Bigga said:
Some time ago the Brasilian player, Marta, was being courted to play for a second division men's team in Italy. It was given some consideration, I believe.
Apparently it wasn't a publicity stunt.
watched a youtube clip of her and technically she looked spot on, much better than many professional men.If most top level women footballers anywhere near her level I might seriously consider watching it.
Ancient Citizen said:
I watched the England ladies the other night and it seemed to take all night to get the ball moved up, they just don't have the speed or strength to be honest. Fair play to them for their tenacity though, it' s just that it will always be regarded very much as a minority sport.
I think women's football suffers from comparisons to men, but they also suffer playing a game designed for men. For instance take a look at womens tennis; in a slam competion men play best of 5 sets women play best of 3, whilst there is a bit of difference in that women have more and rallys etc. Why do they do this, because women can't physically cope playing 5 sets like the men.
The pace is slower for women's football than men, there are other obvious reasons for it but I can't help but think that 90 minutes is too long to sustain a higher tempo, shortening the game may improve the quality, they do this in men's youth football, shortening the pitch may have the same effect. I also think the goals are too big; they are designed for men who are, using average height as a comparison around 5-6 inches taller, it may make more sense to make the goals more propotionate to women's body size.
Women won't have the speed or strength of the men that is obvious, however using another tennis comparison, Tim Henman saying that top level women's tennis players, Serena williams IIRC wouldn't get in the top 40 or beat a top 40 ranked player from the men's game. However you don't look at women's tennis in the same way as women's football, i.e it is enjoyable to watch and you can appreciate it just as much as the men's sport even if there are noticeable differences. Maybe it is just better if women's football just ignored the men's sport, they should adapt the regulations to suit them and look to develop a more technical game, watching some of it has looked like "Kick and Rush", without the rush.
They should look for adaptions to their game that suit them not pick up things from the men's game, the kick and rush 80's watford style, I have witnessed numerous times is pointless for them, you need endurance for pressing which women will have less of in comparison to men and so there is no high tempo that is required. Whilst the long balls only clarify the situation that many teams lack any technical ideas and so resort to long ball because not because it suits them better but because it is easier to coach and play.
Women's football will probably always be a minority sport, so if the physicality of the men's can't be replicated, why not go less physical, i.e reduce the empasis on big and tall forwards, technically these are often the worse and stopper CBs focus more on ball retention,passing, awareness of team mates position etc.
Although of course it may very difficult, many women's teams probably struggle to recruit enough members at youth level so a higher standard of technical ability and footballing awarness may be difficult to find, although Marta shows extraordinary technique so it is possible to achieve in the right circumstances.
If women's football offers something different to the men's game then it will be looked upon with more interest rather than as a poor relation to the men's game.
