To think people who say women's football & tennis isn't as skilled as men's because the men (or even untrained boys) would beat them are missing the point?

I think another example is Basketball, the Men’s and Wonen’s games are totally different. I think the women’s is more skillful just because women are not 6ft 10. But Men would have a massive advantage over women.

It's pointless comparison to make as the playing field isn't equal. Female athletes work and train just as hard as male athletes, but obviously in terms of sheer strength and physical capabilities the upper limit of male athletes is higher than women.

In an equal world where professional sport hasn't basically been taken over as a business, both sets of athletes would be valued and paid equally.

I see women’s tennis differently. When you have people fairly equally matched, at the top of sport, I don’t at all consider that due to a top male tennis player having more brut force that I’m watching a lesser game.

I’m not interested in soccer. I only watch men’s rugby. I follow sailing a bit and occasionally look up endurance running both of which women compete on more equal footing and can beat all the men. I don’t follow them for this reason, I’m just pointing this out.

But someone did say it which is what I was quoting and while their is flaws in it and they possibly didn’t play there best and used it for training etc they still should have beaten them

I am into strength training and men are just physically stronger than women. Some people (even men for some reason) try to dispute it but it’s a fact. It’s something like the average man is stronger than 80% of women, and most men could manage about 3 pushups at a minimum while women’s average is 0.

But I would also draw a comparison between sports and comedy. It’s embarrassing now but I used to think women were just less funny than men because there were barely any female comedians. But actually it was just very hard for them to break into the industry, and now that they are deliberately given a platform there are lots more female comedians doing really well. I think investment and interest in women’s sports is increasing, so we will see ability improving at all levels, because there is more opportunity for girls and the chance of attracting/affording better coaches, trainers, equipment etc. than before. That said, they will never be at the same “level” as men in some sports because they are simply less strong on average. (And this is why I am against trans people playing as their transitioned gender even though I am generally pro trans)

It does, but the shape of the pitch can dictate the tactics used. There's no official shape of them, just a max and minimum for length and width, so it's possible to have a minimally wide and max length pitch and vice versa.

Some clubs change the dimensions of the pitch to help tactically.

So by having women's pitches narrowed compared to men's isn't going to improve the women's game.

I don't think there's a simple solution. But getting more girls and women into the game, and more matches broadcast on tv can only be a good thing in my eyes

Can’t answer that one! I have read the only reason is that there is just not the scheduling time in the major tournaments to accommodate. And the women’s game does bring in less money sad to say.

I also don’t think anyone ever claimed that women tennis players are less skilled. I know it’s a constant debate about football but in tennis the reasons for the differences in the game are about strength but not skill. They are two different discussions

Yes, I appreciate "moving the goalposts" would be tricky, but the width of the pitch makes a difference as well.

Re tennis in fact the opposite is true. Men’s greater strength means the game isn’t just about pure power, which (in my view) makes it more interesting to watch. Hence the oft quoted statistic that Sabalenka has the fastest forehand in the game etc. it’s not really surprising.

To shorten the pitch you would need to move the goalposts.

No not god. A football fan has spoken and as those are overwhelmingly male and they generally find womens football too slow then its a valid point.

I would ask my husband about this topic as well given that he is the football watcher in this house. the rest of us dont watch and dont have an opinion.

Why is it impractical to draw some lines inside the existing ones? They do it for doubles v singles tennis?

My mil thinks this - she truly believes that women shouldn’t be paid as much as sports men because they aren’t as strong. So what she is saying is that women should be penalised for their biology. She’s not very bright.

Their 0-0 with forest popped in to my head as a game I'd have never sat through if it was a mid table team against a relegation candidate in La Liga, yet because it was the PL I happily wasted 2 hours on it.

I subbed in Wolves as Forest seemed too interesting for my example given their season so far

I prefer women’s tennis to men’s as the women’s tennis relies on skill more. I don’t think much of women’s football. I think the way our bodies are built make us a lot less skilful at football.

@MoFadaCromulent why the shade on Fulham, ninth in the table??!

They're essentially different sports as the players and tactics adapt to the circumstances they face, what would to win in a match between two mens teams or male tennis players isn't necessarily going to translate for a women's team or female tennis player facing same sex opponents.

I also think the skill level in football is a bit of a red herring, otherwise nobody would support non-league teams or anyone outside the top 6.
What matters is emotional investment and that is grown by exposure.

There's countless games in La Liga or the bundesliga which are probably higher quality than Fulham vs wolves, but I'm ten times more likely to watch the English game as I've sunk 40 years in to the product and I'm up to date on the narratives and backstory of the teams and players so there'll be something there that gives the game stakes and jeopardy.

It's absolutely no coincidence that the women's game has so much more interest now that broadcasters and marketing departments have pushed the game and so people can relate to the team and care wether or not a player they can recognize and probably refer to by their first name wins a match as opposed to nameless English goalkeeper #254.

We've seen it over here with the league of Ireland, exposure and people investing in the game generates interest in a much greater way than an uplift in quality.

I should add, the “less interesting game to watch” is a commonly held view but of course people may disagree with it.

Pretty much all sport is won on a combination of skill, strength and experience. The whole reason for there being different divisions of competition including age classifications for younger players, a women's league, sometimes a veterans league, sometimes different weight classes and also paralympic versions is so that the skills of those with less strength or bodies that are less well-adapted to the particular sport get a chance to pit their skills and experience against those in a similar position without being overpowered by those with less skill but more strength, so that those with less experience can play with those at a similar level of experience, and those with plenty of skill and experience but who are past their peak of physical condition can still showcase their talent. There is absolutely no point having different divisions in any sport if the boundaries for who qualifies are not really rigorously enforced.

I don’t really agree with your paraphrasing of Serena’s statement except in the broadest terms. Men’s strength and power means there is a lot more spin on the ball and play is consequently more strategic with more variety of shots. In the women’s game the ball travels faster but lacks the spin. It’s a lot more baseline to baseline. And consequently a less interesting game to watch. (The best of 3 in the women’s game also leads to fewer consistent results hence the great variety in the game at the top but that’s a different point).

Well no, I would never state that senior women would have beaten senior men. I was explaining why this example that keeps being trotted out is flawed.

Given more investment and encouragement is given to boys and men playing football then I think it’s no surprise if they do end up being more skilled. Or to put it better, there is a larger pool of skilled players to pick from. Same goes for cricket and rugby. Tennis is a bit different as has been a mainstream sport for girls / women for a lot longer.
I play tennis to a decent level and there are lots of men at my club who are hopeless. They have a huge powerful serve that occasionally goes in, but they can’t keep a rally. I have more fun playing with the older ladies than some of the men.