Why would they even subject themselves to possibly being humiliated in this way? I get that it was a match to warm up for another game, but protect your brand, bitches.
the womens hockey teams (US and CAN) do this all the time. They are a team of the best women in the country. They literally dont have anyone else to scrimmage against between international events that could give them proper competition, and so they regularly go against top High School and DII/III college teams (they dont play the DI's because they would get killed). Its really their only choice.
They cant just play US v. Canada games 80 times a season.
Do they play non-contact hockey or something? I feel like even just mediocre 17 or 18 year old dudes would be able to check the fuck out of any grown women's team.
When they play against men's/boys teams they can't depend on physically outmatching them at all. Instead they really have to focus on their technical ability.
They go into these games knowing the scoreline won't end well, but it really does help. My team used to occasionally scrimmage against older teams for the same reason.
5 best in world best by a kids side of s club that wouldn't get in top 200 of men's football. This is why only America slightly cares about woman's football
Really not sure how true that is. We don't even care that much about the men's version of the game. Most Americans don't quite understand why the rest of the world goes so crazy over it. So if regular male version bores us, imagine how much of a snooze-fest we'd find the women's game.
Although I will admit that of the three players in the entire history of the sport that I can name off the top of my head, one of them is a woman.
Honestly, since they are a youth side and in Australia, I would be shocked if they could get into the top 1000 of youth teams. Australia is not known for its football prowess. The only reason they ever have qualified for the World Cup is because of the regional qualification system and their entire region is shit. The US is pretty shit at football too, but they have legit qualifications for the world cup (and even been edging upwards of the international game, with one or two decent world cup finishes), but Australia is literally dog shit at football (but amazing at rugby and cricket).
Nah its called both football or soccer by posh types or Americans. You seem threatened by it for some reason. NFL MLB and NBA are not hated here because they are totally irrelevant
Its because other countries are too poor for shit that doesnt suck. Youre on here for an American radio show, and probably 9/10ths of what you and the rest of the world is entertained by comes from America. You should consider yourself lucky we dont block our entertaining sports and TV seasons that last longer than 2 episodes from your limey faggot asses.
Actually, I like American shit, I will give you that. But as a Brit who travels (and is mostly outside Britain these days), I would say that in countries connected to the English speaking world (so former colonies, the 54 countries in the CommonWealth), other European countries (mostly the Germanic, Protestant sorts of countries) and the countries they influence, its a 50/50 split with English content.
Americans cover the crass sort of content, British covers the more cerebral content. So you get the plebs and we get the posh or educated types (second language English speakers also choose their accents on these lines sometimes).
In all of those other countries out there though, America is undoubtedly well represented.
Posh types, you know, Port Out, Starboard Home. People that can afford to travel. People with education and access. People who control all the strings. People not like you.
Face it, you live in their country, not the other way round. Mate.
Soccer is just from 'association football'. What do you think FIFA stands for?
Think about it, your version of football, what the world calls American football, is just taken from rugby and then altered to make it more war like (played by elite universities at the time). Well rugby was basically made from a guy who was playing football (sorry, 'soccer'), who decided to pick up the ball and run with it and this was in a town called Rugby. So not only does football predate American football, it predates the sport the proto American football was based on (although I will say the game changed a lot more since then, with Pop Warner and all that shit, but it was still based on rugby).
So all of that and the fact more people play it as football, call it football, more eyeballs, more relevance, more money, I think it is safe to say, you've lost that war mate.
There was an interesting article published on five thirty-eight that listed the most popular soccer teams by number of clicks to each team page on the espn fc site. The headline is about Manchester - who is the most popular, but the U.S. men's national team is #2 and ahead of big clubs like Arsenal and Barcelona, etc...
The women's national team is ranked so low in popularity that it is not even listed outright, but mentioned to be about as popular as the New York MLS team or Chile's national team (page visits logged within the USA only). These figures were collected during a female world cup year and not a real world cup, so numbers would be skewed very far in the womens' favor. Page visits and popularity as estimated by ESPN seems to be a great indicator of financial interest since so much money comes from television contracts.
The U.S. women's team did set records for viewership when it won the world cup, but the feminists are trying to compare this to a random U.S. game. Ordinary women's matches garner very little interest. If the U.S. men ever win a world cup final I would think it would be a much bigger event than when the ladies won.
Just like the time Venus and Serena Williams were beaten back to back by the 200th ranked men's tennis player.
Or when Fallon Fox (male-to-female trans MMA fighter) beat the living shit out of a woman:
During Fox's fight against Tamikka Brents, Brents suffered a concussion, an orbital bone fracture, and seven staples to the head. After her loss, Brents took to social media to fuel the controversy surrounding Fox's perceived advantage: "I've fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night. I can’t answer whether it’s because she was born a man or not because I’m not a doctor. I can only say, I’ve never felt so overpowered ever in my life and I am an abnormally strong female in my own right,” she stated. "Her grip was different, I could usually move around in the clinch against other females but couldn’t move at all in Fox’s clinch…"
Barcelona's U-12s could probably beat them by a similar margin.
It should also be noted that Australia's mens teams are not rated highly at all. And this is just one Australian club's u-15 team.
This happened before around 15 years ago with the German women's team (who were ranked in top 3 at the time) losing 3-0 to Stuttgart's u-17 team. Stuttgart aren't a particularly great team.
Whenever I see Americans talk about how great their women's team compared to the men's team I know they don't know shit about football.
About 4 years ago I saw some shitty comparison about how great the US women are, meanwhile Clint Dempsey, just one player, was earning more than the entire women's team.
"Just remember: if you beat the boys U-12 team, you get paid $14,000 this year. If you lose to the boys U-12 team, you get paid $8,000. You still have to do the bottle-drive and cookie sale regardless."
Whenever I see Americans talk about how great their women's team compared to the men's team I know they don't know shit about football.
They're obviously talking in relative terms - relative to their competition, US Womens team is #1 in the world, US Mens team is...maybe in the top ten? (edit: wow I way overestimated because they were #5 in 2010 World Cup I think...FIFA rankings currently have them at #29)
Very few people think that the US Women's team would win if they played the US Men's team, and those few that do are the ones that clearly "don't know shit about football."
Floyd Mayweather is a great boxer compared to Kimbo Slice or Butterbean even though if either of those two fought against Mayweather they could knock him out just by getting in one shot basically.
lol @ US mens team being top 10 in football. That has never happened. Ever.
Also in 2010, you guys finished 12 (which is extremely good for a US team) and even won your first round group stage. But I think you under-estimate the level of competitiveness of the teams that can consistently get into the quarters. Its a whole new logarithmic level to the US game (never mind the truly elite teams, which is another jump above that).
On a world cup year mate, they were playing warm ups with COCACAF sides, and edged up on points for a minute. But what happened in that World Cup just a few months later? They got slammed out in the group stages and ended up in 25th position after the tournament (which is where they are naturally ranked and have to work very hard to maintain, which is why 2010 world cup was so good for them, because they got to 12, or 2002, that was legit too). What kind of dickhead pushes the main national team hard a few months before the World Cup? (Hint, ones that don't have many players in high level club leagues who have club contracts and ones who don't want to do well in a world cup).
Its like saying your shitty NBA team is ranked #1 because they got higher point wins on the first game of the season against some shitty side. Are they though? Are they really?
The word soccer comes from 'association football', the sport is called football, was called football before American football existed. What exactly do you think FIFA stands for? Its football, and aluminium is aluminium.
It's hilarious that 14 year old boys beat the 5th ranked women's team, keep in mind that the argument from feminists is not that they can beat the men, but that they generate more interest than the men do because when they won the world cup everyone went all ape shit supposedly.
At the risk of sounding like a fag, I think people retweeting this article endlessly at Gavin are kind of missing the point. Gavin/The Daily Show weren't arguing that men could beat the women one on one, it was who deserved to be paid more. It's obvious that elite level men players would totally crush a women's team, and Landon Donovan is a faggot cuckold for recently saying the national team men would lose to the women.
That's true, but it ties in with the women's argument that they are more popular and successful than the men, which is misleading given that it's only because women's soccer isn't remotely as competitive, as evidenced by children beating professional women's teams routinely, and because the US barely watches soccer. The combination means they can easily win 4 out of 7 world cups and draw a one-off TV crowd under the guise that they are battling against huge soccer playing nations. They're not even playing against professional footballers in some cases. If the men won the world cup the TV audience would eclipse the women's final, because it would be 100 times the achievement.
Yeah you are 100% right, outside of a handful of world cup games every 4 years, women's soccer gets zero ratings or attendance. The U.S. men's friendly against Ecuador the other day was sold out and carried on ESPN 2. I just wanted to be a cunt and point out that women losing doesn't prove Gavin's point or even have that much to do with what he was arguing.
It does though; feminists should not want to be paid the same amount for doing less--that would be a gendered position where they are treated differently because of their sex. Purportedly, they want to be treated just like men would in this situation. Which means, they wouldn't make the team, let alone have the audacity to ask to get paid the same for playing against semi-professionals and other women that are shitty.
Soccer ain't that popular in Australia (more popular are: cricket, AFL, rugby, rugby league) and still, the national broadcaster, paid for by the taxpayers, plays the WOMEN'S LEAGUE on television to be fucking phoney progressive. How is this fair, knowing that there are much better players that miss out from these opportunities for exposure? Now, I'm not saying that I want or need fairness, but 'fairness' is certainly what these bitches be asking for--of course, they're perspective of fair is not based on merit but their sexual entitlement.
I guess I only have the perspective of an American. I would be annoyed if the state owned network showcased women's sports in the name of "equality". Salary and exposure should be based on demand for the product and what the free market wants to pay them.
The fact that the women lost tells me the skill level is shit, but if someone wants to pay them millions to play shitty women's soccer then let them. If they are truly being underpaid then the free market would have corrected that.
Has nothing to do with skill level, has everything to do with supply and demand and the free market. I don't think the women are better or deserve to be paid more, but It's not about skill, it's about demand for the product (which is not as in demand as men's soccer).
If you made shoes, and you had a female colleague that made much worse shoes, at a far less efficient rate (in fact, she works less productively than your fourteen-year-old son) and only worked two days to your five, don't you think you'd have a case for why your colleague doesn't deserve a raise just because she has a vagina, and has no intention (or the ability) of upping her productivity?
Don't you think she especially doesn't deserve to be paid the same as you, as that would be blatantly unfair to you? Wouldn't you ask to start using her materials to make the simpler shoes and operate at her productivity?
Yuck. So like I said above, a reason to post some bizarro SJW shit.
I don't give a fuck about your hypothetical woman who makes shoes. I do wonder where all you upset tryhards came from. This sub has always been a shithole but all you hyperpolitical/ sjws make this place insufferable.
Well, even if the women want to talk attendance numbers... In what was once called "Soccer Town USA", Rochester NY, we have an USL men's team (basically AA minor league) that gets about 6,000 attendance per game.
The women's major league pro team here, WNY Flash, features a couple gold medalists and, for a while, hometown favorite Abbey Wambach. They draw about 2,000.
the womens hockey teams (US and CAN) do this all the time. They are a team of the best women in the country. They literally dont have anyone else to scrimmage against between international events that could give them proper competition, and so they regularly go against top High School and DII/III college teams (they dont play the DI's because they would get killed). Its really their only choice.
They cant just play US v. Canada games 80 times a season.
When they play against men's/boys teams they can't depend on physically outmatching them at all. Instead they really have to focus on their technical ability.
They go into these games knowing the scoreline won't end well, but it really does help. My team used to occasionally scrimmage against older teams for the same reason.
The word soccer comes from 'association football', the sport is called football, was called football before American football existed. What exactly do you think FIFA stands for? Its football, and aluminium is aluminium.
80 comments
39 Boredghost77 2016-05-27
Say the words "career ending pregnancy" and try not to laugh
23 MilliBotany 2016-05-27
Aye nye!
18 OpiesPendulousUdders 2016-05-27
The girls would have won in an ironing competition though, we can admit that at least, right gang?
14 Jarvismcjigglesteins 2016-05-27
No, the men's team invented & engineered the device so they'd still have the upper hand.
As soon as we learn to give anal births, the women's team may as well permanently retire.
4 MilliBotany 2016-05-27
I think they'd make a good showing in the "pot rattling" competition, too!
6 Chipnado 2016-05-27
Getting slammed there too, all the best Chefs are male.
1 MilliBotany 2016-05-27
Yes, you're right.
2 Dannyprecise 2016-05-27
I'm pretty good at ironing fam
17 [deleted] 2016-05-27
Why would they even subject themselves to possibly being humiliated in this way? I get that it was a match to warm up for another game, but protect your brand, bitches.
7 lemskroob 2016-05-27
the womens hockey teams (US and CAN) do this all the time. They are a team of the best women in the country. They literally dont have anyone else to scrimmage against between international events that could give them proper competition, and so they regularly go against top High School and DII/III college teams (they dont play the DI's because they would get killed). Its really their only choice.
They cant just play US v. Canada games 80 times a season.
1 racemic_mixture 2016-05-27
Do they play non-contact hockey or something? I feel like even just mediocre 17 or 18 year old dudes would be able to check the fuck out of any grown women's team.
3 friendfromsp 2016-05-27
When they play against men's/boys teams they can't depend on physically outmatching them at all. Instead they really have to focus on their technical ability.
They go into these games knowing the scoreline won't end well, but it really does help. My team used to occasionally scrimmage against older teams for the same reason.
11 cabaretcabaret 2016-05-27
The Aussie women might not be able to beat children but Hope Solo has.
9 Dennyislife 2016-05-27
5 best in world best by a kids side of s club that wouldn't get in top 200 of men's football. This is why only America slightly cares about woman's football
7 Tom_Stall 2016-05-27
Over 50% of professional female soccer players are American. The American Men's team are far greater than the women's team.
I'd rather be a competitor in the Olympics than a gold medalist in the Special Olympics.
-18 Iwontbebannedagain 2016-05-27
But you're neither. You don't even get gold for your internet comments.
The downvote let's me know I hurt your feelings, you fool, why reinforce me? Are you a moron?
7 whydontUlovemeLyndsi 2016-05-27
dis guy should b wurkin at the drive-in he's projectin so hard tsss
-11 Iwontbebannedagain 2016-05-27
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
edit: Have an upvote, brother.
I'm fuckin' dyin' over here, in more ways than one.
10 TakeTheHitGuy 2016-05-27
Just take the fuckin hit dude.
-8 Iwontbebannedagain 2016-05-27
Make me, bitch. What are we, smokin GANJA OR SUMMIN!?
2 sanfrancisco69er 2016-05-27
Its called soccer and we dont care about it at all.
1 LegsideLarry 2016-05-27
Why does everyone have to use the same words you do?
1 sanfrancisco69er 2016-05-27
because its wrong and your mom has cancer
2 LegsideLarry 2016-05-27
Oh
1 nomorecompromise 2016-05-27
hahaha what the fuck
0 K33PSUMMRSAYFE 2016-05-27
Really not sure how true that is. We don't even care that much about the men's version of the game. Most Americans don't quite understand why the rest of the world goes so crazy over it. So if regular male version bores us, imagine how much of a snooze-fest we'd find the women's game. Although I will admit that of the three players in the entire history of the sport that I can name off the top of my head, one of them is a woman.
0 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
Honestly, since they are a youth side and in Australia, I would be shocked if they could get into the top 1000 of youth teams. Australia is not known for its football prowess. The only reason they ever have qualified for the World Cup is because of the regional qualification system and their entire region is shit. The US is pretty shit at football too, but they have legit qualifications for the world cup (and even been edging upwards of the international game, with one or two decent world cup finishes), but Australia is literally dog shit at football (but amazing at rugby and cricket).
1 Dennyislife 2016-05-27
Amazing at cricket? I was st Trent bridge last year and disagree
-16 MilliBotany 2016-05-27
SOCCER. It's fucking called soccer.
And we don't care about it no matter what you fucking call it,
because it's a faggot "game" for faggots to play
and other faggots to watch and jerk-off to.
7 Dennyislife 2016-05-27
Nah its called both football or soccer by posh types or Americans. You seem threatened by it for some reason. NFL MLB and NBA are not hated here because they are totally irrelevant
-19 MilliBotany 2016-05-27
"Posh types". Yeccchh. Who the fuck talks like that?
And being irrelevant to an irrelevant market is irrelevant.
The NFL will make it's annual billions without
shitty food-eating imperialists, thank you very much. USA!! USA!! USA!!
3 BullsLawDan 2016-05-27
This is some kind of weird parody or something, right? It's not working.
2 Dennyislife 2016-05-27
Sorry for sports we made up going global because we invaded everyone before television was invented and yours not making waves in the same way.
2 [deleted] 2016-05-27
Who is this "we" you speak of?
0 TotallyNotObsi 2016-05-27
He's a crooked tooth limey
0 sanfrancisco69er 2016-05-27
Its because other countries are too poor for shit that doesnt suck. Youre on here for an American radio show, and probably 9/10ths of what you and the rest of the world is entertained by comes from America. You should consider yourself lucky we dont block our entertaining sports and TV seasons that last longer than 2 episodes from your limey faggot asses.
2 Dennyislife 2016-05-27
You've lost control Sir.
2 sanfrancisco69er 2016-05-27
Fair enough.
1 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
Actually, I like American shit, I will give you that. But as a Brit who travels (and is mostly outside Britain these days), I would say that in countries connected to the English speaking world (so former colonies, the 54 countries in the CommonWealth), other European countries (mostly the Germanic, Protestant sorts of countries) and the countries they influence, its a 50/50 split with English content.
Americans cover the crass sort of content, British covers the more cerebral content. So you get the plebs and we get the posh or educated types (second language English speakers also choose their accents on these lines sometimes).
In all of those other countries out there though, America is undoubtedly well represented.
1 Iwontbebannedagain 2016-05-27
Some kind of parody?
1 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
Posh types, you know, Port Out, Starboard Home. People that can afford to travel. People with education and access. People who control all the strings. People not like you.
Face it, you live in their country, not the other way round. Mate.
0 [deleted] 2016-05-27
[deleted]
1 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
Soccer is just from 'association football'. What do you think FIFA stands for?
Think about it, your version of football, what the world calls American football, is just taken from rugby and then altered to make it more war like (played by elite universities at the time). Well rugby was basically made from a guy who was playing football (sorry, 'soccer'), who decided to pick up the ball and run with it and this was in a town called Rugby. So not only does football predate American football, it predates the sport the proto American football was based on (although I will say the game changed a lot more since then, with Pop Warner and all that shit, but it was still based on rugby).
So all of that and the fact more people play it as football, call it football, more eyeballs, more relevance, more money, I think it is safe to say, you've lost that war mate.
4 cwin07 2016-05-27
There was an interesting article published on five thirty-eight that listed the most popular soccer teams by number of clicks to each team page on the espn fc site. The headline is about Manchester - who is the most popular, but the U.S. men's national team is #2 and ahead of big clubs like Arsenal and Barcelona, etc...
The women's national team is ranked so low in popularity that it is not even listed outright, but mentioned to be about as popular as the New York MLS team or Chile's national team (page visits logged within the USA only). These figures were collected during a female world cup year and not a real world cup, so numbers would be skewed very far in the womens' favor. Page visits and popularity as estimated by ESPN seems to be a great indicator of financial interest since so much money comes from television contracts.
The U.S. women's team did set records for viewership when it won the world cup, but the feminists are trying to compare this to a random U.S. game. Ordinary women's matches garner very little interest. If the U.S. men ever win a world cup final I would think it would be a much bigger event than when the ladies won.
4 Leeham721 2016-05-27
Just like the time Venus and Serena Williams were beaten back to back by the 200th ranked men's tennis player.
Or when Fallon Fox (male-to-female trans MMA fighter) beat the living shit out of a woman:
3 Tom_Stall 2016-05-27
Barcelona's U-12s could probably beat them by a similar margin.
It should also be noted that Australia's mens teams are not rated highly at all. And this is just one Australian club's u-15 team.
This happened before around 15 years ago with the German women's team (who were ranked in top 3 at the time) losing 3-0 to Stuttgart's u-17 team. Stuttgart aren't a particularly great team.
Whenever I see Americans talk about how great their women's team compared to the men's team I know they don't know shit about football.
About 4 years ago I saw some shitty comparison about how great the US women are, meanwhile Clint Dempsey, just one player, was earning more than the entire women's team.
6 BullsLawDan 2016-05-27
My son plays U-12 and just the thought of this is fucking hysterical. Thanks.
5 imthatsingleminded 2016-05-27
"Just remember: if you beat the women's national team, you get ice cream. If you lose to the women's national team, you still get ice cream."
4 whydontUlovemeLyndsi 2016-05-27
"Just remember: if you beat the boys U-12 team, you get paid $14,000 this year. If you lose to the boys U-12 team, you get paid $8,000. You still have to do the bottle-drive and cookie sale regardless."
2 imthatsingleminded 2016-05-27
They're obviously talking in relative terms - relative to their competition, US Womens team is #1 in the world, US Mens team is...maybe in the top ten? (edit: wow I way overestimated because they were #5 in 2010 World Cup I think...FIFA rankings currently have them at #29)
Very few people think that the US Women's team would win if they played the US Men's team, and those few that do are the ones that clearly "don't know shit about football."
Floyd Mayweather is a great boxer compared to Kimbo Slice or Butterbean even though if either of those two fought against Mayweather they could knock him out just by getting in one shot basically.
1 CelticSabbath 2016-05-27
And who among those fighters gets paid the most? The best one? There you go.
2 imthatsingleminded 2016-05-27
I never said anything about who should get paid what.
0 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
lol @ US mens team being top 10 in football. That has never happened. Ever.
Also in 2010, you guys finished 12 (which is extremely good for a US team) and even won your first round group stage. But I think you under-estimate the level of competitiveness of the teams that can consistently get into the quarters. Its a whole new logarithmic level to the US game (never mind the truly elite teams, which is another jump above that).
2 imthatsingleminded 2016-05-27
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=us+men%27s+national+team+highest+ranking
But in either 2010 or 2014 the US was ranked #5 - that's what I was referring to.
0 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
On a world cup year mate, they were playing warm ups with COCACAF sides, and edged up on points for a minute. But what happened in that World Cup just a few months later? They got slammed out in the group stages and ended up in 25th position after the tournament (which is where they are naturally ranked and have to work very hard to maintain, which is why 2010 world cup was so good for them, because they got to 12, or 2002, that was legit too). What kind of dickhead pushes the main national team hard a few months before the World Cup? (Hint, ones that don't have many players in high level club leagues who have club contracts and ones who don't want to do well in a world cup).
Its like saying your shitty NBA team is ranked #1 because they got higher point wins on the first game of the season against some shitty side. Are they though? Are they really?
-4 MilliBotany 2016-05-27
tl;dc
-5 rrussom 2016-05-27
We dont have womens football teams.
and i'm pretty sure the rest of the world doesnt have football either
1 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
The word soccer comes from 'association football', the sport is called football, was called football before American football existed. What exactly do you think FIFA stands for? Its football, and aluminium is aluminium.
2 cwin07 2016-05-27
It's hilarious that 14 year old boys beat the 5th ranked women's team, keep in mind that the argument from feminists is not that they can beat the men, but that they generate more interest than the men do because when they won the world cup everyone went all ape shit supposedly.
At the risk of sounding like a fag, I think people retweeting this article endlessly at Gavin are kind of missing the point. Gavin/The Daily Show weren't arguing that men could beat the women one on one, it was who deserved to be paid more. It's obvious that elite level men players would totally crush a women's team, and Landon Donovan is a faggot cuckold for recently saying the national team men would lose to the women.
4 cabaretcabaret 2016-05-27
That's true, but it ties in with the women's argument that they are more popular and successful than the men, which is misleading given that it's only because women's soccer isn't remotely as competitive, as evidenced by children beating professional women's teams routinely, and because the US barely watches soccer. The combination means they can easily win 4 out of 7 world cups and draw a one-off TV crowd under the guise that they are battling against huge soccer playing nations. They're not even playing against professional footballers in some cases. If the men won the world cup the TV audience would eclipse the women's final, because it would be 100 times the achievement.
1 cwin07 2016-05-27
Yeah you are 100% right, outside of a handful of world cup games every 4 years, women's soccer gets zero ratings or attendance. The U.S. men's friendly against Ecuador the other day was sold out and carried on ESPN 2. I just wanted to be a cunt and point out that women losing doesn't prove Gavin's point or even have that much to do with what he was arguing.
1 CelticSabbath 2016-05-27
It does though; feminists should not want to be paid the same amount for doing less--that would be a gendered position where they are treated differently because of their sex. Purportedly, they want to be treated just like men would in this situation. Which means, they wouldn't make the team, let alone have the audacity to ask to get paid the same for playing against semi-professionals and other women that are shitty.
Soccer ain't that popular in Australia (more popular are: cricket, AFL, rugby, rugby league) and still, the national broadcaster, paid for by the taxpayers, plays the WOMEN'S LEAGUE on television to be fucking phoney progressive. How is this fair, knowing that there are much better players that miss out from these opportunities for exposure? Now, I'm not saying that I want or need fairness, but 'fairness' is certainly what these bitches be asking for--of course, they're perspective of fair is not based on merit but their sexual entitlement.
1 cwin07 2016-05-27
I guess I only have the perspective of an American. I would be annoyed if the state owned network showcased women's sports in the name of "equality". Salary and exposure should be based on demand for the product and what the free market wants to pay them.
The fact that the women lost tells me the skill level is shit, but if someone wants to pay them millions to play shitty women's soccer then let them. If they are truly being underpaid then the free market would have corrected that. Has nothing to do with skill level, has everything to do with supply and demand and the free market. I don't think the women are better or deserve to be paid more, but It's not about skill, it's about demand for the product (which is not as in demand as men's soccer).
1 yeah_he_do 2016-05-27
Where did he say that? I can't find anything like that from a quick search.
1 cwin07 2016-05-27
I found one source, but it's a year old.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3165608/America-s-World-Cup-soccer-winning-women-beat-MEN-says-man-Landon-Donovan-calls-ultimate-match-Alex-Morgan-says-Bring-on.html
But he has been fairly vocal on the side of women in this whole dumb equal pay thing, and im sure has said similar things recently.
2 BoardroomBimmy 2016-05-27
Why would this be for Gavin? I'm sure a 14 year old boy could kick his ass at athletic things, too.
0 qdpbog 2016-05-27
Suuure. Use yer hands now and give it a good ol spank. Yer hands are so soft and uncalloused.
2 EskimoEscrow 2016-05-27
"This one's for Gavin"
... what?
3 cabaretcabaret 2016-05-27
Gavin appeared on the Daily show talking about the US women's soccer team
-2 Mitchull 2016-05-27
It's just an excuse to post some bizarro social justice bullshit, I guess.
4 EskimoEscrow 2016-05-27
Does OP think women are actually good at sports or something?
0 Mitchull 2016-05-27
Maybe he's attempting a Weird News segment.
4 CelticSabbath 2016-05-27
If you made shoes, and you had a female colleague that made much worse shoes, at a far less efficient rate (in fact, she works less productively than your fourteen-year-old son) and only worked two days to your five, don't you think you'd have a case for why your colleague doesn't deserve a raise just because she has a vagina, and has no intention (or the ability) of upping her productivity?
Don't you think she especially doesn't deserve to be paid the same as you, as that would be blatantly unfair to you? Wouldn't you ask to start using her materials to make the simpler shoes and operate at her productivity?
0 Mitchull 2016-05-27
Yuck. So like I said above, a reason to post some bizarro SJW shit.
I don't give a fuck about your hypothetical woman who makes shoes. I do wonder where all you upset tryhards came from. This sub has always been a shithole but all you hyperpolitical/ sjws make this place insufferable.
1 CelticSabbath 2016-05-27
Glad you find logic insufferable.
1 [deleted] 2016-05-27
[deleted]
1 BullsLawDan 2016-05-27
Well, even if the women want to talk attendance numbers... In what was once called "Soccer Town USA", Rochester NY, we have an USL men's team (basically AA minor league) that gets about 6,000 attendance per game.
The women's major league pro team here, WNY Flash, features a couple gold medalists and, for a while, hometown favorite Abbey Wambach. They draw about 2,000.
1 NitratePrint 2016-05-27
Where's the video?
-5 Mitchull 2016-05-27
Shitpost of the day here.
-12 SWIMsfriend 2016-05-27
maybe its just me, but if i was a women's soccer team going against 14 year old boys, i'd just have the team play naked.
no way in hell these boys would be able to do well if their more focused on sex than the game, plus its near impossible to run with a hard-on.
boom! then they can be known as the only women's soccer team that has beaten 14 year old boys.
6 TheSean85 2016-05-27
Nah. How 'bout the boys play naked. Now we're talkin'.
1 CigarsNCrotch 2016-05-27
shhuurree
6 TheSean85 2016-05-27
Nah. How 'bout the boys play naked. Now we're talkin'.
-19 MilliBotany 2016-05-27
"Posh types". Yeccchh. Who the fuck talks like that?
And being irrelevant to an irrelevant market is irrelevant.
The NFL will make it's annual billions without
shitty food-eating imperialists, thank you very much. USA!! USA!! USA!!
7 whydontUlovemeLyndsi 2016-05-27
dis guy should b wurkin at the drive-in he's projectin so hard tsss
7 lemskroob 2016-05-27
the womens hockey teams (US and CAN) do this all the time. They are a team of the best women in the country. They literally dont have anyone else to scrimmage against between international events that could give them proper competition, and so they regularly go against top High School and DII/III college teams (they dont play the DI's because they would get killed). Its really their only choice.
They cant just play US v. Canada games 80 times a season.
3 friendfromsp 2016-05-27
When they play against men's/boys teams they can't depend on physically outmatching them at all. Instead they really have to focus on their technical ability.
They go into these games knowing the scoreline won't end well, but it really does help. My team used to occasionally scrimmage against older teams for the same reason.
1 fuckjeah 2016-05-27
The word soccer comes from 'association football', the sport is called football, was called football before American football existed. What exactly do you think FIFA stands for? Its football, and aluminium is aluminium.
2 imthatsingleminded 2016-05-27
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=us+men%27s+national+team+highest+ranking
But in either 2010 or 2014 the US was ranked #5 - that's what I was referring to.
1 CelticSabbath 2016-05-27
Glad you find logic insufferable.