Women covering football

[PhoneymcRingRing]

Seeing as there’s no football on for a couple of weeks I thought I’d start a thread on the trend of women covering football see what people really think.

Where do you stand? Do you mind them? It’s a spectrum for me, I don’t mind them presenting shows or commentating I don’t like when they’re in as pundits giving “expert” analysis or Co-commentary.

It doesn’t bother me that much but it does feel like it’s pushed on us.

[ronandtet]

all for equality but it is,t - mens game the other week two out of three pundits female - womens game no males - mens game teams had kids mascots - girls and boys - womens game all mascots all girls

[Zippity]

I think it comes down to a question of 'if they're good enough', I don't mind.

Some of the female pundits are insightful and articulate and put some of the male pundits, such as Ashley Williams, Jamie Redknap or Joeleon Lescott to shame.

I know what you mean in terms of it being pushed on us because I've seen an all-female panel discussing a men's game whereas you're highly unlikely to see the reverse for a women's game.

I get why that's happening, though. In any society where there's been a massive historical imbalance, whether that's the position of certain minorities or the treatment of women, etc, and that balance is being redressed, there's always an amount of going to far in the other direction.

People are reluctant to change, especially when that change involves them not being in as cushy a position as they once were after the change. That's what we're seeing here. Change is rightly (in my opinion) coming and I'm going to use a word here that many will hate-it's all to do with getting rid of the patriarchy that's existed since, well, the stone age.

There's absolutely no reason why women's football shouldn't be a high profile sport, The increased profile of the women's game has had a hugely positive and beneficial impact on the way girls view themselves-I see that in school on a daily basis and colleagues in schools across the city tell me the same. This pattern is repeated across the country and is just one example of why the current push to promote women's football is happening.

And, like I say, in pushing against a force that is resisting (and many men are resisting), sometimes you have to push too hard and get it wong and end up going too far. An example is the BBC reporting on the women's Premier League as if it's the men's game because they're so desperate to show that they think it's really important. They'll talk about Chelsea and Man City without saying it's the women's teams for fear of demeaning the women's game. The fact is, Chelsea and Man City's men's teams existed first so the women's teams need to be identified in a different way. The women's game is really important but pretending their teams are the same isn't helping their cause.

Sorry for the lengthy (and in some folks' eyes, arsey ) reply but it's a cracking question, Phoney, so I gave it my best shot.

[Ragatino]

I think it comes down to a question of 'if they're good enough', I don't mind.

Some of the female pundits are insightful and articulate and put some of the male pundits, such as Ashley Williams, Jamie Redknap or Joeleon Lescott to shame.

I know what you mean in terms of it being pushed on us because I've seen an all-female panel discussing a men's game whereas you're highly unlikely to see the reverse for a women's game.

I get why that's happening, though. In any society where there's been a massive historical imbalance, whether that's the position of certain minorities or the treatment of women, etc, and that balance is being redressed, there's always an amount of going to far in the other direction.

People are reluctant to change, especially when that change involves them not being in as cushy a position as they once were after the change. That's what we're seeing here. Change is rightly (in my opinion) coming and I'm going to use a word here that many will hate-it's all to do with getting rid of the patriarchy that's existed since, well, the stone age.

There's absolutely no reason why women's football shouldn't be a high profile sport, The increased profile of the women's game has had a hugely positive and beneficial impact on the way girls view themselves-I see that in school on a daily basis and colleagues in schools across the city tell me the same. This pattern is repeated across the country and is just one example of why the current push to promote women's football is happening.

And, like I say, in pushing against a force that is resisting (and many men are resisting), sometimes you have to push too hard and get it wong and end up going too far. An example is the BBC reporting on the women's Premier League as if it's the men's game because they're so desperate to show that they think it's really important. They'll talk about Chelsea and Man City without saying it's the women's teams for fear of demeaning the women's game. The fact is, Chelsea and Man City's men's teams existed first so the women's teams need to be identified in a different way. The women's game is really important but pretending their teams are the same isn't helping their cause.

Sorry for the lengthy (and in some folks' eyes, arsey ) reply but it's a cracking question, Phoney, so I gave it my best shot.

Merson et al are a joke, I have no love for the cronyism that seems them wheel out muppets like Bruce & Pardew just because in a bygone era the were players.
Whilst I agree there should be a level of understanding based on a career in the game. These old hacks provide the same sort of insight as a kids toy with a string in their back. Pull the cord, same bobbins spills out their slack jaws. A waste of a seat & salary.

Furthermore, the Liverpool centric, Man U loving bias of commentators and pundits alike in the 'old boys' club is just boring and unacceptable. I despise the 'Knowing tones' of voice when these team players are spoke about, everything thing they do is 'sublime, majestic, oooohhh, aaaaaahhhh.' When it's anyone else, it's derogatory and patronising.

Bin the lot I said.

On women, most of them are schooled in the same art, they don't offer anything fresh or interesting to the conversation and the fact is that most are EDI hires. I 100% vehemently oppose this trend. Life is a meritocracy. So, 90% of hires are based on diversity not quality.

We are in a race to the bottom and boy oh boy the races is travelling at break neck speed!

[toptoon]

Treat men and women the same and treat men and women’s football the same and ‘que será, será’.

But stop putting women commentators on because they are women and stop complaining that women's football doesn’t get treated the same as men’s. The demand to watch it is not the same. Worst of all the complaint to make wages the same between men and women footballers - it’s like some unknown actor demanding the same payment as Tom Cruise for starring in a film.

[Sclox]

No issue if they are good enough. Don't like it when they carry on like men and spin the same scripted cliches. Some are decent and better than a lot of the boring men.

Personally will never watch a ladies game, but good on them and all the best.

[tinostongue]

Personally,I don’t like female commentators for a live match, they seem to think that they HAVE to talk, and talk, and talk, and it gets on me nerves! Not bothered either way about them hosting sporting events but men’s football,no thanks. I know it’s about equality,but seems to only work one way?