Where's the outrage at a lack of a disabled Football team?
Manchester United refuse to launch female team
- Thread starter roykeane19
- Start date
You're behind the times. A newbie has recently posted this vid of the MUFC Deaf team, which he coaches. So ....
I find ladies football dreadfully boring. If it came to OT I would never take any interest in it. I watched the England vs Germany game recently and couldn't get into it even though they beat the Germans. If that makes me sexist so be it.
How are women's team managed at other clubs? Are they managed as part of the club structure in similar fashion as reserve teams and youth teams, or entirely independent of club but just affliated in name? Anyone in the know of this can share some insight?
Manchester United Transgender Team aka MUTT.
What about other disabilities? Seems quite discriminatory to me.
Absolute non story this.
This.
It does seem a bit of an anachronism, and a bit of a shame.
Obviously the article is a load of sensationalist toss,mind.
Next a disabled team, a transgender team and of course a gay team.
With the new ladies top we launched I'd probably cast my eye over them once or twice
Can you imagine the uproar (mostly from sources like the Mail, who make a living from either slavering over or slagging off women's bodies) if we launched a women's team, and then made them wear those?
We had one. The club got rid of it.
I know Arsenal have a womens team but is it common for clubs in England?
There is nothing to stop a disabled man from playing for united. Even if you had only one leg, you could strap on an artificial leg and start playing.
But if you are born female? You just aren't allowed to play. Not because you aren't good enough, but because the paperwork said so.
Stick a pair of hotpants with it and we are most of the way there with blatters blueprint to improve womens football...
Can you imagine the uproar (mostly from sources like the Mail, who make a living from either slavering over or slagging off women's bodies) if we launched a women's team, and then made them wear those?
If that does not work perhaps the glazers can launch a version of the LFL for womens football next?... the mail would love it - they could get all outraged, get manchester united used for their seo links and get to show pictures of scantily clad women.
That's somewhere in the rules?
I love the way these clickbait websites use the word "refuse". They always make it sound like someone is holding a gun to their head and they're just screaming 'No! I won't!'
They could play in Serie A though... its an FA rule that only allows mixed football up to 13 - no such rule exists in Italy - yet no woman has been good enough to play for a Serie A side.
Very progressive of you.
I don't know much about disabled football - if it's anything like paralympic sports there could be a myraid of different categories etc, but it's certainly a possibility.
The gay team though... well you'd better take a seat for this part. I'm afraid to tell you that homosexual men are already allowed to play for the men's team (I know!). And get this - apparently there may even be some of the gays playing top level football! Sorry about that, hope you can still watch the sport without spontaneaously throwing up or anything.
Transgender? Not even starting on that, it's a politico-linguistic minefield.
Cheers. Poor from FA, not that's it's probable, but would be nice to have that option.
EDIT: Actually, how does that work in Italy, could a male player join a female club for example?
Is that so? Didn't know that.
@rcoobc's original post is a red herring though. It's not the rules that are holding anybody back at the top level (though there are good arguments for allowing mixed football on a more general level). No female player would be good enough to play in a high level men's team.
It is more analagous to disabled sport (I AM NOT SAYING WOMEN ARE DISABLED
) than @rcoobc made out. Yes disabled players are allowed to play in the Premier League, but in reality they can never have the chance to, so having their own team makes sense.Not sure if you're serious, but the deaf players have a common disability which presents particular and unique challenges. Not all people with disabilities have the same challenges!
Look, the way I see it, if they aint happy with the kit provided they can always take it off! PHWOAR!!!!!!
For me, the fact that we had one & got rid of it points to the fact that we're even less likely to get one.
IMO the fact that our big 4 rivals have one suggests that we probably should, but the media coverage of us not having one has elements of people finding any excuse to have a go at us!
Yes, tell me more about this.
I'm very interested in the logistics...
It just reminded me of this story from over a decade ago
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/europe/3093147.stm
the perugia president who signed gadaffis son was going to sign Brigit Prinz because
"She is very beautiful, and has a great figure. I can assure you that as a player, she's very good."
If memory serves it never happened as she knew it was a publicity stunt
Aside from whether we should have a woman's team or not (and I think we absolutely should)... you have to love the irony of the Mail accusing someone else of blocking the progress of women....
If women were to reach a level at which they could compete with the men, then I believe clubs would consider changing the rules to allow them to play. That's never going to happen though.
No
I don't like women's football, simple has that. Man Utd don't care about women's football it seems, so what does that say about them?
To be honest that's not going to happen, so it's ireelevant at this level.
The rule does lead to unfairness at a lower level though. I see no reason that a woman shouldn't be able to turn out for a Sunday league team if she wants.
Presumably the top women could probably cut it at a higher level, though it's hard to say what - I'd guess round about Conference. But it's probably more appealing to play top level women's football than be a novelty figure for Altrincham.
If they didnt care they wouldnt have a girls academy featuring a number of age groups would they?
A few years ago there was a woman from the USA team on five live and they asked her what level they thought they could compete at the mens level...
She recounted a story of the usa team (the best in the world at the time) training against the USA mens U19 team in a practice match behind closed doors... apparently they stopped the game at half time because they had stopped counting after being 13 or 14 nil down to the U19's
Its not the skill - its just the physicallity, speed etc of the mens game - many tennis correspondents think serena williams would be in the top 500 mens playes but probably wouldn't crack the top 100... different people say different things but none make a case she could cut it at the top level of the game for example:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/te...e-300s-not-Andy-Murray-says-Jeff-Tarango.html
The womans 100m record of 10.48 seconds wouldn't even qualify for elite mens races for example the rio qualifying standard is 10.16 for men and 11.32 for women
so in a sport where it is not only skill but strength and explosive speed that is often needed its going to be very difficult for any woman to compete at the very top.
Thats ridiculous. It depends on the disability, obviously, but people with disabilities already play in the Premier League@rcoobc's original post is a red herring though. It's not the rules that are holding anybody back at the top level (though there are good arguments for allowing mixed football on a more general level). No female player would be good enough to play in a high level men's team.
It is more analagous to disabled sport (I AM NOT SAYING WOMEN ARE DISABLED
Chicken and the Egg. No club will taken on a young girl and spend money training her to the highest level, when they know there is no return.
Are you saying that no female player would be good enough to play in one of the top 5 divisions EVER. Even though you have female F1 drivers (which some say are the toughest athletes in the world).
All I'm saying is that it shouldn't be a piece of paper that discriminates that stops you playing for a club. Either you have both male and female teams, or you allow women to compete alongside men. #simples.
It's fair to say the standard is a lot lower (I heard someone say before that the highest level of women's football is probably similar to League 2 in skill), but the way to improve it is to participate and draw in and develop as much talent as possible rather than give up.
Well at least we'll have found somewhere Chicharito would start.
I have posted this before but RoShaun Williams ran a 100mtr time at 15 that would have got him 6th place in the 2012 women's Olympic final, that isn't the fastest female footballers but the fastest women period.
Male physical superiority is just too pronounced in football for women to compete at anywhere near a decent standard in men's football.
I think the United U16 team would beat the best women's team in the world easily.
F1 isn't analogous as the physical demands are different.
In general I agree with you that we should either allow mixed teams or have both male and female ones. In practice that does mean having male and female teams. Mixed, at professional level, has absolutely no chance.
A few examples: in 2012, the US women's team lost 8-2 to the U17 men's side in a friendly. In 2013, Sweden's women team lost to AIK Solna's U17 side even though the boys only had 10 men on the field (http://www.thelocal.se/20130116/45646). So yeah, women have next to no chance of competing with men on a professional level.
Indeed, one of them is captain of Liverpool.
I'd say F1 is closer to football than track is. Obviously the physical demands of football have never been more pronounced than they are now (thanks offside rule!) But you still have crocks like Ledly King, and older stewards like Scholes, Pirlo, and even Yorke playing the game at a high level.
Players like Bale and Ronaldo might all be about their physical ability, but others base their game on their technical skills.
At some point we go from saying that women are physically built differently, to saying something else entirely.