-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Equal Prize Money…
- Thread starter brandon
- Start date
SAFC 2012
Striker
Don’t get upset over it man give them equal pay it’s all good.
If you aren’t trying to look good on a message board though just admit it they’re absolutely shite. Like really really Shite
Mackem DJ
Striker
Isms aside. He is right
I’m not sure about this at domestic level. The ECB presumably pay the market rate for women atm. By giving them parity it’s a great gesture, but ultimately that’s money coming out of the pot that could have been used on the grass roots game.
Sillypoint
Central Defender
disagree like, its come on massively in the last few years.
took the bairn to headingley to watch the hundred, the womens game was better than the mens, a more exciting matched game that went to the last few balls.
they had brought the boundary in to an almost insulting level for them too, which was pointless as they were hitting it into the stands regardless
It’ll play a part, but it’s also just science and genetics. Plenty of sports where the women’s version has had plenty of exposure and opportunity and yet there still remains an obvious gap in records/competitiveness/etc.
It’s an opinion, but when you say the women’s game was better you’re merely talking about a particular example of a competitive spectacle. If we’re talking strength, speed, power, for example there is no comparison whatsoever. You’re in the minority, the viewing figures show that.
Last edited:
Yes, but it those qualities are all down to the great physical strength of the male so I don't think it detracts from the quality or skills on display. I was quite surprised at what appeared to be a near capacity crowd for yesterday's ashes ODI although I don't suppose ticket prices would be as high as the men's. Nevertheless increase in attendance should result in increased prize money but not on a par with men's until revenues are equal
Twisted
Striker
A competitive gap only if men were playing women.
Likewise not every fast bowler bowls 95 mile an hour, should a fast bowler who 'only' reaches 80 not bother playing because of science and genetics?
maghater
Striker
Not really, the cash might be equal, but the men have to work a lot harder to get it, best of 5 sets v best of 3
It isn’t though, the amount of people paying to watch (either in person or on television) the respective genders shows there’s a huge gulf and for many people that’s solely down to the difference in quality. The slower paced, weaker nature of women’s cricket in comparison to men’s is a huge factor in why they don’t bother going.
Your example sort of proves the point for me though, an 80mph male bowler is considered only medium-fast and will likely be reliant on swing or seam movement to get success, whereas women can’t even reach 80mph as their genuine fast.
To put it another way, even at club level I’ve faced bowlers who can bowl in excess of 80mph. If you stuck me in the England women’s side for an international match as an opening batsman I’d be facing slower ‘pace’ bowlers than I would be playing at Brandon or Burnopfield or Seaham Harbour in the local leagues for example.
The science and genetics part is all about where the ceiling lies. There’ll always be women who can bowl quicker than lots and lots of men, but the entire point is that those women will be at the elite end of their gender whilst the blokes they’re quicker than will largely be playing club cricket.
The same goes for just about every other sport in existence when you compare the genders - be it sprinting (look at the differences between world records), golf (in relation to distances being driven), weightlifting (again world records).
It isn’t sexist or misogynistic to point these out, if anything, it’s more likely to be those things if you try and paint over it.
There are many sports I watch and enjoy where women participate, but I worry massively for the future and longevity of some of my favourite sports if they’re elevating certain women’s events way above their ceiling at the direct expense and consequence of their male comparisons.
We’ve discussed at length on here funding in domestic cricket, so how will it impact for example Durham CCC or the County Championship and ultimately the future of men’s domestic cricket if they’re throwing money at women’s cricket when ultimately it doesn’t deserve it? People might not like that, but would you be willing to lose domestic men’s cricket in its current guise just so the women’s game can be propped up and highly subsidised?? I’m not.
