Women' Football - issues facing the game

[mids2019]

The mean salary of an elite woman footballer is under 27K

There is no real talk of maternity/pregnancy for players with their peak career being between 20 and 35 with associated salary rights.

There is a need for stadia to be made available for more women's football

Girls football should be made more available in schools.

Until these issues are resolved I think there will be a barrier to women's football in general and need to start to be resolved prior to our women's world cup.

Kevin de Brugne receives 385K per week as the highest paid male.

Until women's football is on the same level as the men's you can't expect the wages to be the same

Wages mostly come from sponsorship, TV and merchandise

The first step is to convince boys that girls can play just as well as them and to stamp out the 'girls can't play football' nonsense some spout on the playground.

Girls still get forced out of football by the “sporty” boys in primary school - this study wasn’t at my DD’s school, but it describes her experience precisely. She gave up for a few years, then excellent grassroot initiatives gave her a confidence boosting and (crucially) single sex way back in. She now plays for a team.

www.researchgate.net/publication/248975381_%27Why_can%27t_girls_play_football%27_Gender_dynamics_and_the_playground

It was amazing watching the Lionesses last night. I’m sure most men agreed. But there are lots of little boys out there who see football as their thing, and exclude girls and boys they don’t like. And quite a lot of football dads who reinforce this by being very competitive and encouraging exclusion of kids who aren’t as good which is often (when very young) just through lack of opportunity.

Which club do you have a season ticket for? Do you buy the new seasons kit?

Unfortunately if you don’t pay for the above you are also part of the problem.

I believe the rights to maternity pay have been agreed recently? In the last year I think? Although I can never see it being a common thing for female footballers to take time off to have a baby. I imagine they would fall into the category who put their career first for a while- not uncommon in society in general. After all their career as a professional footballer is over by mid 30's and in some cases earlier- for most that would be plenty early enough to have kids if they want.

Perhaps some consideration should be given to the awful misogyny which prevented women's football from flourishing and reaching the same 'level' as the men.

www.history.co.uk/articles/when-womens-football-was-bigger-than-mens

It's an absolute disgrace that it's taken so long for the women's game to go professional, that the salaries are still so much lower, that in the very recent past female footballers were working regular jobs at the same time as playing.

All very noble, but back in the real World, where does the money come from to pay vastly higher wages?

The reality is that the club's income needs to raise, to be able to pay players more, hence higher attendances at matches, more merchandise sales, more televised matches & sponsorship (which follows from higher audiences), etc.

Perhaps yesterday will be the catalyst to improve support from the public/audiences/attendances, which may, in time, pump more money into women's football facilitating higher wages.

Men's football is only highly profitable for the players at the top level because of the sheer number of people who want to watch it on TV (hence income from sponsorship/advertising etc), the sheer number who buy overpriced merchandise, the sheer number who buy over-priced season tickets etc. For lower levels of men's football, the wages etc are pretty low, which is no surprise when attendances are lower, merchandise is less popular/cheaper, sponsorship/advertising is much lower, etc.

There is no doubt that things must change, i.e. the scheduling of women's games often takes second place to mens, i.e. less popular times/days, etc., but that still comes back to sponsorships/advertising as the firms advertising will pay more to advertise during games with the higher numbers of viewers, hence why the peak times are given to the likes of Livermore, Chelsea and Manchester City/United. There is also an argument for women's teams to get a higher proportion of the sales profits from merchandise from clubs who have both a man's and woman's team.

At the end of the day, it's a business, so everything works backwards from participant (i.e. viewer and buyer) numbers, which determines how much advertisers and sponsors will pay for exposure.

All very noble, but back in the real World, where does the money come from to pay vastly higher wages?

How patronising, it's nothing to do with being 'very noble' or being ignorant to the realities of the 'real world'.

Heaven forbid on a forum mainly used by women that we discuss the reasons (basically misogyny) why women's football has been light years behind men in terms of popularity, sponsorship, funding etc. Would be a different response on FWR, particularly the naughty step.

It's not even about expecting the same wages as Kevin De Bruyne or Jack Grealish. Whatever the wrongs of the past, which have resulted in the situation as it is at present, the clubs themselves could have been doing so much more and investing so much more. I'm an Arsenal fan but shame on them for paying their mens team an absolute fortune whilst their highly successful womens team were basically paying to ply football.

But they can’t play just as well, which is why we need to encourage and promote women’s sport as a separate thing.

What absolute bollocks- of course they can play as well, comparatively. They couldn't compete against men because of the differences in physical strength- that's completely different as to whether they can play 'as well'. The Lionesses are far more skilful and can play much better one touch football than the crappy head tennis I see when I watch my local mens league 2 team.

I’m comfortable basing it on commercial value. If they can bring in the crowds, sponsorship and television money then they should be paid in line with that.

The crowd last night (87,192) was the biggest ever for a Euros final, male or female. The industry is very conservative (and sexist) and lots of the large stadia refused to host the women's Euros because they thought they wouldn't make money. But there were 68,871 at the opening game at Old Trafford and I'm sure every England game this summer could have filled stadia of that size if they'd been given the chance. The women's game was banned in 1920 despite being more popular than the mens game at the time. Never underestimate the misogyny that underlies the lack of support women's sport gets.

Exactly @JaninaDuszejko

That's a Euro competiton with lots of hype.

Average Man City men's attendance 85,000
Highest Man City woman's attendance 5,317

That's the reality. It's not just matchday income, it's sponsorship, advertising revenue, etc. You can't base wages on competition attendance for a 1 in 4 years competition.

The coverage and interest in Women's football has been tremendous and will undoubtedly increase future interest, attendances, sponsorship, advertising, etc., but until women's games get similar matchday attendances to the mens, then wages etc will never be the same!

*That “comparatively” is doing a lot of work in your post. An under 12s team also plays as well, “comparatively.”

Are you arguing that everyone who plays as well “comparatively” should have their pay compared to the men’s team?*

Do under 12s get paid then? I thought we were talking about the elite game, and professional footballers?

Comparatively was the wrong word to use. The best women footballers are 100% as good as the best male footballers. Their technical ability is as good, their fitness and stamina is as good. Women just can't play against men due to the difference in size and strength. Watching top womens teams playing against other top womens teams is as good as watching the top men.

Anyone who suggests women can't play 'as well' as men is talking out of their arse.

@ObviouslyNotNow "She gave up for a few years, then excellent grassroot initiatives gave her a confidence boosting and (crucially) single sex way back in. She now plays for a team."

I'm sorry to point out the girls football is not single sex. Any male under 19 can self ID in to girls teams, even though the FA have already established leagues for boys, girls and mixed.

The FA trans inclusion policy does not give girls the right to say no to boys choosing to change and shower with them.

The policy also gives adult males the right to self ID as female coaches and supervise girls in the changing rooms and showers.

www.thefa.com/-/media/files/pdf/the-fa-2015-16/transpeople-in-football-guide.ashx?la=en

@Kazzyhoward "Average Man City men's attendance 85,000
Highest Man City woman's attendance 5,317"

Sorry but the inaccuracy jumped right out at me. City can't hold that many people, the max attendance at The Etihad is 55k and their average attendance last season was 52,738 for the mens team.

The womens team play in a really lovely smaller stadium next door. The capacity is 7k and the average attendance last season was 1,917, with the highest being 5,317.

My DH is a season ticket holder for the mens team and regularly goes to womens games. I'm not a City fan. I really admire what City do to try and engage existing fans in the womens game and the level of support given to womens team.

The crowd last night (87,192) was the biggest ever for a Euros final, male or female [...] there were 68,871 at the opening game at Old Trafford and I'm sure every England game this summer could have filled stadia of that size if they'd been given the chance.

Let's not try and kid ourselves that the women's game is (as yet) just as popular and profitable as the men's by selectively quoting attendance figures. Tens of thousands of Euro 2022 tickets were handed out for free. Tickets could be purchased from £5. Tickets for the final started from £15, compared to £250 for the men. And of course England vs Italy didn't sell as many tickets, when capacity at Wembley was limited to 75%.

I have no doubt that the women's game will become more successful as each year goes by. But it's the £1.6bn in revenue from Euro 2020 that has funded the millions of pounds of losses from Euro 2022.

So far, there has been increasing investment of money, time, facilities, research and coaching over the last 10-15 years in the women's game. The result is one fully professional league, one semi-professional league at the top of the football pyramid, with basically amateur football below. And of course, one European Championship trophy!

All of the women's clubs are currently subsidised by their parent clubs. Superstars are paid low six figures but women footballers will not be paid more until more money comes in via merchadise, gate and sponsorship income. This is fair enough. The men's game is hugely popular worldwide, the women's is far behind. Market forces dictate that clubs have to pay their male footballers millions, but they have the budget for it because of the sponsorship and gate and merchandise income. Average attendances were 1000-2000 in the WSL last season. This is an improvement, but not as dramatic as the uptick in TV viewers which went from a few hundred thousand to several million. Arguments about whether men are better are irrelevant because you are not comparing like with like. The issue is, is women's football as popular? It is not. Not yet. Personally, I don't think it will ever be as big as men's football because a) a lot more men than women are interested in sport and b) a lot of those men will always prioritise or prefer men's sport, but given the massive increase in TV viewing, the success of the Euro 22 tournament and the sheer attractiveness of the product, women's football will be much, much bigger than it is at the moment. If gate income and sponsorship continue to increase, women's football will start to pay for itself and that is essential because that is the only way it will be sustainable and not subject to the whims of the parent clubs.

I have to concur with a pp on one point - if you want to support and protect women's football (or women's sport in general), you have to actually do something. If you aren't already, go and watch your local team. Subscribe to the FA player to watch WSL and Championship games. Don't leave our sports in the hands of men. We have to take responsibility.

I've seen plenty of womens football and they have improved in the last 10 years skills wise but until we regularly watch live matches and even sell half the tickets available in a typical stadium (say 30k for arguments sake) they are not going to attract as lucrative sponsors, so thus they won't get paid as much. The answer (partly) is everyone reading this thread goes and sees a live game. Tickets are far cheaper than the mens game

The Etihad Stadium only has a maximum capacity of just over 55k so not sure where you’re plucking your figures from.

Ultimately yes it’s down to attendance etc but it’s not just hype, so many more people attending WSL recently and I have seen it reported that City Ladies had a 3000% uptake in ticket enquires (I think it was enquiries not sales, didn’t look too closely) this morning.

However the poster who linked to the study done in primary schools has hit the crux of it, despite huge progress in girl’s clubs outside of schools, in schools football still, mentally and emotionally at least, ‘belongs’ to the boys. It needs challenging and highlighting at every step because these attitudes extend way beyond the football pitch and playground which is frustrating at best in 2022.

So, do you put your money where your moth is? Do you have a season ticket for your local women’s team? Do you go to the away games, buy the kit, take your children along?

If not, why not? Misogyny?

Don't have a season ticket for either my local men or women's team (although DH is supporting DD1's under-15 team every Saturday). As a family we've been at more women's games than men, both seeing the national team and the local team. Also bought more women's kits because DD1 is the football obsessive. I'm personally not that big a football fan but much prefer the atmosphere at women's games and the ticket prices are better (Our tickets to see England v Austria were £40 for each adult and £20 for each child).