Originally Posted by
Hodger1957
I watched an embarrassing debate on the Pledge last night (Sky News programme), between 3 women that have obviously never watched football, and Gregg Dyke & Nick Ferrari.
They were comparing prize money for the men's & women's World Cups & of course wages.
It started with a joke penalty shoot out between Boris Johnson's sister, and Gregg Dyke. Although Rachel Johnson lost, they revealed that the goalkeeper had been told to let her win (typical).
How can people compare the two? It's like watching a different sport. There's no power in the shots or headers, and the goalkeeping reminds me of watching my step son's under 12's. The crowds at this World Cup are full of screaming school kids.
No male pundit dare criticise it because they'd be labelled ***ist and sacked. Even the outspoken Adrian Durham on Talksport hasn't got a bad word to say against it.
I played with lads twice as good as these women at the World Cup and a lot of them were picking up minimum wage working 40 hours a week. Why should someone half as good as them be expecting Premier League wages just because they're women? Where's the equality in that? If you're the best woman footballer in the world but you're sh1t, doesn't mean you deserve big money.
Perhaps if they want equality we should stop having same *** sports. Instead of men's & women's singles at Wimbledon we just had singles tennis. It's strange that the South African athlete has been ordered to lower her testosterone so she can compete. Has anyone thought to test the Williams sisters, or the women at this World Cup?
They trumpeted the England women's cricket team when they won the World Cup, and the women's hockey team were voted Team of the Year but very few people are interested.
I recommend watching The Pledge it gets my blood boiling every week.