FIFA Womens' Football WC 2011 — Anybody watching?

[Red Door]

On the other hand, there are some moments of sublime beauty when these things are performed at the highest level (like Cabrera's behind the back flip for a double play against the White Sox back in May, or Messi's goal against Madrid in the UCL) that are just breathtaking, and then I think it's right to say that some sports moments are more than just temporary passion, but are about real brilliance or skill. And when people mistake defensive ineptitude for attacking genius, then I feel no inhibition in pointing out that they are just marvelling at fool's gold.

There was attacking genius throughout this tournament - illustrated by players like Marta and Necib who could probably play with some men.

"usually used", eh ? So are you accusing me of sexism or not? I could point out that there are some women's sports that I watch and enjoy happily, but that's irrelevant. The quality in women's football is unfortunately well short of that in the men's game, with the tactical nous, defending, and goalkeeping being particularly poor. My feminist credentials are completely unaffected by calling poor play what it is, poor play. It would be patronising for me to pretend otherwise.

I didn't say whether you were being sexist or not, just merely pointing out the fact that 95% of the time it is used in a sexist fashion (or hell, bigoted fashion) when applied by mostly male sports fans. Again, in the greater picture, the tactics, defending, and goalkeeping is not in the same standards of top male professionals, but that does not make it any less entertaining, any less of a sport, or quality viewing material in the grand picture. It's sport, and these girls can sure play well, even compared to their counterparts 15 years ago.

 

[Dachs]

A local newspaper pundit called it the second worst US loss of all time:

Putting the U.S. Women's Soccer World Cup final in perspective: The worst losses in U.S. history

Incidentally, I'm still not over the 1972 Olympics, and I wasn't even born until eighteen years later.

 

[Stapel]

A local newspaper pundit called it the second worst US loss of all time:

Putting the U.S. Women's Soccer World Cup final in perspective: The worst losses in U.S. history

That list, to me, once again explains there is a massive difference between US and Europe. Of that list, I was only familiar with the 1972 'incident'. And I was only born a year fater that.
The ice-hockey final did a ring a bell, but that's it.

Incidentally, I'm still not over the 1972 Olympics, and I wasn't even born until eighteen years later.

Same in NL with the 1974 WC-final. It is in the collective memory, thus also with those who were yet to be born!

 

[Stapel]

There was attacking genius throughout this tournament - illustrated by players like Marta and Necib who could probably play with some men.

Just to makes things clear...., you are not suggesting they really can play with some men at top level, are you?

 

[Azale]

Just to makes things clear...., you are not suggesting they really can play with some men at top level, are you?

Are you going to hyperventilate or something?

 

[Red Door]

Just to makes things clear...., you are not suggesting they really can play with some men at top level, are you?

Yeah, they're both better than Peter Crouch...and he played internationally for England.

 

[Arwon]

A local newspaper pundit called it the second worst US loss of all time:

Putting the U.S. Women's Soccer World Cup final in perspective: The worst losses in U.S. history

5. 2000 Olympic 4x100 freestyle swim: The United States had never lost this event in the Olympics and didn't figure to lose in Sydney with Neil Walker, Anthony Ervin, Gary Hall Jr. and Jason Lezak. In fact, Hall said his team would smash the host Aussie team like guitars. But Australia's Ian Thorpe jumped out of the pool and played an air guitar to mock Hall after the Aussies stunned the Americans by 19/100ths of a second.

Oh I remember that. Good times.

What a git Hall was.

 

[Stapel]

Are you going to hyperventilate or something?

Well, it does show an incredible ignorance. If meant as I read it (hence the question), it is imho a rather funny point of view.

Yeah, they're both better than Peter Crouch...and he played internationally for England.

Good call !
But you know thta English selection has never ever been the benchmark .

 

[Red Door]

Well, it does show an incredible ignorance. If meant as I read it (hence the question), it is imho a rather funny point of view.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. The top women players (and I'm talking about a limited few, not all of them) could easily compete with men's teams in second divisions, some bad European leagues, the MLS, etc.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Honestly, Red Door, I don't see it. Marta and Necib have certainly got some talent & skills, but they would get flattened early and often by a Lithuanian second division team's defence. But at least they both look talented in a way that is missing from most of the players in this tournament.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Speaking of the MLS, I've been watching some of the exhibition games between them and some of the top European teams, like Manchester United and Real Madrid. It is almost what watching pro football or basketball teams playing top college ones would be like. But eventually, one of them is going to get incredibly lucky...

Even so, I don't think the very top women could even make the MLS teams. much less play on a regular basis.

 

[Yui108]

Mostly because we have so many other sports to watch. Americans will more than happily watch the Lions or the Stros or the Cubs because Baseketball, Football and Baseball are sports we legitimately care about and have cared about for a half a century (in the case of two of them), and nearly a century and a half for baseball. Soccer as a sport is really just a passing fancy. Americans maintain interest in their football, basketball, and baseball teams because there is tradition there. Even though the Giants were a horrendous team from 2005-2008, or throughout the 90s Giants fans (like myself and my dad) followed the team relentlessly because there was a tradition there, Though we were horrible then, we could still talk of the glory days in the 50s when we had McCovey and Mays, and Thompson or the 60s when we had Cepeda and Marichal, or the 80s with Will the Thrill. I think the reason Americans don't look at soccer with any real interest is because that tradition is not there. Now the reason we have any interest in WC at all is because if there's anything Americans love (and do better in my opinion than any other country) it's boisterous displays of nationalism, and the WC (when we're doing well) provides an incredible opportunity for Americans to do that on an international stage, and it's even better when the Americans are the underdogs, because Americans adore underdog stories.

If baseball has been followed for a century and a half, football gets at least 2/3 that.

 

[Red Door]

Honestly, Red Door, I don't see it. Marta and Necib have certainly got some talent & skills, but they would get flattened early and often by a Lithuanian second division team's defence. But at least they both look talented in a way that is missing from most of the players in this tournament.

Absolutely not. Second division team defenders from lesser leagues are really shart players that did not give up on an impossible dream. Players of the top tier in woman's are definitely strong. Just because they are not men does not mean they are weak.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

I can't work out what you meant to say when you said "shart". But you appear to believe that all lower league 2nd division defenders are shart dreamers, and wouldn't have a physical advantage over the likes of Marta and Nicab. Sorry, but there are plenty of intimidating physical players in lower league football, and most of them would be far stronger than any woman player (and they would use that advantage to negate any possible skill advantage).

 

[Red Door]

I can't work out what you meant to say when you said "shart". But you appear to believe that all lower league 2nd division defenders are shart dreamers, and wouldn't have a physical advantage over the likes of Marta and Nicab. Sorry, but there are plenty of intimidating physical players in lower league football, and most of them would be far stronger than any woman player (and they would use that advantage to negate any possible skill advantage).

And this in the end, is where we reach the final conclusion: according to you, a woman cannot be as strong as a man or comparable even. This is sexism. It is wrong. You are wrong. Good day sir.

 

[Lambert Simnel]

Good grief. That's a bit patronising, and insulting.

Physiological differences exist between the sexes. It's not sexist to recognise that. If we were simply looking for the strongest 100 men, and comparing them against the strongest 100 women, then there would be little or no overlap - the men would be stronger. Presumably you accept this ?

However, I don't even see any evidence for seeing the female players mentioned as being particularly strong. You picked two who have shown a moderate amount of skill. But while they may well be stronger than you or me, they are very unlikely to be stronger than a male athlete in the same sport.

Wiki suggests a definition of, "Sexism, also known as gender discrimination or sex discrimination, is the application of the belief or attitude that there are characteristics implicit to one's gender that indirectly affect one's abilities in unrelated areas." In what way does my view (that most male football players are stronger than female football players) fit that definition? Feel free to use sentences of more than three words in doing so.

 

[Red Door]

Good grief. That's a bit patronising, and insulting.

Physiological differences exist between the sexes. It's not sexist to recognise that. If we were simply looking for the strongest 100 men, and comparing them against the strongest 100 women, then there would be little or no overlap - the men would be stronger. Presumably you accept this ?

However, I don't even see any evidence for seeing the female players mentioned as being particularly strong. You picked two who have shown a moderate amount of skill. But while they may well be stronger than you or me, they are very unlikely to be stronger than a male athlete in the same sport.

Wiki suggests a definition of, "Sexism, also known as gender discrimination or sex discrimination, is the application of the belief or attitude that there are characteristics implicit to one's gender that indirectly affect one's abilities in unrelated areas." In what way does my view (that most male football players are stronger than female football players) fit that definition? Feel free to use sentences of more than three words in doing so.

These are athletes. Athletes train, they lift weights, and they are strong whether they are men or women. Any athlete, regardless of sex, would tell you that - that's why the women's basketball biggest supporters and greatest respect often comes from men. And you want an explanation - it comes from your damn definition and your own writing.

they are very unlikely to be stronger than a male athlete in the same sport.

Because they are a woman, they are not as strong as a male athlete. For %&$#'s sake, you defeated yourself in your own writing. Now, you sexist pig, go back to the cave and keep watching sports from the 19th century point of view.

And yes, I am being patronizing because it seems you don't get the some simple facts (or know a single thing about women athletes at all).
Moderator Action: Flaming and trolling.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Whomp]

Moderator Action: This thread has run its course. Let's close it now.