Womens football, Paygap, how is this legal and why is no one talking about it?

[Stupidbonfire]

Just as the title says really. I don’t understand how it’s legal to pay the women footballers so much less. The equality’s act 2010 seems to support equal pay for effort put in.

Am I being stupid? Could someone explain to me how the law is applied in this instance that it’s legal for such pay disparity and why the media seems silent on addressing it?

The women footballers have done our country proud and surely they deserve the same remuneration as the men would.

thank you so much.

I do understand how discrimination works. You apparently don’t understand reality. ‘Crushed by the patriarchy’. Ridiculous.

Really. The women would be amateur level wouldn't they if playing with men?

They are entertainers, so it comes down to how much they bring in in sponsorship, ticket sales etc. The last I saw, the womens’ clubs were almost completely subsidised by the mens’ teams.

Hopefully with the right branding women’s football could become as successful as women’s tennis.

The slower pace and slower ball make the game interesting in a different way.

But you could get amateur men to play to the same standard, so it’s all about getting the branding right and creating the hype around the women themselves. It seems to work for women’s tennis.

If everyone who complained about inequality in football actually went to the odd WSL game, the gap would be significantly bridged quite quickly.

Yeah, almost certainly.

The standard (in England, at least) has markedly improved over the last decade but, as others have said, men’s youth teams have soundly beaten women’s teams in the recent past. The US Women’s National Team (as reigning world champions) lost 5-2 to Dallas U-15 Boys, for example.

Physicality just makes such a huge difference.

There are a lot fewer male stars like this now, the Tom Cruises and Brad Pitts are getting on. A lot of younger actors don't have that same ability to anchor a film, for whatever reason, the market seems to have changed.

It will be interesting to see if that results in more even salaries, I suspect it might.

This is the case in a lot of sports. The Olympic winning women's hockey team in Canada used to play regularly against boys high school teams. They often did not win.

The running time of the fastest woman in the world is beaten every year by boys in high schools and university.

I disagree that women's sports will always be less interesting because of this. It can make for a different kind of game rather than a worse one, with a different kind of team play and different strategies. But if you mixed the teams, women would be playing at a much lower level.

Sport essentially is for entertainment, the men get paid more because they make more revenue. Like Alist stars get paid more than Blist because the movies make more money.
its not sexism, just no one watches womens sport because women aren’t as interested in sport.

I've been to several England women's games. I bought a replica shirt for this tournament. I hosted watch events (and got a whole load of male football fans into the women's game). I go support my local team - men and women. They play at the same stadium (Sat/Sun). Your point?

The women's game at international level has been more entertaining, it's also a far better atmosphere for anyone who isn't a drunk man. Barclays have been supporting the women's game for years - they know their brand won't end up being tarnished with images of violence, homophobia and racism. 80% of the UK's TV audience watched the final. That's huge numbers.

Other big brands will follow suit.

But football needs infrastructure not just higher wages for the elite. Suggesting that women go off and build their own stadiums when existing ones are empty 80% of the time is bullshit.

It is not being ignored. A real issue, one where I would argue it's not just underpaid women but overpaid men.

I've been to several England women's games. I bought a replica shirt for this tournament. I hosted watch events (and got a whole load of male football fans into the women's game). I go support my local team - men and women. They play at the same stadium (Sat/Sun). Your point?

I guess there is a frustration from the fact that after a big sporting event involving women there is always an immediate hand wringing discussion about why said women's sport lags behind the men's in terms of corporate investment, broadcasting, wages etc Often, from my experience when pushed further the very same people complaining have never been to a local club game in their life or done anything to support said game, it is always up to someone else to get off their arse and help. You support the game and fair play to you. Trite calls by some to just pay women loads more without any understanding of the financial model required to achieve that is just stupid. The women's game needs to be self supporting and not relying on scraps from the men's game.

For the women's game to grow it needs support at grass roots level, not just the international games (although that helps). As has been pointed out repeatedly the attendance figures for the WSL are pitiful and any games below that level are virtually non existent. My local mens club plays at level 6 of English league and still pulls in more people for each match then most WSL games. When organisations see more people filling the stands at club level, more girls playing for their local youth teams, more demand for merchandising, they will begin to invest more and TV broadcasters will begin to see a business case to buy the rights to televise the games. I agree with your above points about there being a better atmosphere at womens games insofar as not having all the legacy rival fan bullshit and violence, pissed arseholes and generally a much nicer place for kids to be. I think that is an extremely strong selling point that needs to be exploited.

@YetiTeri

Suggesting that women go off and build their own stadiums when existing ones are empty 80% of the time is bullshit.

Do you understand why they're "empty"? The grass needs time to recover after a match, it needs time to grow. Time is needed for the ground staff to treat and repair it. There's a lot to pitch/lawn maintenance. Treatment powders need time between application and being run all over by two dozen players, in fact, there are time spans between application and cutting/watering. It's quite a science!

A typical stadium could already have two matches in a week, which is about the limit that the grass can take. Trying to schedule an extra 1 or 2 women's matches into the same week is simply impossible. The pitch would quickly become a mud bath.

At our local club, we had 3 matches in week, Sat, Tues, Sat, and by the second Saturday, it was pretty much unplayable.

It's all about budgets they don't get the same attendance and sponsorship as men's football

Football is a business as much as it is a sport and when you get 70, 000 fans paying to see women's football, EVERY WEEK. The TV rights being syndicated around the world and women sitting glued to the TV then you have equality. At the moment it's still a sideshow and the money reflects that.

I would just like to make the point that the so-called overpaid men receiving 60% of revenue in salary, as example above, is absolutely fair. Would you really be on board with the Abramovices and Mike Ashleys (yes I know, both now departed) keeping most of the revenue off the backs of the players when ultimately they are done by age 35? Nobody froths when an actor in the latter seasons of a Netflix show is getting a million an episode.

Yeah I think she is being stupid and naive..

Well Ronaldo gets paid about £200k more A WEEK than Sancho for same position on same team (salary, not endorsements). Sure they put the same amount of 'effort' in.
The FA pays men and women the same per match appearance. The difference is the winning bonus - fair the men it would have been far far more than fir the women. But again there is more interest in the men's Euros. I'd say it would have gone under the radar for most people except the women did so well - there would have been far more interest in the men from the start, meaning more advertising money.

Sorry which teams.play at home twice a week?!

Teams in Europe
Teams with a fixture backlog in late winter to the end of the season
Teams who progress in cup competitions and get favourable draws.
Teams that don't have a different ground for their reserve teams

Not every week of course.

Granted with some clubs there's an element of cost involved with opening their ground for games that will get a small % of capacity filled. Even Real Madrid played at their reserve ground during Covid restrictions.

That still leaves a whole chunk of time with a game every fortnight. Unless you think men's reserves should be higher priority? What gate receipts do they bring in?

Mens reserve teams don’t play at the first team stadiums.

Actually, just checking, in the top tier of the reserves leagues, Aston Villa reserves are the one that do play at the main staidium. I’m not sure about lower divisions.