How comes?

tonyw said:
Oh come on.

It's the Women's World Cup. The pinnacle of women's football every four years. And it's being played at a time when there's no senior men's football going on this side of Egypt and precious little in the way of interesting transfer activity. Everyone's on their holidays.

One month every four years women's football dominates the BBC football news; 47 months every four years men's football dominates the BBC football news. And you're complaining that the women's game is getting too much exposure?!?
Click to expand...
As context it’s all over Fox Sports 1 and other US tv channels too
 
ZeroTheHero said:
I'm not quite sure what your point is really. Yes, you could have people with mobile phones at 'park' matches - but that's pretty absurd isn't it? Which sort of proves the point that you won't end up with VAR everywhere, even at the lower reaches of professional/elite level football! As for the floodlights, it is not an integral part of the game. Play during the day, you'd only use them at night. But VAR would be being used for EVERY game at the top level, and that's the difference.

Here's a scenario and a question: In a couple of years time the Prem have been using VAR for that time, but we (OUFC) have not. I don't think that's outlandish. We get drawn against a Prem team in a cup game. There are now two options. If VAR isn't being used in the cup then we are playing under conditions that we are used to, if it is then the Prem team are playing under conditions they are used to. (Watching the WWC I think you'd be hard pressed to say that the games haven't been changed by VAR!). Is that fair? And how much more difficult are we making referee's lives by potentially asking them to switch from VAR to non-VAR matches from week to week?

Of course, the influence of VAR would be much less if it were reined back to how it was being used previously (i.e. 'clear and obvious mistakes' and matters of fact - offsides for example) but in the WWC it is being used as a safety blanket by (poor) refs.
Click to expand...

Point is you said we cant have VAR because it cant be implemented at all levels.

I said the game is already different at all levels because you dont even get refs at all levels. You equated a substitute without cards or a whistle doing his best being the same ball game as a UEFA qualified ref with 5 other impartial officials.

You say it cant happen because difficult for teams to play under different rules. But again I say that's already happening. Prem teams playing without 4th and 5th assistant referees in EPL but not in Europe, for example.

The elite level may as well be a different sport to the didcot pub league mate. Its done
 
LeftSideBoy said:
Not blinkered, realistic. I am failing to see how womens football is better than mens, in any context. Feel free to change my mind
Click to expand...

But the article you quoted doesn't say it's better. It says it's:

a) Cheaper
b) Has more goals
c) Has less cheating
d) Not just dominated by Europe and South America, and
e) More gay-friendly.

Not sure that any of those points are false....many of them are objectively true.
 
The article certainly over sells the point. Being cheaper doesn't make it better, it just means it's cheaper. In that case, the Conference is better than the Premier League because it's cheaper, has more goals, has less cheating, you can have a beer and watch the game, you can change ends, etc, etc.

Women's football is different than men's, so celebrate it for what it is.

Cynically, if it was better, it wouldn't need an article to say it's better
 
Gary Baldi said:
The article certainly over sells the point. Being cheaper doesn't make it better, it just means it's cheaper. In that case, the Conference is better than the Premier League because it's cheaper, has more goals, has less cheating, you can have a beer and watch the game, you can change ends, etc, etc.

Women's football is different than men's, so celebrate it for what it is.

Cynically, if it was better, it wouldn't need an article to say it's better
Click to expand...
The article isn't drawing an overall conclusion. It's giving 5 areas in which the womens game is more accessible than the mens.

There's nothing in there to need to get particularly defensive about.
 
beyondthefourth said:
The article isn't drawing an overall conclusion. It's giving 5 areas in which the womens game is more accessible than the mens.

There's nothing in there to need to get particularly defensive about.
Click to expand...
The game is more accessible if you perceive men's football = premier league and internationals. If you go to lower league football (hello), then you can apply the same areas. Or follow a non-English national team.

Genuinely, celebrate it for what is it without trying to justify it's existence against the men's game or compare it. Longer term, it will make the women's game unique and stand aside from the men's game. And it is getting there. Just a bit naive from the BBC
 
Interesting that the Norway keeper was clearly off her line as the ball was struck when saving tonight's penalty.

Shoukd it have been disallowed because it was against the rules or ignored because of the "spirit and flow" of the game?

At what point of cheating sorry bending the rules does this cheating sorry bending outweigh the "spirit and flow" of the game?
 
Jerome'SAle said:
Interesting that the Norway keeper was clearly off her line as the ball was struck when saving tonight's penalty.

Shoukd it have been disallowed because it was against the rules or ignored because of the "spirit and flow" of the game?

At what point of cheating sorry bending the rules does this cheating sorry bending outweigh the "spirit and flow" of the game?
Click to expand...
But wasnt last night's game so much the better for having a referee who referee'd rather than going to VAR every two minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom