Womens Euro final

[kained&able]

I enjoyed it. Not anywhere near as much as the previous two rounds, or the group stage game against Sweden, but nonetheless entertaining.

As for the mockers. There's worse football played by professional men's teams every week. These days the better women's international teams would be able to give most League Two teams a tough game if they were able to compete physically. The skill level is way up on even three or four years ago, and there are a batch of teams able to compete at a reasonable level instead of just the USA and Germany. Tactically there's a tendency to slightly naive defending, but on the whole as a spectator I consider that a plus.

And then there's Alex Scott, Karen Carney, Sonia Bompastor, Louisa Necib, Linda Bresonik, Fatmire Bajramaj, Cecilie Pedersen, Lindy Wiik, Karin Stevens...what's not to like? OK, so Ronaldinho, Franck Ribery and Wayne Rooney, are better players, but a forward line of Bajramaj, Pedersen, and Carney is far better looking.

So your argument is: The best in the world are about as good as the shittest professional mens game if they all weaklings and couldn't defend for shit.

But its okay cos they are fit.


Riiiiggghhht. Even the wnba has better arguments(can't dunk/amazing moves but good fundamentals) and thats pretty damn shit.


dave

 

[ericjarvis]

So your argument is: The best in the world are about as good as the shittest professional mens game if they all weaklings and couldn't defend for shit.

But its okay cos they are fit.


Riiiiggghhht. Even the wnba has better arguments(can't dunk/amazing moves but good fundamentals) and thats pretty damn shit.


dave

My argument is that they've moved on from the lowest level of the professional mens game (Conference) and are now playing to a standard many of us are quite happy to watch every week. The physical side of it isn't relevant since mens teams don't play against womens teams. To follow your argument to its logical conclusion would mean that no womens sport can be any good ever. Finally "tactically there's a tendency to slightly naive defending" is also a fair description of the Premiership compared to La Liga or Serie A.

And the aesthetic aspects are an additional bonus.

Now, I accept that there are some people who can't bear the idea that they are watching anything other than the very best quality football played by amazing athletes in the peak of condition. Personally I go along with the views of most football fans (as opposed to Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea supporters) that what actually matters is the drama and entertainment of the game rather than the technical and physical prowess of each individual player.

There's little doubt that La Liga is currently the best league in the world for technique, and tactical knowledge. The Premiership, Bundesliga and Serie A are the best for physical prowess. However from what I've seen the most consistently exciting football to watch is played in Portugal, Argentina and South Africa. Are those leagues rubbish because they aren't technically and physically as demanding, or does that only apply when the difference is gender not geography?

 

[kained&able]

not watched any protugeuse or south african league games recently.

But argentinian football is comedy genius! Its like watching a professional version of your mates playing in the field behind your house.

It is however rubbish.

Conference is semi-pro by the way, although has some entirely professional teams(like luton)


dave