Didn't they let City straight into the top division as well?
United finally setting up a women's team | Championship application successful
- Thread starter Ayush_reddevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
Go for it Kat. Though I warn you, if you post anything remotely cheerful on social media after a defeat, I'll be after your blood.
Not quite. It was worse than that:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/22694564
They wanted City's money involved in the women's game and fecked over one of the most storied clubs in women's football to get it. Maybe that was the right decision for the long term health of women's football, but it was ham-fisted and disrespectful at the same time.
Another cynical move by Ed Woodward to get more cash into the club.
Before everyone has their eyes on us signing the top female players, the task will be to get a team established and promoted to the top league, then you can look at bigger names. They want to bring their own girls through which is great. The big league players want the publicity and they won't get that in the 2nd division. They are right to do it this way and not just try and barge their way into the top league at someone else's expense. Get their on merit.
Fair enough mate.
I liken watching women’s football to watching a conference north game in super slow mo. Zero intensity and a shocking standard.
That's either just being disingenuous and contrary for the sake of it or you must still be at school because there is so much more boring things to watch than women's football. Almost any game from last years Womens World Cup was more enjoyable than our recent game against Seville.
I don’t know, I don’t follow women’s football, hence the question.
I’m happy that you know though
I give a flying feck. It's good for United's role in it's Manchester community. It's the act of a good corporate citizen towards something that has been prioritised by the FA and those who have the task of promoting women's sport in the UK. It's good for me for purely selfish reasons as a United fan, to imagine that one day, when they read out the names on the England women's national team teamsheet I might hear United's name instead of City, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea.All you sanctimonious pricks saying good news
Who gives a flying feck
As for the opinions of sanctimonious pricks who show up in threads clearly labelled as being about women's football for no purpose other than to ridicule fellow posters or the idea of women playing football - frankly who gives a feck what they think about this or any other subject.
People have different opinionsAll you sanctimonious pricks saying good news
Who gives a flying feck
Come back to me when you've looked up the meaning of sanctimonious
Everything starts somewhere. I’m
sure that men’s football in the 1920’s was equally ponderous and unrefined, and that’s fitting as apparently that’s the era where a lot of people’s opinions in this thread belong.
With the name Manchester United attached to it women’s football will get better. Guarantee it.
Classic FA tbh.
Wow shocking amount of ignorance and arrogance on display here. I think much of it is down to misogyny rather than actual experience of the womens game too.
I get it people don't like women's football, but some of the comments here about it just aren't fair or accurate at all. Not even close. It may not be as fast as the mens game but some of the skill on show at the World Cup last year was equal to the mens game. There were some absolute screaming goals scored and some majestic skills on display.
Yes it is not up there yet but describing it a slower version of Conference North football is just being rude and innacurate. The top women pros are well above that standard.
I get it people don't like women's football, but some of the comments here about it just aren't fair or accurate at all. Not even close. It may not be as fast as the mens game but some of the skill on show at the World Cup last year was equal to the mens game. There were some absolute screaming goals scored and some majestic skills on display.
Yes it is not up there yet but describing it a slower version of Conference North football is just being rude and innacurate. The top women pros are well above that standard.
It's all about personal preferences i suppose. If you think 20 women running on the pitch like headless chickens with zero coordination between them is more enjoyable than a defensive performance, then fair enough. But i know which one i prefer to watch.
From what I understand the WSL has a salary cap. Clubs can't spend over 40% of their gross annual operating budget. City's Steph Houghton is one of the top players in the league and makes 65k a year. Morgan would probably make bank in a loan deal with how the current structure is set up but I doubt the United team will attract the very best in its infancy.
The US, Swedish, Brazilian and German womens national teams play way more exciting football than the shitshows we're served up with from United these days.
The skill is a long way off the men's game in fairness. England are the 3rd ranked team in the World and a lot of their play is pretty awful with some comical mistakes whenever I have watched.
The games will always be slower and less powerful but the technical standard will rise, probably quite quickly too. I just don't think it is in any way honest to say that the technical level is near the men's at the moment.
That's just completely untrue though and it's also quite offensive. Sanctimonious in fact.
Firstly there was nothing enjoyable watching United get beaten by a side Leicester beat the season before. A side United should have destroyed if it were not for the awful tactics.
Secondly the top women's sides are far better than what you are giving them credit for. You make them sound like they are like 5 year olds all running around trying to get on the ball and it's just completey wrong.
Agreed the overall technical standard but some of the individual pieces of skill and goals scored were amazing and wouldn't be out of place in the mens game.
Last edited:
Fecking pity Arsenal already got Vivianne Miedema last season, she's like the female incarnation of Van Basten. I went to a couple of games at the Euro's last year and she and Lieke Martens are absolutely top class and unique/once every 30 year players.
Why? Because you don't have the insight to visualise how someone showing up purely in order to ridicule other posters by suggesting they're somehow afraid to utter some greater truth that only you are bold enough to reveal could be considered as sanctimonious? Try adding a bit of depth to your analysis, before you make assumptions about the motives (or the literacy) of other posters.
Meanwhile, back on topic. Sometimes people do say what they mean, for no other reason than they believe it. Some of us believe that United are doing the right thing and we are pleased to see it happen.
Can I use my own dictionary? Or do we need to use the picture-book version you have?
Just gives the moaners something else to moan about.
Agreed, and to be honest your first post (the sanctimonious one
) was absolutely spot on and the reasons listed hit the nail on the head. It might not be for everyone but they don't have to watch if they don't want to. It was fecking embarrassing that United were the only team in the Premiership that didn't have a ladies team. Arsenal ladies are world famous and they have a proud history and I would love to hear our women talked about as respectfully and for them to win as much too.
That seems pretty sanctimonious of you.
To be honest, I hope not. Because as far as I can see the club are trying to do it the right way and I hope they stick to the principles they put in the press release. They're supporting a team to join an expanded League structure and they're talking about recruiting from our youth team, though doubtless they'll spread the net wider. They're not trying to skip the steps and jump in at the top.
Hopefully, they'll stick to that idea. It would be a shame if fans made that hard for them by demanding they compete with City etc within a couple of years. I admit it's inevitable that the press will use it like that during a slow news week sometime - so it might be overoptimistic of me to think moaning fans could possibly resist.
In my defence I've already said why I think it's right. It's good for our links to Manchester and it's good for women's sport and one day it'll be good for me as a selfish fan. Who knows, one day it might even be a good thing for the commercial side of the club as well.
Right then, Ed, let’s put in a sneaky £100m bid for Toni Duggan.
You're so edgy and cool.
In greatest irony of ironies, there is very little diving and rolling around which is rampant in the men's game.
Good stuff, hope they’re well supported.
Well that's good news, couldn't understand why we didn't have one... Although the refusal in the papers to report on the teams as "united womens" or "united men's" will doubtless be more annoying than it has been with City and alike. But hey, that's the modern world! Don't acknowledge gender, you'll be a sexist!
Its Manchester United, not Manchester United mens.
Cool that they're creating a team. I don't personally care and won't be watching. I enjoy the odd women's international game when Canada are playing but just not interested enough to follow a club. I already have enough football to watch.
I don't agree with the idea Manchester United had some duty to have a women's team though. No men's team should have any expected duty to have a women's team nor do women's team have a duty to have a men's club. If they want to have both then perfect. But they shouldn't be ridiculed for not having both.
Very much this. It would be wise to get in some experience among both coaches and players, and neither throw a bunch og 17 year olds in at the deep end too soon, nor take away the competence and good learning environment at the youth set up by removing to many at once. Still, I hope the development will be a patient one, aimed at bringing through Neville’s Devilles or Fletcher’s Witches or something like that in a few years time.
You are actually aware that the Australian Women's national team was beaten 7-0 by an under 15s boys team in 2016, right?
Every single men's conference team is well above the level of women's football, and every single side in the conference north would beat the no.1 ranked women's team.
Women's teams can be well organised and technically accomplished but the pyshicality just isn't there, which is why many refer to it as a 'slower' version of the men's game, and thereby less exciting.
It will be funny if the women win a league title before the men do.
Finally. We can give Mata the team that he deserves.