James Rodriguez

Joan

Well-known member
I think you're undervaluing just how big the male advantage is in terms of athleticism. It's insurmontable. Let's not forget that it's not the frail skinny men that can't even carry their own groceries that go into competitive sports, it's the best of the lot.

Serena would be lucky to win a game.

True. And it's not really unfair to men letting women compete with them. The problem arises the other way. Sure, different on paper, but don't think we'd see any actual change. No woman would make it into teams like Barca anyway.
 

Laplacian

Senior Member
It has more to do than just height and weight too, though. A slender 5'8 man can still win an arm wrestling comp. against a 6'3 180lbs chick.
 

Bobo32

Senior Member
Yea, and depends which men. Riqui Puig is a man technically. I can totally see a bigger stronger woman abusing him physically :lol: if she wanted to.

Yes
But football is not about "abusing physically" so much. Women are stronger than the u13 boys they lose to, but more importantly, they are also faster, quicker, have more stamina etc. - attributes that are actually important and where they outperform pre-adolescent boys. What the women lack however is technique, spatial awareness, tactical awareness, timing, decision making, consistency etc - the MOST important attributes.

An even better comparison (worse for the women) is to the old men. Take for example the TV show Harry's heroes, where the England legends lost against "Ridgeway Rovers Youth F.C", but won against Crystal Palace ladies team. You need to be a pretty bad player in order to let Neil Ruddock get close enough to "abuse you physically" :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry's_Heroes
 

serghei

Senior Member
Yes
But football is not about "abusing physically" so much. Women are stronger than the u13 boys they lose to, but more importantly, they are also faster, quicker, have more stamina etc. - attributes that are actually important and where they outperform pre-adolescent boys. What the women lack however is technique, spatial awareness, tactical awareness, timing, decision making, consistency etc - the MOST important attributes.

An even better comparison (worse for the women) is to the old men. Take for example the TV show Harry's heroes, where the England legends lost against "Ridgeway Rovers Youth F.C", but won against Crystal Palace ladies team. You need to be a pretty bad player in order to let Neil Ruddock get close enough to "abuse you physically" :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry's_Heroes

Those things matter too, but I think football is way more physical than it seems. When you watch it on TV from over 20 meters up it doesn't seem much, but I'm sure that on ground level it's a very tough, physical sport.
 

Luftstalag14

Culé de Celestial Empire
Yes
But football is not about "abusing physically" so much. Women are stronger than the u13 boys they lose to, but more importantly, they are also faster, quicker, have more stamina etc. - attributes that are actually important and where they outperform pre-adolescent boys. What the women lack however is technique, spatial awareness, tactical awareness, timing, decision making, consistency etc - the MOST important attributes.

An even better comparison (worse for the women) is to the old men. Take for example the TV show Harry's heroes, where the England legends lost against "Ridgeway Rovers Youth F.C", but won against Crystal Palace ladies team. You need to be a pretty bad player in order to let Neil Ruddock get close enough to "abuse you physically" :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry's_Heroes

This I don’t buy. I don’t believe those women lost to the boys because of these (why would boys be better than women when it comes to spatial awareness, tactical awareness and decision-making?), nor do I believe that women are worse than men on those.
 

JamDav1982

Senior Member
The gap in technique between female and male players is as big as it the physical gap.

The average local clubs sides playing in the parks would beat the female World Cup winning team.

The technique, speed at which male players can move at and make decisions on is night and day.
 

Fati_Future_BallonDor

Well-known member
This I don?t buy. I don?t believe those women lost to the boys because of these (why would boys be better than women when it comes to spatial awareness, tactical awareness and decision-making?), nor do I believe that women are worse than men on those.


Dude you cant compare men with women, we are a lot better naturally (joke)
 

Joan

Well-known member
This I don?t buy. I don?t believe those women lost to the boys because of these (why would boys be better than women when it comes to spatial awareness, tactical awareness and decision-making?), nor do I believe that women are worse than men on those.

Yes, think so too. Maybe marginally but certainly not all men. I doubt those are the reasons professional women's teams lose against u15 boys. Would be interesting to see research done on the topic, though.

Women's teams should improve as time passes and it's taken more seriously.
 

Rory

Senior Member
Even without physical advantage just look at the talent pool men can choose from. How many boys play football at some point in their lives? probably 40%. How many girls play football? 5%?

Had this conversation with a female friend, she was saying men's and women's football is the same and I just said it really isn't. Not because I'm a sexist pig but because a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j the whole alphabet of reasons lol.

People don't get the physical side to it too. When I hadn't played in about a year, after 20 mins into a game I could barely control the ball and make a simple pass because I was so tired and my legs were dead.
 

Bobo32

Senior Member
Those things matter too, but I think football is way more physical than it seems. When you watch it on TV from over 20 meters up it doesn't seem much, but I'm sure that on ground level it's a very tough, physical sport.

With two equal teams, physicality can decide the game.
The best women train enough to be very fit, they can run and jump for 90 minutes without a problem. But they are hopeless against young boys, and lose against old men barely able to walk.

If they were less physical compared to men but close to equal on technique, vision, decisions etc I would happily watch women's football just as much as men's football as I don't care about tempo or physicality at all. I don't watch, because they play terribly.
Women's handball is a lot closer I think (I don't know so much about handball though). I guess it is because there are less players, and less 3d solutions compared to football.
People don't get the physical side to it too. When I hadn't played in about a year, after 20 mins into a game I could barely control the ball and make a simple pass because I was so tired and my legs were dead.
This is obviously a big handicap for you. It's the same for me, but I could still dominate a women's WC final I am sure, because the skill gap is so large.
You should all watch that TV program where Fowler, Le Tissier, Parlour, Seaman etc played against an active women's team. It is impossible to say these men aged between 45 and 60, some more than 50kg overweight, won against these women based on physique.
 

Co0ter

Senior Member
Have you ever watched a professional top level woman's match live? It's like watching men play in quicksand. Men are just superior, physically, in every way. They can have all the conditioning in the world, but moderately conditioned and skilled men will beat a professional woman's team easily, whether it be older retired men or teenage boys. It's not sexist, it's just how it is.
 

Windhook

Well-known member
Men have bigger muscles by nature -> more power and speed. That's nature.

Two weeks ago I had a talk with a guy from Newcastle, England in a local bar here. He was obviously drunk and complained to me that his girlfriend beat him reguralry, because she took martial art classes for self-defense.
 

Home of Barca Fans

Top