...

I think this is a very nice post too.
 
The Glazers are masters at marketing and club PR, if there truly was something to be gained to the overall benefit of the club I can assure you, they would do it; all they care about is money and by extension the club's image. I was sad to hear when Man Utd disbanded its women's team. But there were good business reasons for doing so, unless that has changed I can't see that situation being reversed.

The better question is why does the women's game need to use the men's game as a prop? Make their own teams, long term it is better to have your own identity rather than be a side show. The argument that existing fans will go to their games doesn't really work... many fans go to the youth games because they want to see who might develop into the senior team. The girls/women aren't going to join the men's senior team, so the fans that will go to see the women's games would probably go to see a local women's team no matter who they were associated with, you've just given them a convenient team to support and nothing more. The benefit to the women's game by using a big club is infrastructure but that doesn't really benefit the club does it? So you can see why the Glazers aren't interested in a women's team for Man Utd. If there were big crowds going to the girls youth teams then you can bet that the Glazers would see that opportunity and make a new women's team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.