Why is the bbc shoving the women game down our throats?

[Bluto Blutarsky]

I'm sure there were talks saying we could have a football game and NFL game on the same day, so can be done.

Why would we make the women play on the artificial pitch? Seems a bit sexist.

 

[chrissivad]

Why would we make the women play on the artificial pitch? Seems a bit sexist.

Well you just assumed that the women would play on the artificial grass...

I was just answering a question about the 2 pitches

 

[Nerine]

I’d sooner glance at the women’s football scores than the results of the 1550 at Cheltenham.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

Well you just assumed that the women would play on the artificial grass...

I was just answering a question about the 2 pitches

Ah, so you want the men to play on the artificial grass. My bad.

 

[alexis]

If it inspires more young women to play, the quality will improve over time.

I get that but it’s not convincing me to watch it or change my mind it’s shit football to watch

 

[MassadaTom]

You've missed the part of my post where I said that the main BBC News RSS feeds are publicising the women's game at least at the same level of the men's game if not more. This is entirely based on virtuous and social activism and not public interest.

I am not saying they shouldn't be reporting on it *at all*

It’s not point of view that I actually support but I think it’s valid and I’ll try to explain:
Men’s games where publicised and promoted for 100 of years ,in effect we grow up having more respect and putting more value on mans game.
We are going through course correction in sake of equality and equal opportunities.
Thanks to it I have chance to enjoy my daughter playing football, I can talk football with her , she can dream to where lily white one day.
Alll good things.
And a payment for all that happiness is 2 minutes of despair and confusion when I think that Arsenal beat us 5-1 , fair trade for me.

 

[Maxtremist]

You've missed the part of my post where I said that the main BBC News RSS feeds are publicising the women's game at least at the same level of the men's game if not more. This is entirely based on virtuous and social activism and not public interest.

I am not saying they shouldn't be reporting on it *at all*

I will admit I don't follow the BBC News RSS feed religiously, but regularly checking their twitter feed and BBC Football homepage would lead me to at least assume that they're not promoting the game to the level of the men's or anywhere close to it. I'd have to assume there's a level of bias involved in that you may notice them more and they stand out more as they're something you're not into and that sticks in your head more.

But I SERIOUSLY doubt they're promoting it as much as the men's game given... well... every other branch of the BBC and how they're promoting things.

And no. As I've said and others have also said, the women's game is growing. The Women's World Cup was a major changing point. So it's not entirely based on virtuous social activism (again, Hyperbole from you). It's based on the game growing and people being more interested in it. So if more people are into it the BBC are gonna talk about it more. It's that simple.

 

[alexis]

Okay I'll bite for this. It wasn't 'Men's team' when they were made but now there are Women's teams, why is it only the Women's teams that have the suffix and not the Men's? Are you really trying to say that doesn't make the Women's team lesser or behind the Men's team?

I have no issue with calling all our teams Tottenham Hotspurs. One just happens to be a Women's team and one happens to be a Men's team. It's really easy to tell the difference and not get confused by that.

Going onto the 'it's an annoyance, why complicate it?'. Maybe cause it's an annoyance for the players and the team? I naturally don't know them but maybe Ashleigh Neville is quite comfortable and prefers saying she plays for Tottenham Hotspur. Maybe Shelina Zadorsky doesn't like it being refered to as 'Tottenham Hotspur Women' and just likes it being Tottenham Hotspurs. That's what it says on their badge so why add the suffix?

It seems like you're finding annoyance in something that really isn't that big a deal. Like the other day, Chelsea pulled off a great comeback against Bayern Munich to make it through to the Champions League final. Do you really need the suffix of Women to tell you that happened in the Women's game? Does it really majorly impact your life if it doesn't include the word 'Women' in the team name? Does it change the fact that Chelsea did indeed come back and beat Bayern?

I’m quite sure if it was men suddenly playing what was a traditional women’s game like netball it would have the men’s suffix.

 

[Maxtremist]

I get that but it’s not convincing me to watch it or change my mind it’s shit football to watch

It got me watching more of the Women's game and keeping up with it, each to their own and all that.

 

[Maxtremist]

I’m quite sure if it was men suddenly playing what was a traditional women’s game like netball it would have the men’s suffix.

Let's say that's true, I really doubt women will get annoyed if they see 'Tottenham 1 - 4 Arsenal' in netball to then realise it was the men's team.

Like, is it that big a deal if they report the game without the suffix in the headline?

 

[punky]

It’s not point of view that I actually support but I think it’s valid and I’ll try to explain:
Men’s games where publicised and promoted for 100 of years ,in effect we grow up having more respect and putting more value on mans game.
We are going through course correction in sake of equality and equal opportunities.
Thanks to it I have chance to enjoy my daughter playing football, I can talk football with her , she can dream to where lily white one day.
Alll good things.
And a payment for all that happiness is 2 minutes of despair and confusion when I think that Arsenal beat us 5-1 , fair trade for me.

To be clear, I'm not saying no one should publicise it. I've said before, Sky Sports or any other privately funded organisation can do whatever they like. BBC 1 even, if they started included women's games in Saturday MOTD, then that's fine. I actually think it might be more useful, they can alternate mens and women's games.

But when you're trying to manipulate *news feeds* based on social activitism, that's wrong IMO.

 

[punky]

I do think it's very naive and quite patronising that the BBC believe people will start watching women's football if they report it in the news on parity with the men's game. It's what happens when you create an organisation that acts as a staff echo chamber.

 

[Trix]

I will admit I don't follow the BBC News RSS feed religiously, but regularly checking their twitter feed and BBC Football homepage would lead me to at least assume that they're not promoting the game to the level of the men's or anywhere close to it. I'd have to assume there's a level of bias involved in that you may notice them more and they stand out more as they're something you're not into and that sticks in your head more.

But I SERIOUSLY doubt they're promoting it as much as the men's game given... well... every other branch of the BBC and how they're promoting things.

And no. As I've said and others have also said, the women's game is growing. The Women's World Cup was a major changing point. So it's not entirely based on virtuous social activism (again, Hyperbole from you). It's based on the game growing and people being more interested in it. So if more people are into it the BBC are gonna talk about it more. It's that simple.

Why would they promote it as much as the mens game? The interest is far less so obviously it takes up less column inches. It isn't a sexist thing it's a popularity thing. It gets far more exposure than many male dominated sports though, and that is based on the fact more people are interested in Women's football than they are in say darts for instance.

I really do think people are making too much of this, it's growing naturally which is the best thing for it imo.

 

[Maxtremist]

Why would they promote it as much as the mens game? The interest is far less so obviously it takes up less column inches. It isn't a sexist thing it's a popularity thing. It gets far more exposure than many male dominated sports though, and that is based on the fact more people are interested in Women's football than they are in say darts for instance.

I really do think people are making too much of this, it's growing naturally which is the best thing for it imo.

Yeah, I never said at the moment they should promote it as much as the Men's game.

I said they don't do that from what I've seen, so the few articles they do promote aren't that big a deal and thus not 'shoving it down people's throats'.

 

[Trix]

Yeah, I never said at the moment they should promote it as much as the Men's game.

I said they don't do that from what I've seen, so the few articles they do promote aren't that big a deal and thus not 'shoving it down people's throats'.

Oh ok apologies.

 

[Thewobbler]

IIRC it was the idea that she's got a high status in the Women's game, why should she go to a low status team in the Men's game? Especially when you have those like Neville who just get handed the national teams Job without much prior experience.

Low stays maybe but the buzz would be great and if she went and succeeded that would be monumental.

At Chelsea she's in a cushy job that roman can bankroll. Would be interesting to see how much he spends on them and how much at man city compared to the rest of the league.

 

[Maxtremist]

Low stays maybe but the buzz would be great and if she went and succeeded that would be monumental.

At Chelsea she's in a cushy job that roman can bankroll. Would be interesting to see how much he spends on them and how much at man city compared to the rest of the league.

I'm not necessarily saying it wouldn't be great for her, was more what I thought she said and my understanding of it.

"Women's football is something to celebrate, and the quality and the achievement of all the females I represent... it's an insult to them that we talk about women's football being a step down, with the dedication and the commitment and the quality they have," Hayes said.
"Fran Kirby, Pernille Harder, Beth England, Magda Eriksson, Millie Bright, Maren Mjelde - do you want me to keep going? These are world-class players, and women's football is not a step down from anything."

So seems like the idea that she saw herself in a 'world class job' so why would she leave for one that wasn't?

Here's her full comments

Emma Hayes shuts down AFC Wimbledon rumours and will stay on as Chelsea Women boss in WSL

When asked if Wimbledon could afford her, Emma Hayes said: Absolutely not; WSL leaders Chelsea, who won last seasons title on a points-per-game basis after the season ended early due to the coronavirus pandemic, are currently on an 33-game unbeaten run in the league, a new record

www.skysports.com

 

[Tucker]

Thought this was quite interesting, but didn't want to start a whole new thread on it, so posted it here

Yeah, if this happened over here, I can only imagine the gnashing of teeth and the wailing from the usual Grots who think every single progressive thought is virtue signaling or a conspiracy by the “MSM” to make us all vegan feminists.

 

[chrissivad]

Ah, so you want the men to play on the artificial grass. My bad.

I haven't said that.
You seem to be reading a lot that isn't being said.

All I have said is that it is possible to have 2 events (I even said football and NFL in the original post) in the same day

 

[Shadydan]

Title of the thread is quite funny tbh