| England Women 19:08 - Nov 30 with 3813 views | QPRSteve |
2-0 up and hit the bar inside six minutes |  | | |  |
| England Women on 21:56 - Nov 30 with 1103 views | DavieQPR |
| England Women on 21:10 - Nov 30 by slmrstid |
I've just been talking about this tonight with some friends - this is one of the problems womens football has at the moment in as far as some countries are now investing in it properly, whilst for others its still a complete after thought and as a result the quality is so lopsided you end up with some of these Sunday League type scores that we've seen recently.
Not really England's fault, they can only play what's in front of them and the players have to go out and do a job, but that sort of game and scoreline doesn't really do anyone much good.
Be interesting to see how games like these are in 10 years time say when others have caught up a bit.
On a separate note, I've had a real think about my attitudes toward womens football over the past year or so - basically having never had any real interest in it before. But I've thought about it - its still the same game I love, its still my country/my team. We watch the Olympics and support GB athletes regardless of if they are men or women - so why not our football teams? QPR Ladies are still QPR, they are still in blue and white and they are still representing our club.
Pure logistics will prevent me from seeing QPR Ladies play live mind. But also I'd like to see clubs drop the "Women"/"Ladies" from team names - they are just their club. We don't say "QPR Men" so why "QPR Ladies"? They're still in Hoops, they're still representing our club, so we should, in my opinion, do our best to support them when we can.
I'd also like to see more clubs have their ladies team play at their proper home grounds, rather than farming them off to some tiny non-league club somewhere. Leicester, to their immense credit, have their team playing all home games at The King Power this year, with tickets very cheaply available. We do intend to go down and take a game at some point when time allows. |
So you would be happy turning up at our ground not knowing which team you were going to watch. Also don't the B team ,U23s and Academy wear Hoops so why not just call them QPR as well? |  | | |
| England Women on 21:57 - Nov 30 with 1109 views | Paddyhoops |
20. 0 . Embarrassing spectacle. Utterly pointless! | | | |
| England Women on 22:08 - Nov 30 with 1073 views | slmrstid |
| England Women on 21:56 - Nov 30 by DavieQPR |
So you would be happy turning up at our ground not knowing which team you were going to watch. Also don't the B team ,U23s and Academy wear Hoops so why not just call them QPR as well? |
- B team,U23s and younger age groups arent the first team. The Ladies team is a first team in its own right.
- I'm pretty sure you can arrange fixture lists to be sure of which team you are going to watch. The name of the competition the game is in is a bit of a giveaway for starters  |  | | |
| England Women on 22:29 - Nov 30 with 1016 views | ted_hendrix |
Some bloke once said; "England expects that every man will do his duty."
Well what about the Women I ask myself, 20-0 is just not good enough 71 -2 would be more acceptable.
Will there be higlights?
Are there any Women here?
Ah, tally-ho, yippety-dip and zing zang spillip.
? |  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |
| England Women on 09:48 - Dec 1 with 843 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| England Women on 21:38 - Nov 30 by Logman |
Not being sexist but the women should play a bit less time in my opinion. They do in tennis (3 sets v 5) and its a biological fact that on average women do not have the same physical performance levels as men. I know that at the elite level 20-0 walkovers are unheard of but I believe that playing on the same size pitches as the men, the women's game would benefit from being a bit shorter in duration. |
Should be up to the women. If they want 90 give them 90. An all women governance body within UEFA / FIFA managing the women’s game would be good if they don’t already.
I’m always disappointed to see the England Women’s team managed by a man too. I expect it’s a small pool of coaches at the moment but how can they develop without the top jobs? |  | | |
| England Women on 10:02 - Dec 1 with 823 views | MrSheen |
| England Women on 09:48 - Dec 1 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Should be up to the women. If they want 90 give them 90. An all women governance body within UEFA / FIFA managing the women’s game would be good if they don’t already.
I’m always disappointed to see the England Women’s team managed by a man too. I expect it’s a small pool of coaches at the moment but how can they develop without the top jobs? |
Sarina Wiegman approves this message.
 |  | | |
| England Women on 10:08 - Dec 1 with 814 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| England Women on 21:38 - Nov 30 by Logman |
Not being sexist but the women should play a bit less time in my opinion. They do in tennis (3 sets v 5) and its a biological fact that on average women do not have the same physical performance levels as men. I know that at the elite level 20-0 walkovers are unheard of but I believe that playing on the same size pitches as the men, the women's game would benefit from being a bit shorter in duration. |
Seeing as they run the same distance in a marathon, 10,000 meters etc; 80 minutes in rugby; ride the same course in horse racing, I don’t think it’s a case of game duration but rather, one of game development in countries like Latvia and Armenia.
Clearly if England played the US’ women’s team on Monday, we wouldn’t be discussing a 20-0 trouncing and thus, whether women footballers are good for 90 minutes.
For my money, as there’s a clear gap between the top nations and the developing nations, I’d think it wiser for the developing nations to play off against each other; the winners then going in to play with the big girls.
It would save demoralising thrashings and maybe allow them to develop at a more sustainable pace. As with Argentina in the rugby, as they develop they will need to be playing the better teams to continue their development. |  |
| |
| England Women on 10:13 - Dec 1 with 796 views | ngbqpr |
Apparently Latvia only have a pool of about 200 players to choose from. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| England Women on 10:14 - Dec 1 with 793 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| England Women on 10:02 - Dec 1 by MrSheen |
Sarina Wiegman approves this message.
|
Exactly my point. She is only the second female manager of the England Women’s team in 50 years. | | | |
| England Women on 10:21 - Dec 1 with 790 views | MrSheen |
| England Women on 10:08 - Dec 1 by PlanetHonneywood |
Seeing as they run the same distance in a marathon, 10,000 meters etc; 80 minutes in rugby; ride the same course in horse racing, I don’t think it’s a case of game duration but rather, one of game development in countries like Latvia and Armenia.
Clearly if England played the US’ women’s team on Monday, we wouldn’t be discussing a 20-0 trouncing and thus, whether women footballers are good for 90 minutes.
For my money, as there’s a clear gap between the top nations and the developing nations, I’d think it wiser for the developing nations to play off against each other; the winners then going in to play with the big girls.
It would save demoralising thrashings and maybe allow them to develop at a more sustainable pace. As with Argentina in the rugby, as they develop they will need to be playing the better teams to continue their development. |
I would agree. Cricket has a series of international playing levels that encourage frequent competition, but that isn't one-sided or humiliating too often - but it can happen in a highly technical game, see Mali Women. But this is structural, not altruistic - 90% of the money in cricket comes from India, England and Australia, and they aren't too keen on sharing it, so they have loaded the decision-making structure.
In football, the real booty comes from the World Cup. The national federations want their share of it, and they have the voting power to claim it, unlike a more hierarchical game like cricket. They aren't going to volunteer for a low status competition that will deny them a share, and pushing hopelessly overmatched teams out is part of the process, never mind the effect on players and perhaps participation of public humiliation. The real prize is bigger tournaments, more often - never mind the quality. | | | |
| England Women on 12:49 - Dec 1 with 728 views | themodfather |
you still have to play who and what is in front of you, we won and won big, so criticise the oppo, if we don't hammer them, "why not? they were there for the taking" just like the men recently v san marion, 10-0 . the job first is to qualify from the group, then prepare for the finals. getting there. comfortably. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
