Strange infantilised coverage of women's football

2 man midfield said:
I have no idea. Perhaps the outdated idea that ‘men can take it’ while women can’t. Look at the shit De Gea and Maguire got from professional pundits against Sevilla the other day. Women’s football has multiple gaffs per game and the commentary don’t seem to mention it - it’s like the elephant in the room, as if everyone knows the standard is poor, but don’t want to mention it. Perhaps because it’s not really news, everyone knows the standard isn’t there yet and pointing these things out often wouldn’t really help.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I do think that's it. Although, maybe not so much that 'men can take it, women can't', more the thinking that 'men are fair game, women are off limits' when it comes to criticism, abuse, etc.

Somebody posted earlier on about it being an extension of the 'punching up v punching down' and I do think it's deemed that millionaire male footballers are fair game for slating, but criticising female players is 'punching down' and so something you don't do.
 
Last edited:
They earn 1/100 their male countrrpart on average, so it’s still very early days as a profession to pretend high standards or go full throttle on them. The promotion is a bit nauseating, yet it’s tentative and remarkable.
 
My expectations of someone earning £50k to say £150k per year are rather different to someone in the £5m to £15m per year range; and they apply across various sports, male and female.
 
Bertie Wooster said:
I was referring to the time of the first world war / 1920's when the ban that people mentioned was introduced. I'd have thought at that time it was a Men's FA, given the quote someone cited stated the FA said: "the game of football is quite unsuitable for females and ought not to be encouraged.".

That doesn't strike me as an FA that was representing both the men's and women's game. That's why I asked couldn't the women have set up their own version, with their own FA, leagues, etc, if they weren't allowed to be affiliated to the men's game and FA - as the quote, and ban, shows.

You suggest other reasons why that may not have been possible, and that's valid. There probably was a lack of resource - and interest - in starting and developing a professional Women's game from scratch at that time. Especially once the men's version had restarted after the war.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t the ”Men’s FA” and that’s the horrible part of it. It was a football association that said that. They sure as feck made it very clear that day that they represented only men.

At that time in early 1900s, sure the women (maybe) could’ve started their own FA, maybe they even tried, but that wouldn’t have gotten nowhere.

You say men were so kind to build all these things in football that women can now take advantage of.

It was also men who banned women’s football for 51 years. It was also men who would’ve made sure that any ”Women’s FA” would’ve been laughed at and basically demolished.
 
Last edited:
Bepi said:
They earn 1/100 their male countrrpart on average, so it’s still very early days as a profession to pretend high standards or go full throttle on them. The promotion is a bit nauseating, yet it’s tentative and remarkable.
Click to expand...

kundalini said:
My expectations of someone earning £50k to say £150k per year are rather different to someone in the £5m to £15m per year range; and they apply across various sports.
Click to expand...

Very good points. The history of professional women’s football is very short. Apart from a few countries, most top tier footballers still have to work since they don’t get paid to play. Some even have to pay to play.

When we’re approaching the first time teams are full of players who’ve had similar opportunities as men, starting from their academy years, we can start to demand more as well.
 
I think the women's game in general has a more softer/calmer atmosphere.

If you go to a game in person, it is a far more family friendly environment. I've been to a couple of matches with women who have come away either loving or hating it. One in particular is so used to going to men's matches with her dad over the last couple of decades, that she hates the atmosphere and hasn't made an effort to go since. She said it was all too polite/sterile.

I do feel commentary, punditry and media can maybe come across politer and more encouraging than with the men's game, especially when it comes to a mistake/error. But I'm not sure that is a bad thing.

I won't lie though, I'm not a massive fan of the use of ex and current WSL players being used so readily as pundits and co commentators on men's matches. It all seems very forced.
 
top1whoisman said:
It wasn’t the ”Men’s FA” and that’s the horrible part of it. It was a football association that said that. They sure as feck made it very clear that day that they represented only men.

At that time in early 1900s, sure the women (maybe) could’ve started their own FA, mayne they even tried, but that wouldn’t have gotten nowhere.

You say men were so kind to build all these things in football that women can now take advantage of.

It was also men who banned women’s football for 51 years. It was also men who would’ve made sure that any ”Women’s FA” would’ve been laughed at and basically demolished.
Click to expand...
That's twice you've said I said men were 'kind' to the women's game. I never did. That 'kind and generous men' terminology was used in a mocking response by someone to my post that read:

"It's been given a huge helping hand though by the male clubs - who had built up a sport, professional league, domestic and then global fan base and media interest over a century from scratch - forming female teams and giving them an immediate share of all that domestic and global fan base and media interest.

Much easier and quicker route to 'breaking into the mainstream' than starting teams from scratch and having to do the hard work of garnering new interest in a Liverpool Rovers, Manchester Athletic, etc."

I wasn't saying it was 'kind' of men to do it. I think it was a societal change and something that was pretty much forced upon them, really, and that they had little choice but to do it rather than doing it through the goodness of their heart or any bs like that.

I just was stating that it had to be acknowledged as a fact that the female teams being affiliated with such well established global clubs, and therefore having immediate access to such global fan base / media attention from the start, has been a huge help this time around. I don't see how you can argue against that. You can add it was overdue or justified or whatever, but you can't say it's not an accurate fact that it's valid to acknowledge.
 
cj_sparky said:
If you go to a game in person, it is a far more family friendly environment. I've been to a couple of matches with women who have come away either loving or hating it. One in particular is so used to going to men's matches with her dad over the last couple of decades, that she hates the atmosphere and hasn't made an effort to go since. She said it was all too polite/sterile.
Click to expand...
I'd favour the atmosphere having a bit more bite, particularly at club level, and I think it will go that way over time.
 
cj_sparky said:
I think the women's game in general has a more softer/calmer atmosphere.

If you go to a game in person, it is a far more family friendly environment. I've been to a couple of matches with women who have come away either loving or hating it. One in particular is so used to going to men's matches with her dad over the last couple of decades, that she hates the atmosphere and hasn't made an effort to go since. She said it was all too polite/sterile.
Click to expand...

I can totally relate to that and understand that.

Having said that, the culture of support in the women’s game is very young. For that to develop and improve, we need those passionate people to be kind of pioneers, start making noise & chanting and bring others with them - instead of showing up once and saying it’s too quiet, polite & sterile.

I’m sure the men’s professional game didn’t have crazy atmosphere from the get go. Someone started it and others followed.

I do like and appreciate the more family-friendly atmosphere, and I kind of see a lot of value in trying to engage and attract a different crowd to the men’s game.

But I also feel that the women’s game and teams need a bit more noise and chanting. And for that I feel we also need people who instead of turning away, show up again, form supporter groups, come up with chants etc.
 
horsechoker said:
They're perhaps wary of punching down. The expectations of men's football is far higher so people tend to be less harsh towards the women's game.

That's just my 2 cents
Click to expand...

I think it’s this and also that they don’t fully trust or believe in the product. So they spend all their time telling us how good it is, instead of letting us see for ourselves.

I know the standard in the women’s can often be poor, but Men’s football is often low quality and exceptionally tedious so they should just treat it the same.
 
DOTA said:
I'd favour the atmosphere having a bit more bite, particularly at club level, and I think it will go that way over time.
Click to expand...

The recent United match vs Arsenal had a bit of bite to it, made it a much more compelling watch.
 
Juventus kickstarted women football in Italy a few years ago after a long period at amateur level, they won a number of scudetto in a row (I think 5) and reached the QF in the Champions League last year.

This time around and just today, Roma women won their scudetto… last week, the biggest game Roma-Juventus 3-2 was marred by Roma ultras behavior (hostile chants, spitting, insults, sexist remarks) in the stands of their small stadium, quite shocking to be honest yet not unexpected.
 
cj_sparky said:
I think the women's game in general has a more softer/calmer atmosphere.

If you go to a game in person, it is a far more family friendly environment. I've been to a couple of matches with women who have come away either loving or hating it. One in particular is so used to going to men's matches with her dad over the last couple of decades, that she hates the atmosphere and hasn't made an effort to go since. She said it was all too polite/sterile.

I do feel commentary, punditry and media can maybe come across politer and more encouraging than with the men's game, especially when it comes to a mistake/error. But I'm not sure that is a bad thing.

I won't lie though, I'm not a massive fan of the use of ex and current WSL players being used so readily as pundits and co commentators on men's matches. It all seems very forced.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I gather from it as well. I don't really watch womens football, but the little things I've picked up on through osmosis, it seems like it's just more...welcoming? Maybe not the right word, but it's definitely billed as a more "family-friendly" bring your kids along type of type of deal. So I think the real lack of overly critical, almost TalkSport-esque vitriol, is just an extension of that.

It certainly doesn't seem to have the toxicity that we see in the men's games both at the stadiums and in punditry.

As an aside, are there many prominent fan channels out there dedicated solely to the womens game? I mean, I'm assuming there is, obviously, but I just wonder what they're like? I ask because I think the rise in fan channels has had quite a detrimental impact on football punditry as a whole and it often feeds off negativity.
 
Bertie Wooster said:
That's twice you've said I said men were 'kind' to the women's game. I never did. That 'kind and generous men' terminology was used in a mocking response by someone to my post that read:

"It's been given a huge helping hand though by the male clubs - who had built up a sport, professional league, domestic and then global fan base and media interest over a century from scratch - forming female teams and giving them an immediate share of all that domestic and global fan base and media interest.

Much easier and quicker route to 'breaking into the mainstream' than starting teams from scratch and having to do the hard work of garnering new interest in a Liverpool Rovers, Manchester Athletic, etc."

I wasn't saying it was 'kind' of men to do it. I think it was a societal change and something that was pretty much forced upon them, really, and that they had little choice but to do it rather than doing it through the goodness of their heart or any bs like that.

I just was stating that it had to be acknowledged as a fact that the female teams being affiliated with such well established global clubs, and therefore having immediate access to such global fan base / media attention from the start, has been a huge help this time around. I don't see how you can argue against that. You can add it was overdue or justified or whatever, but you can't say it's not an accurate fact that it's valid to acknowledge.
Click to expand...

Some good points, fair play. I understand a bit more what you meant.

However after reading the op and the message you replied to, I still don’t understand how men giving a helping hand to the women’s game is in any way relevant to that post or the discussion about why the commentating in the women’s game is or isn’t condescending.
 
DOTA said:
I'd favour the atmosphere having a bit more bite, particularly at club level, and I think it will go that way over time.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd agree with that. I think that it is generally a very young crowd and it will be interesting to see how it evolves over time. My niece for example has been to an England and an FA Cup Women's final at Wembley. Whilst she generally enjoyed, she said it wasn't as good as when she went to see soccer aid at Stamford Bridge :lol:.
 
Bepi said:
This time around and just today, Roma women won their scudetto… last week, the biggest game Roma-Juventus 3-2 was marred by Roma ultras behavior (hostile chants, spitting, insults, sexist remarks) in the stands of their small stadium, quite shocking to be honest yet not unexpected.
Click to expand...

That’s the downside if you want to target the same demographic and similar atmosphere to what the men’s game is.
 
Who's Kissing Cameras? said:
Came here to say this. It’s a fear of getting ‘cancelled’.
Click to expand...

Is there any evidence for this or are just we spitballing random ideas here? We have seen male and female pundits call out shocking play/defending/miss/unsporting behaviour before. It’s not like the professionals who cover the game are sticking to positive talking points strictly no matter what. That is absurd and not rooted in any kind of reality.
 
top1whoisman said:
Some good points, fair play. I understand a bit more what you meant.

However after reading the op and the message you replied to, I still don’t understand how men giving a helping hand to the women’s game is in any way relevant to that post or the discussion about why the commentating in the women’s game is or isn’t condescending.
Click to expand...
Thanks (for the first paragraph). :)

As for the second - my post wasn't addressing the 'condescending' aspect. I'd already posted about that. I was responding to a post that said: "Context I guess. Women’s football is doing its best to break into the mainstream and is getting a bit of time in the sun right now. Men’s football is at its peak and is as competitive as it’s ever been."

I bolded the part I was referencing and just did what I expected - turns out I was very wrong :lol: - a one time response to it. Yeah, it probably wasn't relevant to the OP, and had I known it would take us on such a detour I'd have probably not posted it.

I think there's been some really good points made about the OP - and I've done some 'on topic' posts about it as well. It's been an interesting read so far. :)
 
I've noticed that the Irish commentary is by far the worst.

S02E07-Bx3rc9gU-subtitled.jpg
 
You can’t expect us men to have made a u-turn in just a couple of years while we have been putting women in the background for ten thousands of years. Give us a break, we’re trying and we will get there, we are equals. Don’t make drama out of everything now.
I see nothing wrong with what the OP posted in fact the media should start using the same words for men’s football because I hate the overreacting in the press with their hyperbole and all.
 
top1whoisman said:
I can totally relate to that and understand that.

Having said that, the culture of support in the women’s game is very young. For that to develop and improve, we need those passionate people to be kind of pioneers, start making noise & chanting and bring others with them - instead of showing up once and saying it’s too quiet, polite & sterile.

I’m sure the men’s professional game didn’t have crazy atmosphere from the get go. Someone started it and others followed.

I do like and appreciate the more family-friendly atmosphere, and I kind of see a lot of value in trying to engage and attract a different crowd to the men’s game.

But I also feel that the women’s game and teams need a bit more noise and chanting. And for that I feel we also need people who instead of turning away, show up again, form supporter groups, come up with chants etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah it is a young crowd, it will be interesting to see how it evolves. I also agree that rather than writing it off it may be better to go again and try to help create/generate that atmosphere.

My niece loves sport in general. She has attended an England and a Women's FA Cup final at Wembley, whilst she enjoyed the game and the day in general. She preferred the atmosphere of a Soccer Aid charity game she attended at Stamford Bridge. Whilst myself watching on T.V, I honestly couldn't tell the difference in those atmosphere's as both crowd sounded incredibly young.

I don't know how you change or encourage people to engage differently. I often feel guilty for not being into Women's football as much as I should, I loved United's first season in the WSL2. It may be because it was new and fresh, but I don't tune into the games now as regularly as I should.
 
Almost 50% of this thread reads like sarcasm. Not sure it actually is though? :lol:
 
Bertie Wooster said:
Thanks (for the first paragraph). :)

As for the second - my post wasn't addressing the 'condescending' aspect. I'd already posted about that. I was responding to a post that said: "Context I guess. Women’s football is doing its best to break into the mainstream and is getting a bit of time in the sun right now. Men’s football is at its peak and is as competitive as it’s ever been."

I bolded the part I was referencing and just did what I expected - turns out I was very wrong :lol: - a one time response to it. Yeah, it probably wasn't relevant to the OP, and had I known it would take us on such a detour I'd have probably not posted it.

I think there's been some really good points made about the OP - and I've done some 'on topic' posts about it as well. It's been an interesting read so far. :)
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Sorry if I came across annoying (quite often do :lol: ).

Been working in the women’s game here in Finland and tend to get defensive when I see something that doesn’t sit right/seem fair to me.

Yeah I think it’s an interesting topic and most posts have been reasonable and non-offensive, which is kind of the minimum I’d expect. But many good points and arguments made.
 
I heard a match report the other day referring to a woman's game as 'snippy'. Literally never heard that about a man's match.

Snippy, hysterical women at it again.

Hatsoff for covering the game on your podcast lads, but wake the feck up.
 
When the women get into a fight are the commentators allowed to say "handbags"?

Don't give me any WOKE responses.
 
Speedicut75 said:
I think people fear the prospect of strawman misinterpretations being employed, with any negative, or sometimes merely objective comment, garnering the tired observation of woman-hater or misogynist.
Click to expand...

That's basically it in a nutshell. A shit game of football is a shit game of football but you aren't allowed to say that in the women's game or call the players out in the same way as you would in the men's game.

That being said, I do love watching United Women play. Sometimes it just feels like stakeholders within the game are just trying too hard instead of letting it evolve naturally and want to have their cake and eat it.
 
RedPed said:
That's basically it in a nutshell. A shit game of football is a shit game of football but you aren't allowed to say that in the women's game or call the players out in the same way as you would in the men's game.
Click to expand...

Never heard anyone on the comms say that in a men’s match either. That’s because naturally Sky, BT, BBC or whoever it is wants to portray their product as highly as possible.

Nothing to do with the gender. It wouldn’t be the best ad for say BT to have their commentators on a CL game saying ”it’s been a shit game, why would anyone watch this crap?”

Even if it’s not commentating we’re talking about. Where in mainstream media do they say a men’s football match was shit? Or the players were shit? They wrap their critique in a more polite form as they should, they are supposed to be journalists. That happens in both women’s and men’s football.

Media is a stakeholder in the game. Why would they ruin their opportunities to remain that or keep their contacts intact with shitting on players/managers/teams/clubs without context and civil manners.
 
Last edited:
maniak said:
I watch both men's and women's footie and to be honest I prefer the commentary on the women's game, I think it's a much healthier way to look at the game. Maybe it's patronizing, I dunno, but because the pundits are not so focused on having digs at players or looking for creative ways to say a team sucks, it's actually more relaxing. I don't get angry at the pundits nor journos on social media who talk about women's footie, I enjoy it much more and it becomes pure entertainment, unlike the men's game, which is more about stress than entertainment for me at this point.
Click to expand...
This covers it for me.
I feel like they had a blank slate to create a healthier, kinder tone and its better for it. I guess it'll veer into patronising sometimes but it feels like thats a drastic improvement over some of the stuff attached to the mens game (the treatment beckham got in 98 for instance).
 
Based on my experience and observations, the journalists, commentators etc. who know the game, players and teams inside out, are also comfortable enough to criticise them.

Which is kind of logical as if you’re not aware of all the context, it’s a bit ignorant to criticise (or to commentate in general). So to an extent I feel it’s a quality issue in terms of the people writing, commentating and doing punditry on women’s football.

It’s also a question of demands and standards. I think we all should demand better when it comes to interviews, comms and punditry in the women’s game. When you’ve got pros who know the game inside out doing the job, you also get more in-depth analysis.

Of course you always have one or two who don’t want to talk bad about anyone and those should never be in that job to begin with.

I definitely get the point the op is making. I’ve seen and heard both, the patronising and overly-cautious approach but also the well thought out criticism. Tends to be the better quality pros who can dish out the criticism without going overboard or making it personal.

I hope the old days of the English press trying to destroy careers by highlighting individual mistakes and the people who made them would be over soon. Probably wishful thinking but at least we’ve got a lot of pundits (not talking about you, Graeme) who bring context and comparison into the picture instead of just shitting on a player.

So better professionals ->
Better coverage ->
More criticism
 
Media usually uses softening words when women are involved. That's why male teacher rape their students while female teachers sexually assault theirs.
 
krazyrobus said:
Media usually uses softening words when women are involved. That's why male teacher rape their students while female teachers sexually assault theirs.
Click to expand...
Not even "assault". "Has sex with a student" is used very often in headlines.
 
top1whoisman said:
I can totally relate to that and understand that.

Having said that, the culture of support in the women’s game is very young. For that to develop and improve, we need those passionate people to be kind of pioneers, start making noise & chanting and bring others with them - instead of showing up once and saying it’s too quiet, polite & sterile.

I’m sure the men’s professional game didn’t have crazy atmosphere from the get go. Someone started it and others followed.

I do like and appreciate the more family-friendly atmosphere, and I kind of see a lot of value in trying to engage and attract a different crowd to the men’s game.

But I also feel that the women’s game and teams need a bit more noise and chanting. And for that I feel we also need people who instead of turning away, show up again, form supporter groups, come up with chants etc.
Click to expand...

this is happening already - I think Im right in saying that this is the first season that Away tickets are available for our Womens matches (in that we actually get a specific United section at Away grounds) and there is now a small but growing hardcore who follow the Womens team home & away. Most of the chant tends to be the same songs you hear at a Mens match but now the first specific chants start appearing like 'Tooney & Lessi Russo'.
 
stw2022 said:
It's quite jarring once you listen out for it. A friend of mine pointed it out.

A team will lose in Europe and its "plucky" and they were "unfortunate". Men's teams "crash out of the cup" ladies teams "give their all and despite best efforts have been eliminated"

Men's teams under achieve. Fail. Ladies teams are "disappointed but look forward to bouncing back"

Once your notice the difference in media reporting of men's and women's football you can't stop hearing it. It seems patronising.

Women's teams "give their all" despite losing 4-0. Men's teams get hammered.
Click to expand...

I dont think 'infantilised' is the right word but I do understand what you are getting at

In general, those involved and reporting on Womens football probably feel an overriding need to support the entire Womens game - there is still a lot of pushback from those who say it is crap, getting too much coverage etc therefore is a tendency to keep criticism low so as not to fuel those kind of comments

It will change in time
 
Strangely enough, I have the opposite issue with the way the commentary for the recent FA Youth Cup final. They were trying so hard not to infantilise it on the FA’s official YouTube channel (who streamed it for free - good on them). They went on about the final not about development of young players, it’s about the result and the result only. They then brought up that in player actually won an FA Cup medal before he won an FA Youth Cup medal a year later, to highlight that that he still wanted to play in the competition even after winning the senior version.

I’m all for bigging up the prestige of the competition you’re covering, but they seemed to go out of their way to make it out to be essentially a senior game. Which it isn’t. And by making the comparison, I think it came off a poor man’s version of something of the professional game, rather than the what it is - the elite representation of youth football.

There’s probably a lot to analyse in the differences between the way we view and comment upon women’s football and academy football.
 
The fact that this is being discussed in a male dominated football forum is progress. I agree with the OP's assertion. And women's football is still in a growth process so the media are similarly adapting to this shift and given that a lot of commentators are male, there is an overt self-consciousness not to appear too critical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.