I caught part of a discussion on Radio 5 this morning about whether women should play with smaller goals than men, given that men are significantly bigger. This could mitigate the criticism of the poor quality of women goalkeepers. Well, their poor shooting already goes some way to compensating for this. But is it a coincidence that the Thai gk who shipped 13 against the US is also the smallest at 165cms (5'5")?
However, ponder this. When the 24' by 8' goal size was determined back in the 1870s, the average height of a European male was 167cms. The average height of the goalkeepers in the first round of the women's World Cup is 175cms (5'9") - much bigger than men 150 years ago. In fact, there's a good case for the size of the men's goals to be bigger to reflect their much bigger stature now.
Not if you are the Argentinian goalie!
Quote from: Stoneleigh Loyalist on June 14, 2019, 08:44:15 PM
Not if you are the Argentinian goalie!
Same thought occurred to me! But she is significantly taller than the average at 180cms - the tallest at 182 are England, Chile and China.
No.
I don't see the benefit to their game. What they should do though, is have the refs start calling some of those fouls that they are letting go. You know, the kind that would be called in the EPL and most Euro leagues.
Well if we are considering smaller goals then lets not overlook smaller pitches as women are less capable of covering as much ground as men.
Quote from: filham on June 14, 2019, 09:27:05 PM
Well if we are considering smaller goals then lets not overlook smaller pitches as women are less capable of covering as much ground as men.
Sarcasm doesn't come through well via text. Sarcasm?
NO, Equal rights and all that
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on June 14, 2019, 09:30:25 PM
Quote from: filham on June 14, 2019, 09:27:05 PM
Well if we are considering smaller goals then lets not overlook smaller pitches as women are less capable of covering as much ground as men.
Sarcasm doesn't come through well via text. Sarcasm?
Why would it be sarcasm? Are you disputing it?
It's not something that needed saying, perhaps, but it's still a pretty simple and irrefutable statement of fact
Quote from: Statto on June 14, 2019, 11:06:38 PM
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on June 14, 2019, 09:30:25 PM
Quote from: filham on June 14, 2019, 09:27:05 PM
Well if we are considering smaller goals then lets not overlook smaller pitches as women are less capable of covering as much ground as men.
Sarcasm doesn't come through well via text. Sarcasm?
Why would it be sarcasm? Are you disputing it?
It's not something that needed saying, perhaps, but it's still a pretty simple and irrefutable statement of fact
Sorry but why is that a fact? I was not aware that women cannot run as far as men. In terms of covering distance I don't think there is any difference. If filham meant that women can't cover the ground as quickly as men that's a different argument but it isn't what he said. Maybe a simple misunderstanding, depends on what filham intended to convey.
Quote from: Twig on June 14, 2019, 11:17:03 PM
Quote from: Statto on June 14, 2019, 11:06:38 PM
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on June 14, 2019, 09:30:25 PM
Quote from: filham on June 14, 2019, 09:27:05 PM
Well if we are considering smaller goals then lets not overlook smaller pitches as women are less capable of covering as much ground as men.
Sarcasm doesn't come through well via text. Sarcasm?
Why would it be sarcasm? Are you disputing it?
It's not something that needed saying, perhaps, but it's still a pretty simple and irrefutable statement of fact
Sorry but why is that a fact? I was not aware that women cannot run as far as men. In terms of covering distance I don't think there is any difference. If filham meant that women can't cover the ground as quickly as men that's a different argument but it isn't what he said. Maybe a simple misunderstanding, depends on what filham intended to convey.
Yes if you take time out the equation, then perhaps women aren't "less capable of covering as much ground as men". In much the same way that I'm capable of covering as much ground as the Kenyan bloke that holds the current world record for a marathon. The only difference between us is that whereas he can run 26 miles in about 2 hours, it takes me about 2 days. But ignoring that small detail, we're both equally good at marathon running.
Of course if you look at it like that, the whole concept of being able or unable to cover a lot of ground becomes pretty meaningless, and certainly has no relevance to football matches, which are played over a fixed period of time (90 minutes). Ergo, I strongly suspect filham was talking about the amount of ground a man/woman can cover in 90 minutes.
Lol..not sure about over in England...but my daughter has played soccer for 12 years and can cover the same amount of ground faster than most 15:year olds can. If the statement wasn't being sarcastic it was definitely an ignorant statement.
Sent from my BND-L34 using Tapatalk
Smaller goals, smaller pitches, smaller shorts and smaller tops.
Interesting OP and discussion that kind of follows the usual 'natural' trends. Whatever the size of the pitch and goals it's the same for both sides, with the same physical and mental attributes tending to influence outcomes. As someone who has watched and followed the women's game for quite a long time I note how improvements to fitness, techniques, application, and achievement have been made at the top of the game whilst acknowledging how far the lower echelons have to go to make up ground.
I was intrigued by the media response to the thirteen goals the US scored against Thailand and remember the times in the men's game when such large scores were regular occurrences. I hope the women's game adapts and develops its own unique style and doesn't even try to compete like for like with the men's game. We know the fastest men run faster than the fastest women, but what we don't know is whether the latter will ever catch up. What I will say is that a good women's match is every bit as entertaining as a good men's match even now.
At what age do young boys first play on a full size pitch? I think it is 14 so you could make the pitches and the goals smaller if it would improve the game
Nothing to do with football but on the subject of athleticism watch the amazing catches that the English women have made lately in their cricket games. Every bit as good as the men.
Yes the goals should stay the same size and also international refs should clamp down on the cynical fouls made by the Argentinian women who matched their men in that department.
An interesting similarity that I have noticed in this weeks games is that supposedly quality women players are as one footed as our much lauded men. The number of times last night that I saw the situation where on the left wing the move was crying out for a one touch cross. Instead of that the ball was switched to the right food slowing the move and angle of the cross.
Back to goal size I can see teams recruiting beanpole freaks to train as goalkeepers.
All of the England netball team are tall so there are fit girls out there.
Modified - I am not suggesting that our netball girls are beanpole freaks they are very fit!
This was first brought up by one of the England players. I wonder if there would have been an outcry if a male had said this.
092.gif
Why don´t the ladies swap their shirts after the game as men do.
Quote from: AnOldBrownie on June 15, 2019, 02:48:06 AM
Lol..not sure about over in England...but my daughter has played soccer for 12 years and can cover the same amount of ground faster than most 15:year olds can. If the statement wasn't being sarcastic it was definitely an ignorant statement.
I think you are confusing (a) the concept that men are on average, or at the elite level, physically faster, stronger, bigger etc than women with (b) the concept that every single man in the world is faster, stronger, bigger etc than every single woman in the world. (a) is true. (b) is untrue. Saying (a) is not ignorant.
I thoroughly enjoy watching the England Lionesses playing Football, Cricket and Rugby and most other sports. I note you don't see them surrounding the referee screaming like the spoilt brat men's footballers of today. I find the women competitive and entertaining, athletic not forgetting the skill.
It case you haven't noticed women are built and made differently to men, and I don't see any swollen egos on the field of play wanting to be massaged either.
Women have come along way in team sports over the years, and good luck to them.
I am really enjoying these women's games, there is much skill and technique on show.
Regarding the OP, the Scotland GK certainly got caught out against Japan due to lack of height.
Also am I imagining it or is England's excellent LB Greenwood playing games while wearing her false eyelashes??
When I suggested smaller pitches for women I was not intending to be sarcastic but was remembering that at school we played ( in South Park) with smaller goals and pitches.
Women do generally run slower than men and therefore take longer to cover distances, a smaller pitch would speed up their game. Also , again generalising, women have less stamina than men and therefore on a shorter pitch would be fitter at the end of the match.
In grand slam tennis we don't expect women to play five set matches, their football may look better if made a little less strenuous.
I have to admit that I have only just about accepted that football is really a game for women and I certainly can't accept that women should be boxing or playing rugby.
So long as it's the same for both sides, it kind of doesn't matter, and women have as much right to participate in any sport as men.
Karen Bardsley, the England women's 'keeper says this about the position: "The constant messages I heard growing up was: 'If you're unfit, you go in goal. If you're no good, you go in goal.' How do we change that? How do we give goalkeeping more respect?".
It flooded my memories at school when, as a borderline late entry to teenage years, I was way down the list for selection to a playground team. I ended up in goal and, because I was agile, had lightning reflexes, and could land without damage on the playground surface, I soon became a very early selection. I played in goal for my school and as a youth in a good five-a-side team where I was never beaten by a penalty. I never grew tall enough fast enough to be a serious candidate for post school football and I was never coached and everything was down to speed, agility and a quick perception of where the ball was going to end up.
Bardsley goes on to say that she trained in a mixed college and this taught her more than if she had trained alongside other girls only. Interesting thoughts,
I was shoved in goal, because I was 6' 8"and a half, there was no other choice, and I had hands like shovels so I was probably made for the job, I ended up loving every minute of it. I think you have to be of a certain mentality especially in those days when there was very little protection for Goalkeepers.
Quote from: filham on June 15, 2019, 09:36:29 PM
When I suggested smaller pitches for women I was not intending to be sarcastic but was remembering that at school we played ( in South Park) with smaller goals and pitches.
Women do generally run slower than men and therefore take longer to cover distances, a smaller pitch would speed up their game. Also , again generalising, women have less stamina than men and therefore on a shorter pitch would be fitter at the end of the match.
In grand slam tennis we don't expect women to play five set matches, their football may look better if made a little less strenuous.
I have to admit that I have only just about accepted that football is really a game for women and I certainly can't accept that women should be boxing or playing rugby.
I must admit I too struggle with women boxing and playing rugby. Football i'm Fine with but rugby and boxing a step too far for me.
Quote from: Burt on June 15, 2019, 10:58:08 PM
So long as it's the same for both sides, it kind of doesn't matter, and women have as much right to participate in any sport as men.
I think the women's game would benefit greatly from being played on a smaller pitch (with smaller goals) similar in size to what the U13 Academy teams play on at present.
The Women's international team is similar in stature to a U13 Academy team (physical strength and size) and playing on a smaller pitch would let them concentrate on the technical ability, skill and movement rather than trying to compete physically with the men's game.
the Women would get greater football development and the matches would be faster and more entertaining.
There is a reason that the U13's play on a smaller pitch and that is to develop their game and not just have the most physically developed of them dominate.
Women's football is different from Men's in the same way futsal is different from 11-a-side and there is no point trying to compare them.
I don't think it's coincidence that watching the Women's world cup the more physical teams are progressing.
if we were watching this tournament being played in purpose built stadiums with different sized pitches then it would be a totally different ball game.
Quote from: Montague on June 17, 2019, 10:02:45 AM
Quote from: Burt on June 15, 2019, 10:58:08 PM
So long as it's the same for both sides, it kind of doesn't matter, and women have as much right to participate in any sport as men.
I think the women's game would benefit greatly from being played on a smaller pitch (with smaller goals) similar in size to what the U13 Academy teams play on at present.
Yes, but women's rugby and field hockey (as examples) use the same dimension pitches as the men's game and they still manage to produce entertainment which is what the professional (rather than amateur) sport is there to produce. There is even a move to have women playing five set tennis which is only hampered by complaints in the administrative circles that scheduling would be a serious problem at the logistical level in the existing circuits i.e. they'd have to reduce the number of players participating for both men and women and/or lengthen the duration of the tournament.
The best women have proven they can produce similar steady improvements in quality in comparison to men. For sure physical strength, stamina, and technical ability are required in all sport but as long as women want to play on full sized pitches with the same rules as men then who in their right mind would argue with them other than the women themselves?
