oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 It will only improve over time, but right now womens football is just shocking. Goalies can't catch or throw. Defenders can't head the ball. Forwards can't see beyond the most simple passes. Midfielders don't read interceptions. And why is this ?? Because girls are stopped playing the game at 11 I would suggest.... Mix them together and watch the difference shrink... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 And why is this ?? Because girls are stopped playing the game at 11 I would suggest.... Mix them together and watch the difference shrink... I'd have no objections to them trying to play at the same level/in the same competition. That's what I said... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Imagine the tricky little Brazilian trying to skip past a big hard defender and gets a crunching tackle. She breaks a leg, who is responsible for breaking the rules and letting her play to recieve such an injury? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) Like I said earlier... The following arguments dont not hold ground... Not strong enough Not fast enough Not skilful enough And before anyone wants to continue to argue that girls aren't strong enough or fast enough pick up a biology book. So what is the reason ? Edited February 17, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Like I said earlier... The following arguments dont not hold ground... Not strong enough Not fast enough Not skilful enough And before anyone wants to continue to argue that girls aren't strong enough or fast enough pick up a biology book. So what is the reason ? It's against the rules, as they're written. So if something does happen (she gets hurt/hurts someone) then as the club breaking the rules we're paddle-less up a creek of poop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) It's against the rules, as they're written. So if something does happen (she gets hurt/hurts someone) then as the club breaking the rules we're paddle-less up a creek of poop. So it is JUST the rules.... So no one here can offer a better argument ? So we have to ask ourselves why the need for this rule.... I would suggest to continue to not allow a women to play with NO GOOD REASON can only be sexism. The only thing being focused on is their sex. Edited February 17, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 So it is JUST the rules.... So no one here can offer a better argument ? So we have to ask ourselves why the need for this rule.... I would suggest to continue to not allow a women to play with NO GOOD REASON can only be sexism. The only thing being focused on is their sex. Please don't consider me an expert. Just pointing out my opinion. Watching womens football I think it's clear to say they are not even close to the Men's game in their standards. Now, I'm a strong advocate of playing better teams to get better... however you have to walk before you can run. To remove the formal legislation is fine, but would it make any difference? I can't think of a single woman player I've seen who could compete at our (very low) level, so what is really gained by removing the paper based blockade? Improve their standards - which is occuring at a rapid rate - especially in the US - over the next 5 years and then begin to look at the legality of segregated leagues. All that said - football is the least of your worries if you're passionate about mixed sex sports. Look at Athletics and other sporting areas (table tennis especially) where women are competitivly as good as men yet remain segregated, and focus your frustrations there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I disagree, I do think women are not strong enough and I do think that argument holds ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Like I said earlier... The following arguments dont not hold ground... Not strong enough Not fast enough Not skilful enough And before anyone wants to continue to argue that girls aren't strong enough or fast enough pick up a biology book. Following that logic through, we should have level playing field for everything else then - or are we just talking about football. Not Athletics, Rugby League, Rugby Union, Ice Hockey, Swimming, Tennis, American Football, Basketball... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 So it is JUST the rules.... So no one here can offer a better argument ? So we have to ask ourselves why the need for this rule.... I would suggest to continue to not allow a women to play with NO GOOD REASON can only be sexism. The only thing being focused on is their sex. See, I always thought it was nothing to do with sexism, and the reason they are split from age 11 is because its roughly the age when their bodies start developing. If girls play with boys, what you are saying is that girls will become as strong as boys? Am I right in thinking that, because if that is the case then you are saying girls are weaker than boys (you sexist pig ;) )...and if girls are weaker than boys then sure the argument that girls football lacks strength is true. Now the fact is, womens football does lack strength and pace, but not skill. In fact, you can compare it to most sports and its true. Fastest 100m runner on the planet- Man. 200m- Man. 400m-Man. 10,000m- Man. Every swimming world record- mens are faster than women. Same can be said for cycling. Fastest tennis serve ever- Man...it would go on and on and on. Its not sexist, its just the way it is, and its why there is mens football and womens football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Following that logic through, we should have level playing field for everything else then - or are we just talking about football. Not Athletics, Rugby League, Rugby Union, Ice Hockey, Swimming, Tennis, American Football, Basketball... ....Karate, Judo, Kick Boxing, Boxing, BJJ how could I forget these? I've fought against female opponents, I'm not saying they haven't got the technique, or the haven't got power, but I've never seen a physical match and the two sexes train together. Always have done to my knowledge anyways... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 To remove the formal legislation is fine, but would it make any difference? I can't think of a single woman player I've seen who could compete at our (very low) level, so what is really gained by removing the paper based blockade? That is only true because the rule exists. Girls do not get exposed to the coaching required. Removing this rule WOULD expose them to this coaching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I disagree, I do think women are not strong enough and I do think that argument holds ground. Well that is simply a steroptype that holds NO ground... I know women who are far stronger than ANY player that plays for OAFC... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Following that logic through, we should have level playing field for everything else then - or are we just talking about football. Not Athletics, Rugby League, Rugby Union, Ice Hockey, Swimming, Tennis, American Football, Basketball... If they have the ability why not.... We have divided men and women through the decades... That is now changing and sport is one of the reaming hurdles to clear... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Well that is simply a steroptype that holds NO ground... I know women who are far stronger than ANY player that plays for OAFC... Who? And does she have the necessary skillset apart from strength to be a professional footballer in the mens game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 See, I always thought it was nothing to do with sexism, and the reason they are split from age 11 is because its roughly the age when their bodies start developing. If girls play with boys, what you are saying is that girls will become as strong as boys? Am I right in thinking that, because if that is the case then you are saying girls are weaker than boys (you sexist pig ;) )...and if girls are weaker than boys then sure the argument that girls football lacks strength is true. Now the fact is, womens football does lack strength and pace, but not skill. In fact, you can compare it to most sports and its true. Fastest 100m runner on the planet- Man. 200m- Man. 400m-Man. 10,000m- Man. Every swimming world record- mens are faster than women. Same can be said for cycling. Fastest tennis serve ever- Man...it would go on and on and on. Its not sexist, its just the way it is, and its why there is mens football and womens football. First things first... There is a difference between armature and professional sports... The sports you talk about there are mostly armature... You dont run for money your run for the glory... Professional sport is different... Sports like Tennis, Football, Rugby, Cricket etc etc can easily be argued that women could take part... I am saying denying women from entering professional sport on the basis of nothing but sex is wrong and is sexism.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) Who? And does she have the necessary skillset apart from strength to be a professional footballer in the mens game? Jill Mills... massively strong women... The second part is impossible to prove due to the lack off access to coaching from a young age but I believe this Brazilian women is a similar physique to what would be required. Chris Taylor is hardly the strongest chap is he. Edited February 17, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) ....Karate, Judo, Kick Boxing, Boxing, BJJ how could I forget these? I've fought against female opponents, I'm not saying they haven't got the technique, or the haven't got power, but I've never seen a physical match and the two sexes train together. Always have done to my knowledge anyways... But those would be sensible arguments to say women couldnt last and so wouldn't enter... Still I wouldn't be in favour of a RULES that states women cant enter... Fact is sports like football, tennis...snooker ffs!! A women could compete with men... Edited February 17, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Its not acceptable in any other PROFESSIONAL environment to deny a women a opportunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 That is only true because the rule exists. Girls do not get exposed to the coaching required. Removing this rule WOULD expose them to this coaching. The University soccer structure in the USA provides women there with a better and more formal training structure than and boy would get in the UK. Christ they have better formal coaching than Latics!!! They're still not as good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 The University soccer structure in the USA provides women there with a better and more formal training structure than and boy would get in the UK. Christ they have better formal coaching than Latics!!! They're still not as good. That would be a good example if it highlighted what happens when you allow boys and girls to play together with no restrictions but it dose not. Allow a girl to continue playing with the boys with no interruptions, being exposed to the same coaches I think will produce girls who are more than capable of competing with men. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 If they have the ability why not.... We have divided men and women through the decades... That is now changing and sport is one of the reaming hurdles to clear... Females will come up short when it comes down to collision sports. You can't expect a female to gain the muscle and the mass to even equal a RL Centre say, Keith Senior for Rhinos or a Hooker like Keiron Cunningham - these guys are average build, how about something more devastating like a Vinnie Anderson, Mal Meninga, Tuigamala, or players who are taking hit after hit like Fozzard or Wellens running the drives... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 (edited) Females will come up short when it comes down to collision sports. You can't expect a female to gain the muscle and the mass to even equal a RL Centre say, Keith Senior for Rhinos or a Hooker like Keiron Cunningham - these guys are average build, how about something more devastating like a Vinnie Anderson, Mal Meninga, Tuigamala, or players who are taking hit after hit like Fozzard or Wellens running the drives... If that is true then you don't need a rule....no girl would ever make the grade.... At one time people said we wouldn't ever have a black president... Guess what happened once the playing field was levelled... You might think its different but it isn't... There isn't one valid argument ( in my opinion) so far which goes against abolishing rules based around sex... Edited February 17, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Another example... Why do we have local leagues full of Asian footballers but very few professional Asian players ? Sooner people realise the slightly wrong and dated undertones to our game the better... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_ragg1984 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 First things first... There is a difference between armature and professional sports... The sports you talk about there are mostly armature... You dont run for money your run for the glory... Professional sport is different... Sports like Tennis, Football, Rugby, Cricket etc etc can easily be argued that women could take part... I am saying denying women from entering professional sport on the basis of nothing but sex is wrong and is sexism.... They were all professional. Professional training methods, professional levels of pay. No one is denying women the right to play professional sport, women can be professional too! The point is, put them in sports up against men and they would be out of their depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.