13,000

Locke's SAFC said:
I've been watching bits of it, and there's no bullshit cheating, diving, rolling around on the floor and so on. The men's game could learn a thing or two from them.



Watch it. It's a touch like the difference between men's and women's tennis. The women's game is more fluid and in a way better to watch, and they definitely don't do all of the bullshit cheating, diving and rolling around.
Click to expand...
have to agree...I'm also shocked at the standard, it's very good
 


Stortford said:
Totally disagree, actually think women’s tennis is better to watch live, (granted on tv men’s is more interesting) same level of skill on average and at least you can see the ball, men’s game as you say is all about power and apart from top few is all about who has the best first serve and wins most free points on that.
I go regularly and is nothing more tedious that watching say Isner or Karlovic bang down 40 or 50 aces but not have the ground strokes to break opponent and just waiting for tie break, that Isner Mahut match summed it up. Depends what part of the game you enjoy but I prefer skill to pure power.
I think the fact that Women’s tennis has its own very well supported tour and equal prize money would suggest many agree with me.
Tennis and probably athletics are 2 sports where the skill level is on a par which makes it very watchable, the women just lack a bit of power compared to the men, women’s football is decades behind in that regard.
Click to expand...

I think skill/technique wise with tennis is similar unlike football but long rallies with little happening other than them passing the ball to each other waiting for one of them to overhit it, or hit the net is tedious. Women's is almost defensive shot after defensive shot with little else happening opposed to the men's who play more on front foot. Then there's Serena who at her peak was a total freak compared to everyone else and was just repeatedly winning titles without even dropping a set the whole competition and broke the record for most aces. . There's more action in the men's game as they need to cover the court quicker, and recover quicker which makes the rallies more entertaining.
 
samaistonsrightfoot said:
I think skill/technique wise with tennis is similar unlike football but long rallies with little happening other than them passing the ball to each other waiting for one of them to overhit it, or hit the net is tedious. Women's is almost defensive shot after defensive shot with little else happening opposed to the men's who play more on front foot. Then there's Serena who at her peak was a total freak compared to everyone else and was just repeatedly winning titles without even dropping a set the whole competition and broke the record for most aces. . There's more action in the men's game as they need to cover the court quicker, and recover quicker which makes the rallies more entertaining.
Click to expand...
If the men get into a rally then yes far more interesting, just doesn’t happen often enough due to power serves.

Was at Nottingham on Saturday, was WTA for women and challenger for men on grass when weather permitted.

Both men’s and women’s matches were equally entertaining as non of the men had knock out serve, watching Evans was excellent for that reason so decent rallies.
I would also say that watching live is totally different experience to tv as appears so much faster and what you describe as passing it to each other and waiting for mistake isn’t true they have attacking intent and skill just not the power to kill it off unless your name is Serena of course.

But back to thread, I would and do pay to watch women’s tennis, wouldn’t dream of doing that with football.
 
samaistonsrightfoot said:
Tennis definitely isn't as good to watch as mens. I'm not that into it now but was when I was younger. Women in it don't have the power the blokes do so the rallies often end up in a tedious game of pass. My parents and family go to Wimbledon every year and they all prefer the blokes aswell for the same reason. It's much more exciting.
Click to expand...

Agree that men's tennis is also better than women's, for exactly the same reasons.. I'll watch mens tennis all day long. Plus they play much more tennis than the women do, suppose they wouldn't be able to hack 5 sets or they'd already be doing it. (obviously joking) although they should do 5 sets given they get same prize money.
 
Last edited:
McGregor said:
Agree that men's tennis is also better than women's, for exactly the same reasons.. I'll watch mens tennis all day long. Plus they play much more tennis than the women do, suppose they wouldn't be able to hack 5 sets or they'd already be doing it. (obviously joking) although they should do 5 sets given they get same prize money.
Click to expand...

Doesn't bother me they play less sets tbh. Their rallies last longer, but of course their rallies last longer because they don't have the power or speed the men do.

Football is totally different. Fans pack grounds out all over the world for mens and aa few thousand, if that, turn up to the women's games and they want the same pay. Its ridiculous. Even men don't get the same pay as other men in it and its all based on ability (as least in the vast majority of cases) because the club they play for is earning millions in TV revenue/gates/sponsorship/prize money etc. Its like a non league player asking for the same money as Ronaldo.

Tennis gets about the same fan attendance for men and women.
 
horselover said:
have to agree...I'm also shocked at the standard, it's very good
Click to expand...

'Standard's good, mate, but its value is in showing us what football used to be. Just playing the game for the love of the game. And, we've lost that in the men's game, since the advent of Sky and the money involved it's win at all costs and that's not what the game is supposed to be about. In truth it all started before Sky got involved, but we as English men and women have come to accept that diving and generally being an outright arsehole has its place in our game. It doesn't. I remember Michael Owen diving against Argentina to win a penalty in the 2-2 and thinking this game's fucked. That was 20 years ago it's a lot worse now. It's supposed to be the flagship of the community and played in the right way. I don't think some people realise but one of the main factors in creating both football and rugby was to teach people the benefits of team sports, and it follows team work, and fair play.

'Interesting how rugby largely followed by people with a bit of cash has stayed largely true to its original foundations, whereas football, traditionally followed by people with not a pot to piss in has become all about money. Disgraceful when you think about it.
 
Last edited:
happy feet said:
Are you just virtue signalling? Do I want England to win? Yes. Do I watch, no I find it to slow and a bit boring.
Click to expand...

Not at all - I happen to think this topic usually shows up a lot of people on here as the fuckwits they are (as I mentioned in my previous thread). It’s cringeworthy some of the comments.

It’s ‘too’ by the way ? ;)
 

Back
Top