Well... duh. If you go far enough back, women’s soccer is even banned in swaths of Western Europe and the Women’s World Cup doesn’t exist.
US Soccer: No equal pay “because men have more responsibility”
- Thread starter Carolina Red
- 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?
r/BoneAppleTea
Then there’s the reality that our men do things like lose back to back games against Jamaica and Venezuela.
And we can’t beat Mexico and the Mexican National Team is more popular in the US than the USMNT.
Which is relevant because?
Jesus fecking Christ, did I just stumble into a nest of incels?
You were saying that they had a lot of added responsibility. I’m saying nah, they don’t. They aren’t even the most popular men’s national team in their own nation.
You know those blue lamps folks put outside to zap bugs?
I was wondering what that buzzing sound was.
I was speaking hypothetically about playing at a World Cup but you already know that. I feel like you're just being deliberately obtuse now.
They're not popular purely because they're not very good. If they won a few games you'd all jump on the bandwagon wouldn't you
Well yeah, because they can’t qualify for the real one.
As daft as anything I've heard recently.
They've failed to qualify once since 1992, stop exaggerating.
When’s the last time the USWNT failed to place in one?
Apples and oranges.
Not when talking about responsibility.
USMNT has gotten to the round of 16 twice since 1990. The USWNT has never failed to place. It is a disappointment when they don’t win it.
Soccer is the spotlight sport for American girls internationally. Most American boys view soccer players as sissies who can’t or won’t play tougher sports.
There is no way in hell the USMNT is carrying a greater load of responsibility than the USWNT.
That's down to the standard of opposition being so low in comparison. They rarely come up against anyone that they don't just brush aside. Most of the teams they play are amateurs because there is so little money in the women's game.
I wouldn’t. I’d still think they’re trash and that opinion hasn’t changed since 2006.I was speaking hypothetically about playing at a World Cup but you already know that. I feel like you're just being deliberately obtuse now.
They're not popular purely because they're not very good. If they won a few games you'd all jump on the bandwagon wouldn't you
That's fair
I know most Americans don't care about football.
The USWNT is only really cared about because they happen to be good at this point in time. When the time comes that somebody else is on top then the popularity will waver.
That has nothing to do with the fact that the USWNT has a greater burden of responsibility placed on it than the USMNT.
What exactly is that defined by then? The men play in front of bigger audiences with more money and prestige at stake.
There's a lot I still don't understand here. Mainly because 90% of the articles on this are just opinion pieces and there is far too much information missing at this stage. Everything I have read so far on this states that the women were offered the same deal as the men by the USSF but turned it down.
Here is how the payments for men and women by the USSF work out:
So if that's the case I can see why they turned down the deal in favour of a salary. The women's team are arguing that the men's deal would have resulted in them receiving less money, but as nobody has published why in black and white I can only surmise from the information I've read as to why: the men are paid 5,500 per appearance at the WC. Which for the women, who played 7 games, would have only worked out at $38.5k. By turning down the same bonus deal, it means that the women's team were paid less for the qualifiers (though admittedly played less), but averaged more per appearance at the WC.
Again, information is murky atm, with nobody actually publishing definitive yearly total income for players, so I'm only going on everything I have read.
The problem, as far as I can tell, stems from FIFA. FIFA pay the USFF a lot less for the women's WC team than the men's, which is why the USFF is arguing they would be losing money if they paid the women the same as the men from the FIFA prize pool.
So if this is the case, then the US men's national team are just benefitting more from the success of the men's game overall. The hope really is that women's football's star will continue to rise rapidly and the women's world cup will start bringing in a lot more revenue and bigger prize pools.
I don't think this argument is as simple as either side is trying to argue tbh, and I see the mudslinging has already started so I'm gonna back out either way. It will be interesting to see the outcome of this though.
Here is how the payments for men and women by the USSF work out:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...n-in-gender-discrimination-lawsuit-2020-02-21
So if that's the case I can see why they turned down the deal in favour of a salary. The women's team are arguing that the men's deal would have resulted in them receiving less money, but as nobody has published why in black and white I can only surmise from the information I've read as to why: the men are paid 5,500 per appearance at the WC. Which for the women, who played 7 games, would have only worked out at $38.5k. By turning down the same bonus deal, it means that the women's team were paid less for the qualifiers (though admittedly played less), but averaged more per appearance at the WC.
Again, information is murky atm, with nobody actually publishing definitive yearly total income for players, so I'm only going on everything I have read.
The problem, as far as I can tell, stems from FIFA. FIFA pay the USFF a lot less for the women's WC team than the men's, which is why the USFF is arguing they would be losing money if they paid the women the same as the men from the FIFA prize pool.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/
So if this is the case, then the US men's national team are just benefitting more from the success of the men's game overall. The hope really is that women's football's star will continue to rise rapidly and the women's world cup will start bringing in a lot more revenue and bigger prize pools.
I don't think this argument is as simple as either side is trying to argue tbh, and I see the mudslinging has already started so I'm gonna back out either way. It will be interesting to see the outcome of this though.
Not completely understandable of the situation, but surely whatever income the USFA (?) make from the mens or womens success in a tournament such as the world cup, should have equal pay out percentages at the very least.
Random numbers, but say USMNT win and the FA recieve $100'000'000 and 10% goes the the players, the same 10% should be given to the women players also.
Unless I am misunderstanding here, seems very simple, no?
Random numbers, but say USMNT win and the FA recieve $100'000'000 and 10% goes the the players, the same 10% should be given to the women players also.
Unless I am misunderstanding here, seems very simple, no?
On average, American girls worship the USWNT and care deeply about their success.
On average, American guys think the USMNT is too sissy to play “real football” and don’t care if they win or not.
The USWNT has the responsibility of an actual standard of excellence on the international stage to uphold and a massive US fan base that loves them. There’s a reason the USWNT Jersey is the highest selling jersey Nike.com has ever sold.
I'm talking about worldwide. Greater audience = more responsibility.
This.
And the thread is about the US Soccer Federation paying US soccer players.
And besides that, the USWNT is globally more relevant than the USMNT ever dreamed of being.
Yes, and the men get more money because the men's game is bigger and the USSF receives more income from them.
I’ll give you credit. You’re an excellent brick wall.
That’s great bud. Literally nobody has doubted FIFA pays more to men than women.
Here’s the list of complaints submitted by the USWNT against the USSF
And that's why the men make more. You're saying that the women should get paid more from the money the men raised.
Point of fact: US law says women should be paid equally for equal work. The USSF is attempting to claim the players on the USWNT aren’t engaging in the same work as the players on the USMNT.
So what you're saying is that a WNBA player should make as much money as LeBron James? You're trying to turn this into a feminism debate when the debate isn't based around lack of feminism (I'm a feminist).
Judging by this thread men certainly has more response ability than women. What has the ladies on here to say about this?
Since you brought it up...
https://www.glamour.com/story/the-w...a-historic-victory-in-the-fight-for-equal-pay
Could be true but the women’s team has been among the world’s best for as long as I can remember since the 1996 Olympics.That's fair
I know most Americans don't care about football.
The USWNT is only really cared about because they happen to be good at this point in time. When the time comes that somebody else is on top then the popularity will waver.
'Merica
We are truly a stupid country that has benefited from the geographic lottery.
We are truly a stupid country that has benefited from the geographic lottery.
That's completely irrelevant. We are talking about the US national teams.