Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

William and women's football

1000 replies

Nono22972 · 17/08/2023 13:19

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12413893/amp/Prince-William-not-attend-World-Cup-final-watch-Englands-Lionesses-face-against-Spain.html

One again, William's neglecting women's football. The Lionesses made history. It is the first time that the English team (male or female) reached the World Cup final since 1966. We all know that if the men had reached the final, he would've been there and probably would've brought George with him.

Queen Letizia and her daughter Sofia will be attending. What's William's excuse? You are président of the Football Association.

This is really disappointing but I'm not really surprised. The young generation of royals are such a joke compared to previous generations. Yes, the Queen’s children had their controversies but when it comes to royal work, they always got the job done.

Prince William will not attend World Cup final to watch Lionesses

Prince William will be watching England's first final since 1966 on the television and will not fly to Australia to see the Lionesses compete, Kensington Palace has confirmed.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12413893/amp/Prince-William-not-attend-World-Cup-final-watch-Englands-Lionesses-face-against-Spain.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
26
EffortlessDesmond · 17/08/2023 21:27

@Nono22972 , with the best will in the world, you sound like a SmithSquare bot.

IcedPurple · 17/08/2023 21:28

EffortlessDesmond · 17/08/2023 21:04

I hear you @LimeCheesecake , but I still think it should be a woman presenting the cup for a women's tournament, so the Princess of Wales is not a step down but a polite acknowledgement that this is an all female business. That women's sport should be respected and celebrated equally.

I think it suggests the opposite. That women's sport is only of interest to women.

William is President of the Football Association. Kate isn't. If any royal goes to the match it should be William.

CloudyMcCloudy · 17/08/2023 21:31

MrsFinkelstein · 17/08/2023 19:48

@Serenster @PrincessTigger you're not really engaging in the spirit of the thread by posting facts and not putting the boot in William for no tangible reason at all.

Ha true

EffortlessDesmond · 17/08/2023 21:37

So maybe we just can't quite agree. I have never watched a football game attentively, and would admit, I really don't care either way as long as the better team wins (nor any other sport either) but celebrating the best of the world and public acknowledgement of the triumph ought to command a top person from the losing side to present to trophy to the winner. My opinion.

IcedPurple · 17/08/2023 21:45

EffortlessDesmond · 17/08/2023 21:37

So maybe we just can't quite agree. I have never watched a football game attentively, and would admit, I really don't care either way as long as the better team wins (nor any other sport either) but celebrating the best of the world and public acknowledgement of the triumph ought to command a top person from the losing side to present to trophy to the winner. My opinion.

So you think Macron should have presented the World Cup to Messi last December?

Like I say, that's not how it works.

EffortlessDesmond · 17/08/2023 22:00

Like I said, I don't give a toss who wins, but I do think the biggest cheese available should do the presentation. Macron should have presented the World Cup, as the head of state. It's ceremonial.

PrincessTigger · 17/08/2023 22:18

It’s hard to articulate why this bothers me but I will try!

First off, I am a massive fan of women’s football and have been all my life. I remember being told several times I couldn’t play “because you’re a girl” and my mum took me to show me that girls could play too and I was hooked!

For the longest time, women were asking for parity with men in terms of pay, sponsorship, coverage, or even just to earn a living wage. There were players in the top teams having to work second jobs because they couldn’t earn a living off football. They even had to buy their own kits and supplies.

The reason they were told they couldn’t have parity with men in terms of pay was because they didn’t sell tickets, they didn’t attract advertisers, they didn’t secure sponsorships, they didn’t sell merch, the teams don’t have massive international fan bases, and the players didn’t have the kind of name-recognition men did.

Ok, the women said, give us a fighting chance then. Broadcast our matches, advertise our games, sponsor us, help us build up the kind of name recognition men’s teams have. How can we build up fan bases who want to pay to see our matches and buy our merchandise if there’s no way they can watch us now, or if they’ve never even heard of us?

And then the broadcasters, newspapers, clubs, sponsors all said “we’re not going to invest in you because men are not going to watch women play, so you can never have the kind of broad appeal the men’s teams have.” In other words they used the potential men might be sexist in order to treat women differently.

Fast forward to 2023 - women’s football is broadcast not just at all (which is nice!) but on BBC1! The women’s Euros final got the highest crowd of any match, mens or womens. Millions of people watched the semi-finals. Every single newspaper ran England’s win on the front page, as did Australia. Social media went crazy with people - including MEN - being excited about the match, hopeful, proud. What was lovely to see was men analysing the match and talking about it exactly the same way they do with the men’s game. And little boys idolising women athletes!

The clubs, broadcasters, sponsors, etc were wrong. Women’s football has an audience. Not only that, men are interested in watching it too.

So when you say that PW not taking a 45h round trip with his entourage to watch one football match shows that like a typical man, he doesn’t care about women’s football: a) you’re wrong about men not caring about women’s football, b) where have you been for the past decade?, and c) you are not supporting the women’s team you are repeating the WRONG excuse used by the industry to not treat them fairly in the past. Men are interested in the women’s world cup!

Finally, PW himself has clearly been very involved in the women’s game. Plenty of examples have been given. It’s not “constructive criticism” if you’re wrong about the most basic facts, it’s uninformed projection. I know on MN people like to take against people because they don’t like their face or their eyes are too close together or they look like an ex or something, and then they try to reverse-engineer a more rational reason to not like them… but using female footballers’ struggle (and success!) to do that… ew

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 07:36

Is nobody from the UK going to present the World Cup to the only English football team in nearly 60 years to win a World Cup ( if they win)? Will it be presented by some faceless official while the Spanish have their Royal Family there? That's not good optics!

spanieleyes · 18/08/2023 07:45

Why should someone from the UK present the World Cup, whether England win or not, it's not the UK cup!

YetMoreNewBeginnings · 18/08/2023 07:46

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 07:36

Is nobody from the UK going to present the World Cup to the only English football team in nearly 60 years to win a World Cup ( if they win)? Will it be presented by some faceless official while the Spanish have their Royal Family there? That's not good optics!

Why would someone from the UK be presenting the trophy at an event in Australia, organised by Australians, with all the work done by them?

The optics of one of the royals swooping in for that glory would be far worse

CloudyMcCloudy · 18/08/2023 07:48

YetMoreNewBeginnings · 18/08/2023 07:46

Why would someone from the UK be presenting the trophy at an event in Australia, organised by Australians, with all the work done by them?

The optics of one of the royals swooping in for that glory would be far worse

Exactly. Do we do it for Wimbledon when a Spaniard wins?

No it’s still our representatives

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 07:50

Nono22972 · 17/08/2023 21:06

Constructive criticism is not being spiteful. There's a pattern with Kate and William.
They don't do much work, the numbers don't lie. People always make excuses for them: first it was "they need time" then they'll do more when they'll be 1st in line then it's the children. There's always an excuse for them. They take time off most of the year

I agree. The football issue is just one of many examples of the Wales' idleness. They get away with it because they are compared to Meghan and Harry. But I suspect William and Harry are very similar. Entitled and spoilt, with no idea how the world works. The only difference being that William knows that he needs the Royal Family to continue for his lifestyle to continue and Harry didn't. The endless excuses people make for their sheer lack of effort is ridiculous. William expects to be handed the Head of State role and expects his son to be handed it in turn. So they need to do more and be more effective instead of being on endless holidays. Prince Andrew with his golf trips tagged onto his Royal 'duties' did more than these two put together.

PrincessTigger · 18/08/2023 08:09

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 07:50

I agree. The football issue is just one of many examples of the Wales' idleness. They get away with it because they are compared to Meghan and Harry. But I suspect William and Harry are very similar. Entitled and spoilt, with no idea how the world works. The only difference being that William knows that he needs the Royal Family to continue for his lifestyle to continue and Harry didn't. The endless excuses people make for their sheer lack of effort is ridiculous. William expects to be handed the Head of State role and expects his son to be handed it in turn. So they need to do more and be more effective instead of being on endless holidays. Prince Andrew with his golf trips tagged onto his Royal 'duties' did more than these two put together.

W loves football including women’s football, you think him not going to watch what he enjoys is laziness?! I’m sure he’d love to go. But it’s terrible for the environment, bad optics here AND in Australia, it would take 2-3 days of his time for 90 minutes, and I’m sure Kate would be delighted for her husband to swan off for 2-3 days to watch a football match during the school holidays. And if he did go, all the people criticising him in this thread would still be criticising him. I bet he’ll watch it at home with his kids and have a better time.

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 08:13

YetMoreNewBeginnings · 18/08/2023 07:46

Why would someone from the UK be presenting the trophy at an event in Australia, organised by Australians, with all the work done by them?

The optics of one of the royals swooping in for that glory would be far worse

I mean, for the moment at least, King Charles is the King of Australia. So the Head of State of the Host nation ( or his family) won't even be there, at a time when the host nation has put on the most successful ever women's world Cup. That alone, if I was an Australian Republican would be reason enough to have my own President. Their own Head of State lives so far away they can't even turn up to important national events.

Hippyhippybake · 18/08/2023 08:16

The functions of the Head of State in Australia are performed by the Governor General.

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 08:18

PrincessTigger · 18/08/2023 08:09

W loves football including women’s football, you think him not going to watch what he enjoys is laziness?! I’m sure he’d love to go. But it’s terrible for the environment, bad optics here AND in Australia, it would take 2-3 days of his time for 90 minutes, and I’m sure Kate would be delighted for her husband to swan off for 2-3 days to watch a football match during the school holidays. And if he did go, all the people criticising him in this thread would still be criticising him. I bet he’ll watch it at home with his kids and have a better time.

During the school holidays where she has to cope on her own with 3 kids while doing all the housework and make 3 lots of meals plus endless snacks do you mean? I think the suggestion above of a family holiday in Australia during the World Cup would have been a good compromise. Both of them are lazy. This is not the only example of it. If they spent less time on PR and more time actually doing the bread and butter of Royal work which is not onerous, they would not be accused of being lazy.

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 08:21

Hippyhippybake · 18/08/2023 08:16

The functions of the Head of State in Australia are performed by the Governor General.

I know that. But it's not a massive stretch from that to saying why can't the Governor General just be the Ceremonial Head of State until we can elect someone? If they want to keep the Commonwealth realms they need to turn up.

YetMoreNewBeginnings · 18/08/2023 08:22

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 08:13

I mean, for the moment at least, King Charles is the King of Australia. So the Head of State of the Host nation ( or his family) won't even be there, at a time when the host nation has put on the most successful ever women's world Cup. That alone, if I was an Australian Republican would be reason enough to have my own President. Their own Head of State lives so far away they can't even turn up to important national events.

I’d bet Australian republicans would be far more pissed off at one of the royals swooping in instead of leaving an Aussie to present the trophy

Hippyhippybake · 18/08/2023 08:23

Australia is welcome to become a Republic any time they like. It’s their choice.

CloudyMcCloudy · 18/08/2023 08:24

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 08:13

I mean, for the moment at least, King Charles is the King of Australia. So the Head of State of the Host nation ( or his family) won't even be there, at a time when the host nation has put on the most successful ever women's world Cup. That alone, if I was an Australian Republican would be reason enough to have my own President. Their own Head of State lives so far away they can't even turn up to important national events.

They gave their own representatives. They don’t need KC to do it

Threenow · 18/08/2023 08:25

C8H10N4O2 · 17/08/2023 14:15

If I had months of holiday every year - yes. If I was gifted a billion pound estate free of tax as just part of the reward for my job then yes.

Right now I'm on holiday on significantly lower income than his and have done a number of work calls. Its par for the course at a certain level - a level which cuts in well below the rewards and holidays enjoyed by the young generation of royals.

More fool you then. Just because you are prepared to give up holiday time for your job doesn't mean others have to. Some people have different priorities.

CloudyMcCloudy · 18/08/2023 08:27

Gave - have

Threenow · 18/08/2023 08:32

meercat23 · 17/08/2023 20:47

This, and many other posts on this thread are just thinly disguised spitefulness..

The envy and bitterness on any threads regarding the RF is just embarrassing to witness.

If they go anywhere there is hand-wringing and tutting about wasting money, or their cabon footprint, if they don't go anywhere they are not doing their job.

I also have to laugh at the posters who think the RF can just go somewhere on a whim at a moment's notice.

justasking111 · 18/08/2023 08:33

Angrycat2768 · 18/08/2023 08:18

During the school holidays where she has to cope on her own with 3 kids while doing all the housework and make 3 lots of meals plus endless snacks do you mean? I think the suggestion above of a family holiday in Australia during the World Cup would have been a good compromise. Both of them are lazy. This is not the only example of it. If they spent less time on PR and more time actually doing the bread and butter of Royal work which is not onerous, they would not be accused of being lazy.

I can't disagree with your post

Serenster · 18/08/2023 08:33

If they spent less time on PR and more time actually doing the bread and butter of Royal work which is not onerous, they would not be accused of being lazy.

This is a discussion which has been had many times, but as is clear from the posts on this thread, many people believe that unless the members of the royal family are actually being seen at a public engagement, they are otherwise lolling on a sofa being fed peeled grapes by a servant not doing anything. I don’t think that’s remotely realistic (and enough news about what else fills their time sneaks out now and again to make it clear - for example the recent announcement that William is to lead a 5 year fundraising campaign connected to microbrial resistance. This had not been even hinted at before its announcement , and obviously did not just drop out of the sky but will have involved much pre-work including by William). But obviously opinions will vary.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread