Karen carney

[The only way is S6]

This thread & the Wiegman thread have mustered 43 replies between them.

Enough said. 

[Birstall Owl]

On 22/08/2023 at 13:02, scram said:

If we can be realistic for a sec...

 

The vast, vast majority of fans care only for the first team and how it does

 

They don't care about their academy and youth teams, they absolutely certainly don't care about their womens teams

 

They just don't - it's a fact

 

Now, the amount of money a club raises in sponsorship is directly related to their success and exposure - so imagine if a lot of that income had to be siphoned off to prop up what to many fans is not even a tangible entity of the club whilst simultaneously denying the vast majority of the club income to drive it forward

 

I think you could extend that to vast majority of clubs too. All that matters is the first team and that is where all the money is pointed at, everything else even down to paper clips is scrutinised and has to be justified.

 

Which is why stadiums like Old Trafford need millions open millions spending on it to bring it up to other PL ground standards.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

On 23/08/2023 at 03:23, Luke said:

Couldn't be further from the truth 

 

I don't recall all this attention, money, coverage, and support for the women's game 10 years ago...

[markg]

Whether or not they've 'earned' the extra sponsorship or not, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Let them have it. Women weren't allowed to play professionally for decades, so if they get something now that they haven't 'earned' then fine.

[Ellis Rimmer]

2 hours ago, markg said:

Whether or not they've 'earned' the extra sponsorship or not, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Let them have it. Women weren't allowed to play professionally for decades, so if they get something now that they haven't 'earned' then fine.

To clarify the sponsorship that say Arsenal get from the emirates, you think half of that should go to their women’s team?

[markg]

2 minutes ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

To clarify the sponsorship that say Arsenal get from the emirates, you think half of that should go to their women’s team?

Sure, why not.

 

[Ellis Rimmer]

7 minutes ago, markg said:

Sure, why not.

 

Because if a club receives money for something, they should be able to use that money in the way that they want to

 

also it would discourage clubs from having women’s sides, if they have to share the sponsorship equally between the men and women’s team

 

It just doesn’t make sense on any level 

[aussieowl87]

I think on a men's football club's forum, the discussion around the growth [or lack thereof] of women's football is always going to be skewed.

 

There are going to be men's football fans who don't give a throw about women's football. There are going to be men's football fans who casually enjoy watching women's football. There are going to be men's football fans who are just as invested in the women's game as the men's.

 

Apply the same, but the other way around to women's football fans - just in lesser numbers.

 

I don't think women's football will ever be on parity in terms of fanbase / attraction / marketability compared to the men's game, but that doesn't mean I'd sit here and discount or play down or begrudge its relative growth or hope it struggles or what-have-you.

 

To respond directly to the OP Topic. No. Half of the men's sponsorship should not go to women's football. Are there avenues in which a men's and women's team of the same club can promote football as a whole that haven't been explored yet? Yes. But that's down to individual clubs to sort rather than some sort of top-down mandate.

[morganowl]

im sick to death of watching premier league / league football with the likes of carney stood with ex players/managers about 2 foot taller , she isnt qualified she aint played in the premier league managed and has no right been there . good look to the womans game its not for me but if supporters want to watch it and pay £50 then they can have big wage increases , same regards if they get the same viewing figures for live tv games its a market if they get 50000 crowds paying x amount and get the same viewing figures as mens football then they will get the same wages etc . i call it sky woke now its beyond stupid now . 

[markg]

7 minutes ago, morganowl said:

im sick to death of watching premier league / league football with the likes of carney stood with ex players/managers about 2 foot taller , she isnt qualified she aint played in the premier league managed and has no right been there . good look to the womans game its not for me but if supporters want to watch it and pay £50 then they can have big wage increases , same regards if they get the same viewing figures for live tv games its a market if they get 50000 crowds paying x amount and get the same viewing figures as mens football then they will get the same wages etc . i call it sky woke now its beyond stupid now . 

The likes of Karen Carney

 

Basically women. Women aren't allowed in your view to be on football shows?

[morganowl]

27 minutes ago, markg said:

The likes of Karen Carney

 

Basically women. Women aren't allowed in your view to be on football shows?

for instance when a premier league game is on i want ex or current players/managers who have played or managed at that level . if i watch a championship game i dont want a premier league person i want someone with the experience of either playing or managing , same in league 1 and so on.  the same regards the world world cup you want ex women players or managers to give there incite as pundits not an ex male footballer etc . i hope that has clarified things for you.. and i have discussions about football with quite a few woman i know , im not sexist and would like more woman to attend our games . 

[Ellis Rimmer]

5 minutes ago, morganowl said:

for instance when a premier league game is on i want ex or current players/managers who have played or managed at that level . if i watch a championship game i dont want a premier league person i want someone with the experience of either playing or managing , same in league 1 and so on.  the same regards the world world cup you want ex women players or managers to give there incite as pundits not an ex male footballer etc . i hope that has clarified things for you.. and i have discussions about football with quite a few woman i know , im not sexist and would like more woman to attend our games . 

I agree... if it was purely football knowledge to get you on TV none of the current ones would be on there you would be watching Gabriel Marcotti discuss it and people like that

[edmontonowl]

15 hours ago, Morepork said:

Silly comments like this do more harm than good.

 

I feel very defensive of the womens game, something I never expected a few years ago. The lack of funding in relation to some national teams at the World Cup, the misogynistic Spanish tw@t kissing the payer on the lips, the bo!!ocks Infantino came out with and a million other injustices they face.

 

Their game has grown exponentially in the last few years and all credit to them for that, as it currently stands its an entertaining and quality product. TV rights, advertising and other commercial revenue streams will determine its future growth and what the players get paid. I just don't see any justification for making a statement like this. Of course I want to see them progress and get funding but not at the expense of the mens game. Its a classic case of trying to right an injustice by creating a new one.

 

 

Fair points

 

The women's game has had to overcome a great many more barriers than the men's game, something which is also true of other sports.

 

While I don't think a 50-50 split of sponsorship money can be justified, I think the men's game (clubs) should support the women's game and likewise so should the sponsors/advertisers.

[markg]

3 hours ago, morganowl said:

for instance when a premier league game is on i want ex or current players/managers who have played or managed at that level . if i watch a championship game i dont want a premier league person i want someone with the experience of either playing or managing , same in league 1 and so on.  the same regards the world world cup you want ex women players or managers to give there incite as pundits not an ex male footballer etc . i hope that has clarified things for you.. and i have discussions about football with quite a few woman i know , im not sexist and would like more woman to attend our games . 

Fair enough. It's not sexist, I get you. You've not said 'not women' but just listed everything that would discount women. 

[scram]

14 minutes ago, edmontonowl said:

 

 

Fair points

 

The women's game has had to overcome a great many more barriers than the men's game, something which is also true of other sports.

 

While I don't think a 50-50 split of sponsorship money can be justified, I think the men's game (clubs) should support the women's game and likewise so should the sponsors/advertisers.

 

 

The mens clubs do support the women's game - very much so in the case of the big clubs

 

And sponsors/advertisers will spend their marketing budget where they feel they get best exposure and value

 

They can't be forced to sponsor women's football

[Morepork]

20 minutes ago, edmontonowl said:

 

 

Fair points

 

The women's game has had to overcome a great many more barriers than the men's game, something which is also true of other sports.

 

While I don't think a 50-50 split of sponsorship money can be justified, I think the men's game (clubs) should support the women's game and likewise so should the sponsors/advertisers.

 

4 minutes ago, scram said:

 

 

The mens clubs do support the women's game - very much so in the case of the big clubs

 

And sponsors/advertisers will spend their marketing budget where they feel they get best exposure and value

 

They can't be forced to sponsor women's football

 

Was just about to make the points @scram has made. I'm not comparing the struggles because they are different but the mens game faced plenty of its own. Afterall is was male players that wrangled power from the clubs through the likes of the Bosman ruling that paved the way for player remuneration we see today.

 

I think a lot of men are sympathetic to the struggles the women have/are facing, I also think a lot of men have bought into the women's game which is why I see posts like Karneys as damaging. It risks alienating regular people that would otherwise be getting behind their sport.

 

In much the same way as I see Megan Rapinoe damaging the women's game by demanding parity with men's pay. These aren't just decisions that can be made arbitrarily, market forces around TV rights, Sponsorship and other commercial revenues need to be the drivers of women's pay as they are in the men's game.  

 

Where I do think we need to be more proactive is calling out and removing obstacles (often male) that are neither genuine or committed to advancing women's football for whatever reason. Seeing the likes of Rubiales removed from his role as president of the Spanish Football Association because he does not know how to conduct himself like a normal person around women is a good step. Others will hopefully follow. 

 

[edmontonowl]

Sponsors/advertisers have to change their perspectives on where their money goes and why.

 

They could be a driving force but they focus too much on their ROI - short-termism.

 

That's where the money comes from these days.

[scram]

7 hours ago, edmontonowl said:

Sponsors/advertisers have to change their perspectives on where their money goes and why.

 

They could be a driving force but they focus too much on their ROI - short-termism.

 

 

 

Of course they do - that's exactly why they have marketing budgets

[Morepork]

7 hours ago, edmontonowl said:

Sponsors/advertisers have to change their perspectives on where their money goes and why.

 

They could be a driving force but they focus too much on their ROI - short-termism.

 

That's where the money comes from these days.

I don’t see it as a choice between the two. Women’s football revenue does not need to be at the expense of the men’s game. Their product has improved so much and gained in popularity at a remarkable rate. They will appeal to a broad base of advertisers and if they are interested improved TV rights money is a given. They do face some dangers though and I believe the World Cup highlighted one.

Edited August 25, 2023 by Morepork

[DJMortimer]

20 hours ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

I agree... if it was purely football knowledge to get you on TV none of the current ones would be on there you would be watching Gabriel Marcotti discuss it and people like that

 

Good point. People like Marcotti and Tim Vickery are in a different stratosphere to the likes of Jamie Redknapp, Lee Hendrie and Danny Murphy who offer nothing out of the ordinary, other than just having played at a high level. The former actually bring insights and perception that most of us simply don't have and should be valued much more than they are. For example, the Sky Soccer Saturday mob between them offer little that couldn't be found picking people randomly out of the crowd at a game.