2023 FIFA Women's World Cup: Rubiales banned from all football-related activities for three years

[54]

Location: Australia & New Zealand

 

 

 

 

Quote

England squad for the 2023 World Cup

Goalkeepers: Mary Earps, Hannah Hampton, Ellie Roebuck

Defenders: Millie Bright, Lucy Bronze, Jess Carter, Niamh Charles, Alex Greenwood, Esme Morgan, Lotte Wubben-Moy

Midfielders: Laura Coombes, Jordan Nobbs, Georgia Stanway, Ella Toone, Katie Zelem, Kiera Walsh

Strikers: Rachel Daly, Beth England, Lauren Hemp, Lauren James, Katie Robinson, Chloe Kelly, Alessia Russo

 

 

 

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by 54

[OCK]

INJURY RAVAGED 

[timeEd32]

World Cups and Olympics in this part of the world kill some of the enthusiasm for me given the match times.

[OCK]

Should be fine, 7am-10am KO times for most England games. 

[LFEE]

9 minutes ago, OCK said:

Should be fine, 7am-10am KO times for most England games. 

Bet the hospitality sector are rubbing their hands.

[timeEd32]

42 minutes ago, OCK said:

Should be fine, 7am-10am KO times for most England games. 

 

Should have mentioned I'm in the US. Lots of middle of the night kickoffs.

[OCK]

Aye that's shit 

 

[iklgizmo]

I don't think there has even been a deal signed to broadcast it in Europe yet! I'm sure BBC/ITV will come to some sort of agreement but at the moment, it's a standoff and there are only 50 days to go!

 

On the footballing side, I think injuries mean England will struggle to get past the quarters.

USA will be huge favourites as always, with Germany probably the strongest European side by some distance!

[Miercoles]

I'm excited for this. New baby due to arrive in a week or so, this will make perfect "up in the middle of the night" viewing.

 

 

[ponsaelius]

Didn't realise it doesn't start until 20th July (and runs to 20th August). 

 

Seems a bit late? I know women's football has to exist of its own accord but can't help but feel it would be better not to be on a bit earlier before pre-season and start of next season ramps up. I'm sure they're usually on June-July. Is this something to do with Oz sports venues being used?

 

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by ponsaelius

[Deuce]

Big loss for the U.S.

 

 

[timeEd32]

Embedded tweets are back?!?

[iklgizmo]

On 01/06/2023 at 20:10, ponsaelius said:

Didn't realise it doesn't start until 20th July (and runs to 20th August). 

 

Seems a bit late? I know women's football has to exist of its own accord but can't help but feel it would be better not to be on a bit earlier before pre-season and start of next season ramps up. I'm sure they're usually on June-July. Is this something to do with Oz sports venues being used?

 

 

 

I thought it was something to do with the weather, but don't know enough about Australian weather to know If a few weeks would make that much difference 

 

[54]

 

[Izakaya]

Few of us going to get tickets for Jamaica V Brazil. Definitely not because the crowd will be full of unbelievable fanny. Definitely not. 

[triggs]

Going to the first game of this. Australia vs. Ireland in Sydney was an inspired choice to fill the stadium

[Optimistic Nut]

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12914046/england-women-lionesses-disappointed-with-fa-following-breakdown-in-talks-over-world-cup-bonuses

 

 

[Groundhog63]

50 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12914046/england-women-lionesses-disappointed-with-fa-following-breakdown-in-talks-over-world-cup-bonuses

 

 

Christ, they'll only spend it on handbags and make up ffs...... 😉

[TheBrownBottle]

36 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12914046/england-women-lionesses-disappointed-with-fa-following-breakdown-in-talks-over-world-cup-bonuses

 

 

I'm not sure what I make of this one.  The FA is losing money, so the demand that they pay more hardly seems reasonable - regardless of the players feeling 'aggrieved' (and there is also the issue for me of whether or not a player should be paid large sums for representative matches generally - I'm not particularly sympathetic when similar stories emerge re the mens' WC, either).  Demanding more than the FA actually receives is hardly a cogent argument for being underpaid.  Also, if players are to receive payment, FIFA's model of all players receiving the same amount irrespective of nationality seems pretty egalitarian to me.

 

Though this is tempered by the fact that the women's game is underfunded by the TV companies, based upon viewing figures vs payments for rights.  Increased TV revenues = more money paid to FIFA for the WC = more money in bonuses.  And of course the fact that the FA effectively rendered women's football illegal for decades, and so they have serious ground to make back up (though I'd suggest that this relates more to investment in women and girls' football at grassroots rather than bonuses to professionals).

[Groundhog63]

5 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

I'm not sure what I make of this one.  The FA is losing money, so the demand that they pay more hardly seems reasonable - regardless of the players feeling 'aggrieved' (and there is also the issue for me of whether or not a player should be paid large sums for representative matches generally - I'm not particularly sympathetic when similar stories emerge re the mens' WC, either).  Demanding more than the FA actually receives is hardly a cogent argument for being underpaid.  Also, if players are to receive payment, FIFA's model of all players receiving the same amount irrespective of nationality seems pretty egalitarian to me.

 

Though this is tempered by the fact that the women's game is underfunded by the TV companies, based upon viewing figures vs payments for rights.  Increased TV revenues = more money paid to FIFA for the WC = more money in bonuses.  And of course the fact that the FA effectively rendered women's football illegal for decades, and so they have serious ground to make back up (though I'd suggest that this relates more to investment in women and girls' football at grassroots rather than bonuses to professionals).

Whilst I agree, in principle, with the whole equality ethos whatever industry etc etc but there has to be some realism about the value of the product. 

Apart from that I think, again in principle, FIFA's insistence that every player gets the same is brilliant. 

Some life changing cash for the poorer countries. 

Contary to, say, our own Gvt's tight fisted attitude to Gurkhas & South Pacific soldiers who can't be given the same rewards as our troops because "it's a greater value to them as they're poorer to start with" 

[Paullow]

https://www.oddschecker.com/football/womens-international/womens-world-cup

Just having a look at some of the individual match odds, and seems hardly worth watching until the knock out stages - Costa Rica 150/1 at Sky Bet to beat Spain, who also have Vietnam at 200/1 to beat USA, Haiti 100/1 to beat England etc. If you get the B side around 13/2 then that looks pretty competitive, relatively.

32 teams clearly works better for tournaments, 2 going through, 2 going out and none of this best third place, and I guess having these less fancied teams might help the sport grow in that particular country, but it seems like they have expanded it well before it's time, and probably get a few pointless 9-0+ type wins in the opening days, and then no doubt more discussions about goal sizes and what not.

[iklgizmo]

Yea there will definitely be some ridiculous scorelines in the group stages, but like you say, the alternative is don't let the rubbish teams play!  

Even the opening games on paper should be very easy wins for Norway and Australia 

 

This all starts early tomorrow morning with the first game in New Zealand. Not the best preparation though, as there has just been an active shooter situation in the city and at least a couple of people have been killed!

[Yorkie]

Jill Scott's accent is just lovely.

 

 

[Disco]

30 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

Jill Scott's accent is just lovely.

 

 

[Yorkie]

it's horrendous