Sunderland AFC Ladies



It great to see women's football get more attention and it really proves a point when they can attract gates of over 20k. A very good case for higher wages as well as showing the lads a thing or two about honesty on the pitch!
 
peasmarshmakem said:
Surprised at Man City attendance despite derby v Utd never thought that many would be bothering to go ....if our lasses were playing the Mags ladies I doubt it would be more than 5k....I just don't get the women's footy, personally I wouldn't pay to watch ,the bits I've seen on the box looks like they play with a lightweight ball...is it the same weight and size as the blokes play ?
Click to expand...

They played against the mags last week at the SoL infront of a crowd of about 1,000 iirc.
 
SAFC.com Sunderland Ladies rounded off a fantastic opening month of the season with a 9-1 win yesterday against Hull. They’re absolutely flying, and there’s no better time for the people of Wearside to get on board and follow their journey back to the top. The story of Sunderland’s Ladies’ demotion and subsequent series of setbacks is now a...

More at Roker Report...
 
i took my lass (no) to the Chelsea game and it was a good day out tbf. Goal was a screamer and the atmosphere was lovely and relaxed. There was loads of kids there, especially young lasses with their dads. Ideal way to introduce them to the sport without the fear of some dickheads causing trouble.

initially there were no tickets left so i was gonna have to pay 50 quid for hospitality but they emailed me and said there were some spares. got right behind the goal in the shed lower so pretty pleased.
 
Doberman said:
freebies.

basically folk handed tickets and begged to attend. Rob Harris (journalist) said 40,000 tickets had been given away for Chelsea today.
Click to expand...

40,000 given away and 16,000 didn't bother their arses.

What happened to all this equality nonsense that American player was harping on about.

Should have been charged between £65-£76 like watching their male counterparts
 
Father Jack Hackett said:
What do you think men's football attendances were in their infancy? The woman's game is 140 years behind in these terms.
Of course they'll more than likely never be the same as the men's game but let's hope they keep rising like they did in the men's game, reaching their peak in the 1930s (taking 50 years) before the bells and whistles of the Premier League in the 90s.
Click to expand...
I can’t beleive how many utter idiots post on here every time the subject of lasses footy pops up. Using men’s footy as a benchmark for comparison is ludicrous. Do these same plonkers slag off non league men’s footy because it’s not the same standard as the premier league? No. Women’s footy should be viewed and judged on its own merits. If you like it great, if you don’t, then leave it be.
As far as I’m concerned if it gets young lasses off Facebook and onto a footy pitch actively enjoying sport then it’s to be commended.
Young girls now can seriously consider a professional career in the game. It’s not pie in the sky anymore it’s attainable.
I think there’s a lot more at play with some posters than not finding women’s footy interesting. It seems some are rooted firmly in the 18th century.
 
Dilligaf60 said:
I can’t beleive how many utter idiots post on here every time the subject of lasses footy pops up. Using men’s footy as a benchmark for comparison is ludicrous. Do these same plonkers slag off non league men’s footy because it’s not the same standard as the premier league? No. Women’s footy should be viewed and judged on its own merits. If you like it great, if you don’t, then leave it be.
As far as I’m concerned if it gets young lasses off Facebook and onto a footy pitch actively enjoying sport then it’s to be commended.
Young girls now can seriously consider a professional career in the game. It’s not pie in the sky anymore it’s attainable.
I think there’s a lot more at play with some posters than not finding women’s footy interesting. It seems some are rooted firmly in the 18th century.
Click to expand...

if we're judging lasses football on it's own merits then it should get next to no coverage on the tele. Similar to non league football. Nothing about being rooted in the 18th century. It's just the standard doesn't warrant equal coverage which Sky et al are seemingly trying to push for. It's not the 'idiots' using men's football as a benchmark.
 
Doberman said:
if we're judging lasses football on it's own merits then it should get next to no coverage on the tele. Similar to non league football. Nothing about being rooted in the 18th century. It's just the standard doesn't warrant equal coverage which Sky et al are seemingly trying to push for. It's not the 'idiots' using men's football as a benchmark.
Click to expand...

If no one was interested in watching it, then it would get 'next to no' coverage.

The viewing figures for the World Cup suggest that there is an audience.
Jat said:
40,000 given away and 16,000 didn't bother their arses.
Click to expand...

But 25,000 did bother.

Leyton Orient had a 'Football for a Fiver' day last season.

It was 'Sold Out'... except it wasn't.

There were plenty of empty seats because people had bought tickets and then not bothered.

If you charge f**k all, people will get them in just case they fancy it, it's not exclusive to Women's football.
 
Last edited:
Doberman said:
if we're judging lasses football on it's own merits then it should get next to no coverage on the tele. Similar to non league football. Nothing about being rooted in the 18th century. It's just the standard doesn't warrant equal coverage which Sky et al are seemingly trying to push for. It's not the 'idiots' using men's football as a benchmark.
Click to expand...

Should they not televise Women's Tennis because it's only 3 sets maximum and they don't hit it as hard? What about Athletics? If one doesn't break 100m in 10 seconds, should there be next to no coverage?
 
The ten or so countries that are putting significant resources into the game are starting to reap the benefits in terns of the level of competition.

Predict that the next WWC will draw an even bigger audience, albeit the nations that do not invest will continue to produce the "lowlights" video clips.
 
Doberman said:
if we're judging lasses football on it's own merits then it should get next to no coverage on the tele. Similar to non league football. Nothing about being rooted in the 18th century. It's just the standard doesn't warrant equal coverage which Sky et al are seemingly trying to push for. It's not the 'idiots' using men's football as a benchmark.
Click to expand...
How much coverage it gets has got bugger all to do with my point mate. But addressing your post, There are lots of things on tv which I think are shite, I don’t complain about the amount of times they are shown. I just don’t watch them
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was surprised how much I enjoyed watching the lasses team, and the World Cup in general. I suppose it helped that we were pretty good and did well.
 
Doberman said:
if we're judging lasses football on it's own merits then it should get next to no coverage on the tele. Similar to non league football. Nothing about being rooted in the 18th century. It's just the standard doesn't warrant equal coverage which Sky et al are seemingly trying to push for. It's not the 'idiots' using men's football as a benchmark.
Click to expand...
Replace “lasses” with “Scottish” and the same argument holds
 
Doberman said:
if we're judging lasses football on it's own merits then it should get next to no coverage on the tele. Similar to non league football. Nothing about being rooted in the 18th century. It's just the standard doesn't warrant equal coverage which Sky et al are seemingly trying to push for. It's not the 'idiots' using men's football as a benchmark.
Click to expand...
non league football is on the tv every week pal. has been for ages.

out of curiosity, have you been to a womens game before?
 

Back
Top