|
Post by independent on May 5, 2022 10:47:57 GMT
Time will tell if WSL can grow crowds,my fear would be that they won't be able to do so. At the moment a league with weekly attendances of 9000 has it's own program on BBC. Whether this is promoting the game or not is debatable, given the empty grounds and lack of atmosphere that games are being played in. Similarly the big increase in women on men's football shows are more likely to attract female viewers to Male football than WSL. As far as I can see everything possible has been done to promote women's football without success. The only option that they haven't tried is to play league games as a curtain raiser to a male game. I imagine that wage bills will rise in the WSL (as they should) without a similar rise in income, requiring increasing subsidies. One idea floated is that every Premier league team should have to have a women's team. What would happen to the relegated teams has not been decided. But it may be that each Premier club would have to keep their Women's team for at least 3 years after relegation. This looks like a desperate measure to keep WSL going until it can grow an audience. If they cannot,then they have to be permanently subsidised.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on May 5, 2022 10:50:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by heworksardtho on May 5, 2022 10:51:57 GMT
It’s shit they are milking yo death
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on May 5, 2022 10:53:56 GMT
Can't believe they postponed Inside No 9 for that crap 😎
|
|
|
Post by noustie on May 5, 2022 11:06:06 GMT
The North London derby had 13,438 last night, not bad. Prices are low due to low demand, seems fairly obvious capitalism 101 to me. It's less to see my local non-league team than to see Stoke, regardless of the fact that the entertainment is pretty similar I honestly don't know if it will take off. Men's football had an almost unchallenged supremacy among sports and was embedded in British industrial culture and rituals for decades. This is an attempt to grow a sport in a petri dish after it was suppressed, whether officially as with the FA ban, or due to cultural norms about women and sport, for a long, long, time. As every game is on live that could either boost live attendance, or kill it, the jury's out. As numbers are so small the impact of women players (who are also fans) not being able to come due to games clashing with when they play might be more pronounced. However, I can honestly say I do WANT it to succeed in establishing a place in the sporting landscape, like women's tennis has done over the years. For whatever reason there are definitely some men who would rather it didn't Oh and regarding sponsorship - Barclays extended their WSL support for 3 more years with a doubling of income for the league www.sportcal.com/News/FeaturedNews/137153 I honestly hope it works out too as my wee lass is right into it - she'll sit and watch a bloke's game now whereas she had zero interest until she caught a WSL game on the tele by fluke. I hope they learn from previous mistakes leagues made around how fast it can grow - if you're average WSL player can remain satisfied at £30k-£60k a year, unless they're top banana, instead of looking at the blokes making that a week it hopefully has a chance to get off the ground and find its feet. I get what folk are saying from a pure capitalism stance but the sponsorship to run it is a drop in the ocean essentially and in a saturated market there's more scope in attracting more girls to watch than boys I'd assume. The thing that does seem unfair is that there's a number of folk wanting them to illustrate how they're going to turn a profit. The blokes game is swimming in dosh but how many of the league teams if this was truly a capatilist system open to market forces would even still exist? Wouldn't be surprised if a few years down the line women with loads of dosh start investing purely for the love of the game rather than seeing it as ever turning a profit.
|
|
|
Post by noustie on May 5, 2022 11:30:34 GMT
I've mentioned it before but Scotland have gone from getting 1000-1500 in 2010 qualifiers to having 6000 vs Cyprus in 2019 then 8000 vs a Spain side we'd lost 8-0 too in the last game on a Tuesday night in the middle of the Easter holidays. The growth is decent for the international side but they need to be patient as there seemed genuine disappointment in the crowd number.
|
|
|
Post by a on May 5, 2022 11:51:48 GMT
I've mentioned it before but Scotland have gone from getting 1000-1500 in 2010 qualifiers to having 6000 vs Cyprus in 2019 then 8000 vs a Spain side we'd lost 8-0 too in the last game on a Tuesday night in the middle of the Easter holidays. The growth is decent for the international side but they need to be patient as there seemed genuine disappointment in the crowd number. I think the issue is the natural inclination to compare it to the mens game. Treat them as two entirely separate entities and the “dislike” will probably evaporate
|
|
|
Post by noustie on May 5, 2022 12:01:58 GMT
I've mentioned it before but Scotland have gone from getting 1000-1500 in 2010 qualifiers to having 6000 vs Cyprus in 2019 then 8000 vs a Spain side we'd lost 8-0 too in the last game on a Tuesday night in the middle of the Easter holidays. The growth is decent for the international side but they need to be patient as there seemed genuine disappointment in the crowd number. I think the issue is the natural inclination to compare it to the mens game. Treat them as two entirely separate entities and the “dislike” will probably evaporate Defo mate and I think the lassies are as guilty of it as the blokes to an extent. A bit of it was jealousy at the CL semi between Barca and Real had just got 90k but that shouldn't even be on the radar. Having the game at 19.45 basically meant anyone outside of Glasgow was going to be midnight to get home at least - in the middle of the holidays no reason not to bring it forward to 6pm as folk could then get home at a decent hour possibly attracting a few more families. Anyone coming from outside Glasgow would probably have had to take some sort of time off that afternoon anyway. I watched some of the Julie Fleeting documentary and they were playing in-front of friends and family at basically the local astro-turf in quite a few of their games. At the time she was up there as one of the world's best player and was playing in hand-me-down jerseys from the blokes side.
|
|
|
Post by independent on May 5, 2022 21:10:14 GMT
Forget about comparing it with anything else. Time will tell if it can become sustainable. I think this constant bullshit publicity doesn't do it any favours. Read the article about viewing figures for Women's Sport, not Women's Football. Even then they are boasting that some people have tuned in on 3 occasions. This is terrible stuff to read.Similarly claiming the England highest scoring record and comparing it with the men's total. Why compare the two? I wish that they would just get on with it and hopefully, the game will grow organically. No KO time for their FA Cup final yet?
|
|
|
Post by blackpoolred on May 5, 2022 22:05:15 GMT
Not sure why people think it is not sustainable, £60,000 a year full-time contracts is peanuts for the top clubs. That is only a 1.5 million wage bill. I am betting the tv money covers that and attendance money will also pitch in. Either way far more sustainable than the men's game and any monetary loses are a drop in the ocean - our owners paid £49 million just in tax this year - Pitching in a few million to the ladies' team would write off some of that in expenses. I wonder if Stoke got to the prem league and FA cup finals and were successful - how many of us would go. I went to my first game this year and will be going to a few more next year. I loved the whole experience: friendly atmosphere, able to stand and have a beer and was extremely impressed with the standard of the game and the application of the players and that was a third-tier game involving our own Stoke. Give it a try - I can't think of a better way of whiling away a Sunday afternoon As it stands it simply isn’t sustainable right now. The new money is split 75/25 between WSL and Champo, over 4 years, meaning the top league will get £6m a season. Factor in running costs, higher expectations for wages and it won’t cover it. The league lost £8.7m last season, so this money will require further investment from the mens side of the club. Obviously there are comparisons between the mens game, which with sponsorship and TV revenue made clubs hundreds of millions in some cases, so for the womens game to match it then there has to be more genuine interest in order that companies will bid to broadcast games and sponsors for kits etc. Edit: interesting read We will have to wait and see. I think crowds will start to rise, especially if England do well in the euros - in which all of their games have sold out. As somebody mentioned Newcastle got 22,000 in their last game and that was a tier 4 match - As it stands the WSL needs to be more competitive, all of the trophies go to one of three teams, which is not too unlike the men's game but the teams below the top 3 or 4 in the women's game are miles behind and there is rarely an upset if ever. Also, the top women's teams have successful men's teams, it would be interesting to see how attendances would go if clubs like Stoke & Newcastle were challenging for trophies and other clubs where the men's team are starved of success and the fans have a tribal/fanatical interest in the success of their town.
|
|