Jump to content

Women's World Cup 2019


KMitch

Recommended Posts

In hurdling there are smaller hurdles for women than it is for men.

It's not a foreign concept to change the rules slightly in other sports to help women limit the physical gap they have to men.

I watched highlights from the Korea game and their keeper barely covers the goal, she got no reach because of her size. The 2 penalties was weak. she went the right way but she simply couldn't get the ball because of her physical limitations.

Edited by villalad21
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

In hurdling there are smaller hurdles for women than it is for men.

It's not a foreign concept to change the rules slightly in other sports to help women limit the physical gap they have to men.

I watched highlights from the South Korea game and their keeper barely covers the goal, she got no reach because of her size. The 2 penalties was weak. she went the right way but she simply couldn't get the ball because of her physical limitations.

But so what? She's not *entitled* to save the penalties. 

Hurdles are obviously a different matter. If it's not possible for women to reliably get over men's hurdles, or if they would have a higher frequency of injury doing so, then it's necessary to have lower hurdles for safety reasons. But the Korean goalkeeper wasn't in any physical danger from not saving a fairly well-placed penalty. 

People are still not answering the key question, 'what problem are you trying to solve here?' 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

In hurdling there are smaller hurdles for women than it is for men.

It's not a foreign concept to change the rules slightly in other sports to help women limit the physical gap they have to men.

I watched highlights from the South Korea game and their keeper barely covers the goal, she got no reach because of her size. The 2 penalties was weak. she went the right way but she simply couldn't get the ball because of her physical limitations.

You could argue that out of tens of millions of Koreans, she was the best suited for the role and she got picked regardless of her limitations. 

Women are not as good athletes as men. Should we make the pitch smaller so that there is less running and they have more energy? Should we make the ball lighter so that there is more power in the shots? Should we make the halves shorter as women have less endurance? Should we make the box smaller so that a smaller keeper has more control?

How far do we take this?

Edited by Mic09
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hurdling comparisons are a red herring.

Physical limitations in hurdling would, in many cases, literally prevent a large number of competitors actually meeting the requirements of the sport. That is that the point of hurdling is to race whilst clearing obstacles, and therefore if the 'standard' size of hurdle is too large for the majority of female athletes to actually compete within the requirements of the sport, then you need to change the obstacle size to a more viable size for women to compete.

That isn't true of football. Having a goal that is comparatively larger on average doesn't mean women can't realistically play football. It does mean the keeper in the women's game generally has a harder job than in the men's game, but this is generally true across the board.

It isn't the same as hurdling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A team lost 12-0 in the under 20 World Cup, has not been a mention of it. The team that won went out 1st round

USA won 13-0 one of the tournament favourites and professional players beat minnows and people want change size of goals

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People are comparing the women's game to the men's game. Saying players are struggling and the standard of goalkeeping is awful.

It's actually not. It's awful compared to the men who play at the elite level. But compared to the millions of other women who play the game the standard of goalkeeping is the very best in the world.

 

It's like seeing a woman break the 400m world record and saying the standard is poor because it's 5 seconds slower than the men's world record.

 

Making the goals smaller wouldn't improve the standard of goalkeeping. It would just mean less goals are scored. They are very different things. If anything it would probably make the standard of goalkeeping worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

People are still not answering the key question, 'what problem are you trying to solve here?' 

A seriously difficult task is the issue.

A strike heads in the direction of the top corner, a 5'6 goalie is supposed to do what exactly? Not saying it's easy to save shots headed towards the top corner for men either but at least they have a chance saving it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

A seriously difficult task is the issue.

A strike heads in the direction of the top corner, a 5'6 goalie is supposed to do what exactly? Not saying it's easy to save shots headed towards the top corner for men either but at least they have a chance saving it. 

So what?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the sort of belittling of the womens game that the recent media push is trying to remove 

If dont like it dont watch it. Dont think people have said womens cricket should have bigger wickets for example

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zatman said:

This is the sort of belittling of the womens game that the recent media push is trying to remove 

If dont like it dont watch it. Dont think people have said womens cricket should have bigger wickets for example

They should have a limit to how high you can hit the ball because the shorter women can't jump as high to make catches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

A seriously difficult task is the issue.

A strike heads in the direction of the top corner, a 5'6 goalie is supposed to do what exactly? Not saying it's easy to save shots headed towards the top corner for men either but at least they have a chance saving it. 

We just have such a wildly different perspective on this. My answer to the bolded is 'try and save it; if she can't, pick it out of the net like any other goalkeeper'. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help idly wondering what the Venn diagram overlap would be between 'people who want to reduce the size of goal frames in women's football' and 'people who complain about positive discrimination in the workplace'. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

A tennis court is bigger for a woman than it is for a man. A hockey goal is bigger for a woman than it is for a man. A **** running track is bigger for a woman than it is for a man.
It means the sport is slightly different for the different sexes. That's it.

But stop with the patronising stuff about women not being able to cope because the goals are too big. it's nonsense.

It is and they play best of 3 sets rather than 5... A hockey goal  is 12ft X 7ft (7.80 m² ) compared to a football goalpost measuring 24ft x 8ft (17.84 m² ) . A hockey goal is 43.72% of the size of a football goal so far more managable for anyone (male or female) regardless of their height.A running track distance is a funny one i guess as a single lap is still 400m but the mens world record is 43.03 compared to the womens time of 45.07, over a mile the difference is even more stark, 3.26.00 for male & 24+ seconds longer for a woman at 3.50.07.

Honestly think that the 21ft x 7ft youth goalposts would make a huge difference to the womens game (As would taking a few yards off the pitch at either end but that's a different story)

Edited by LakotaDakota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zatman said:

This is the sort of belittling of the womens game that the recent media push is trying to remove 

If dont like it dont watch it. Dont think people have said womens cricket should have bigger wickets for example

They do play on smaller pitches though in cricket.......just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

They do play on smaller pitches though in cricket.......just saying.

& use much lighter balls, & play 4 day tests instead of 5. Boundaries range from 50m-64m compared to mens 59-82m, That is a huge difference in size over a circular pitch

Edited by LakotaDakota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

It is and they play best of 3 sets rather than 5... A hockey goal  is 12ft X 7ft (7.80 m² ) compared to a football goalpost measuring 24ft x 8ft (17.84 m² ) . A hockey goal is 43.72% of the size of a football goal so far more managable for anyone (male or female) regardless of their height.A running track distance is a funny one i guess as a single lap is still 400m but the mens world record is 43.03 compared to the womens time of 45.07, over a mile the difference is even more stark, 3.26.00 for male & 24+ seconds longer for a woman at 3.50.07.

Honestly think that the 21ft x 7ft youth goalposts would make a huge difference to the womens game (As would taking a few yards off the pitch at either end but that's a different story)

Nobody is saying it wouldn’t make a huge difference. 

People are just asking why you would want to make that difference?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

Honestly think that the 21ft x 7ft youth goalposts would make a huge difference to the womens game (As would taking a few yards off the pitch at either end but that's a different story)

Why is it a different story? It seems like exactly the same story - simplyfying the game.

Like I mentioned in the other post, we could make each halves 30mins. Women don't have the same endurance. We could also make the balls lighter so there is more power behind shots.

Where do we stop with this? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

We just have such a wildly different perspective on this. My answer to the bolded is 'try and save it; if she can't, pick it out of the net like any other goalkeeper'. 

Same. I don’t know what the goal is, pun intended. 

The only outcome i can see is it makes it easier for goalkeepers. Again I’m not sure why that’s a positive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are phsyical differences between the sexes so why not adjust the playing field & equipment to reflect this to make the game "better" and actually end up making it even more similar as a spectacle  in the end as the pace would be quicker on a smaller pitch & the goalkeepers would actually have a chance at saving a shot hit directly over their head. Kids/youths play on smaller pitches because typically they are smaller, Playing on full size pitches results in the same sort of issues seen in the womens game, Now sure there may be the odd 6ft+ woman playing football but it is far from the norm.

Why does the pitch/goals/half length have to be exactly the same as the mens in order for it to be considered football?

Playing on a huge pitch with massive goalposts adds nothing to the game at all so make it better with a few small adjustments, it really is that simple.

Womens cricket is fine enough to watch with a smaller pitch, but it would be pretty shit if very few people were even capable of hitting a boundary because the pitch was 20m bigger in every direction.

Messi & Ronaldo are both absolutely brilliant but if cloning was possible & you had an entire team of 6'2 Ronaldo's playing against an entire team of 5'7 Messi's there would only be one winner

Edited by LakotaDakota
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â