Author Topic: England women's football team standard  (Read 2423 times)

England women's football team standard
« on: May 23, 2019, 07:12:28 pm »
The England women's football team is due to take part in the World Cup in France this year.
I wonder if they are good enough to beat a decent boys under-16 team (from, say, a Saturday,
or Sunday league)?

mcshroom

  • Mushroom
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2019, 07:19:48 pm »
Yes, easily.

More importantly, why do you even need to wonder that? They are one of the best teams in the world at their sport.
Climbs like a sprinter, sprints like a climber!

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2019, 07:36:42 pm »
The England women's football team is due to take part in the World Cup in France this year.
I wonder if they are good enough to beat a decent boys under-16 team (from, say, a Saturday,
or Sunday league)?

What an idiotic post  ::-)
We are making a New World (Paul Nash, 1918)

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2019, 07:37:37 pm »
More importantly, why do you even need to wonder that? They are one of the best teams in the world at their sport.

Presumably as a measure of the obscurity of women's football, given that a lack of women competing in some sports can lead to hilariously low standards (DAHIKT).

But ...it's sportsball.  Hardly obscure!
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2019, 07:46:21 pm »
Went to some of the matches at Hampden during the 2012 Olympics.
The US and French teams played some of the best football I've seen.
North Korea were bad but I've seen worse in the SPFL so...

Apparently the Scottish team is considerably better than their male counterparts.
But TBH all they need to do is win their first match of the world cup, nothing else matters...

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #5 on: May 23, 2019, 07:46:33 pm »
Yes, easily.

More importantly, why do you even need to wonder that? They are one of the best teams in the world at their sport.
This.
If memory serves, England men's came 4th in the last world championship.
England women's came 2nd.

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #6 on: May 23, 2019, 07:55:33 pm »
Easier to answer in Women's cricket. England played the RAF men once. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQ21w_jGI78

Women have played in the various Lancashire Leagues, which are a decent standard and mixed, while in the national team women's team. Kate Cross was one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathryn_Cross

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2019, 08:25:47 pm »
Well it's not uncommon for ladies to play u15/u16 boys and they often lose.
The USA lost to Dallas u15 last year so I guess the answer is they would struggle.
Despite the diving and play acting it's still a very physical sport, more so than ever IMHO

Not sure why you want to know though...  :(
Regards,

Alan

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2019, 09:02:34 pm »
England Women won the Cricket World Cup.

Something the men haven’t done yet.

The Final was a great match, although it went a bit flat for a while when they had to go off to prepare the tea for themselves.
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2019, 09:40:14 pm »
Just watch the game - they are really good players. The only way that lower standard (ie Saturday league) male teams could compete if by kicking them off the park and making it all about physicality.
I don't understand the point of the question though - it becomes a different sport when played by people with different attributes. It can actually be a better game to watch - there's a bit more space and time and good players can make good use of that.

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #10 on: May 23, 2019, 11:13:52 pm »
Also the keepers are smaller in the goals. (The goals in the men’s game haven’t kept up with the changes in the physiology of the players)
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2019, 01:45:54 am »
If you look at the biographies of sporting folk, you'll often find that the whole family are professionally involved. They might be players, physios, managers or administrators. Just look at the Nevilles.

It's a family business, and they'll fill any available niches. Sibling rivalry is the root of a lot of sport, at some point one sibling outstrips another.

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2019, 07:52:36 am »
What an idiotic post  ::-)
What a pathetic, insulting respsonse.  :sick: 

Cudzoziemiec

  • Waking up now, put the kettle on!
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #13 on: May 24, 2019, 09:19:11 am »
Also the keepers are smaller in the goals. (The goals in the men’s game haven’t kept up with the changes in the physiology of the players)
Interesting point. It's a well known problem in basketball, but that's a sport which inevitably selects for height. I hadn't considered it applying to football. Presumably also hockey, handball, netball, also tennis, erm, probably anything played on a pitch?
I do not ride a great big Mercian, gangster tanwalls, fixed cog in the back.

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #14 on: May 24, 2019, 10:02:03 am »
Also the keepers are smaller in the goals. (The goals in the men’s game haven’t kept up with the changes in the physiology of the players)
Interesting point. It's a well known problem in basketball, but that's a sport which inevitably selects for height. I hadn't considered it applying to football. Presumably also hockey, handball, netball, also tennis, erm, probably anything played on a pitch?

The concept of the taller the better is being challenged in Basketball

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #15 on: May 24, 2019, 10:39:11 am »
Also the keepers are smaller in the goals. (The goals in the men’s game haven’t kept up with the changes in the physiology of the players)
Interesting point. It's a well known problem in basketball, but that's a sport which inevitably selects for height. I hadn't considered it applying to football. Presumably also hockey, handball, netball, also tennis, erm, probably anything played on a pitch?

It may just be a perception, but I think I see more goals where the keeper can’t reach the shot than in men’s football.
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

Basil

  • Um....err......oh bugger!
  • Help me!
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #16 on: May 24, 2019, 12:07:58 pm »
I used to wonder how the England men's footie team would get on in the English premier league.  Obviously a theoretical question as sometimes the same player would appear for both sides.
I reckon they'd have trouble finishing in the top six.
Quote from: Kim
And remember that friends who organise things on Facebook aren't proper friends anyway.

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #17 on: May 24, 2019, 08:57:24 pm »
What an idiotic post  ::-)
What a pathetic, insulting respsonse.  :sick:
Your original question was insulting to women footballers. You’ll be the first person on this forum I’ve put on ignore.
We are making a New World (Paul Nash, 1918)

PaulF

  • "World's Scariest Barman"
  • It's only impossible if you stop to think about it
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #18 on: May 24, 2019, 10:43:01 pm »
I used to wonder how the England men's footie team would get on in the English premier league.  Obviously a theoretical question as sometimes the same player would appear for both sides.
I reckon they'd have trouble finishing in the top six.

I’ve always thought that the top club side, in any sport, would beat the respective national team simply because they play and train together week in week out. The Saracens/Leinster match the other weekend was a perfect example of this; a better game than most of the internationals. 


Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #20 on: May 25, 2019, 10:16:19 am »
https://www.google.com/search?q=could+a+women%27s+international+football+team+beat+an+boys+under-16+team%3F&oq=could+a+women%27s+international+football+team+beat+an+boys+under-16+team%3F&aqs=chrome..69i57.38930j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

A quote from the first article returned:

"The only thing that needs reporting here is that some young hopeful footballers were able to meet and 'jam' with some very famous other footballers. If you find the alleged score-line funny, try learning the facts, step into the 21st century and just plain grow up."
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #21 on: June 04, 2019, 02:45:25 pm »
I really don't see why there has to be women's football. It's not a contact sport and doesn't rely on absolute strength. It's not like say weight lifting or running where the top athletes are complete physical outliers in the general population. It's a game of skill where you have to have good general fitness as well. Should be a mixed sport. Anything that relies on strength or pushing the body to its limits should be segregated but anything thats skill and general fitness should be mixed.
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #22 on: June 04, 2019, 03:16:53 pm »
I really don't see why there has to be women's football. It's not a contact sport and doesn't rely on absolute strength. It's not like say weight lifting or running where the top athletes are complete physical outliers in the general population. It's a game of skill where you have to have good general fitness as well. Should be a mixed sport. Anything that relies on strength or pushing the body to its limits should be segregated but anything thats skill and general fitness should be mixed.
Seriously?
Football is absolutely a physical sport, with a certain level of contact. It requires some combination of speed, power, and aerobic fitness (varying by position). Aside from the distance they run (at the top flight some players routinely run > 11km a game), every challenge for a ball requires physical power and strength. And especially when the ball is in the air - to be effective as a CB in England you need to be about 6ft2 and be able to jump >30 inches straight up (yes there are exceptions who make up the difference with leaping ability, or who just struggle in the air, but the people who are top of the aerial duel charts are this size or bigger). Hell, look at the Champions League semi final - Ajax were technically superior but couldn't handle Fernando Llorente. He picked on Daley Blind mercilessly, and Spurs imposed themselves on the game in a way that they couldn't prior to his introduction.

It's hard to find a full breakdown of the running, but this shows the distances covered by the top guys: https://www.90min.com/posts/6299626-the-10-players-who-have-covered-the-most-distance-during-the-2018-19-premier-league-season. Bear in mind a lot of that is at high speed as well. If speed wasn't important then players wouldn't be finished by the time they are 35 (if they are lucky). Just watch some games and you can see the differences in the physical ability of the players. Especially if you watch FA Cup games - the lower league teams are usually knackered by about 70 minutes because the top players are just fitter.

Even at a low level you see this.  I could compete at a certain level, then I tore ligaments in my knee. I couldn't run until a certain time after the surgery - I worked hard on my skills (and I still have most of them 15 years on), but I lost a yard of pace and a certain amount of aerobic fitness and I couldn't get back to the level I was at before the injury. All about physicality. Believe it or not, the fitness issue wasn't so much of a problem in American football, and I could disguise the lack of pace with technique, so I was able to compete in that sport for quite a few years after the injury!

In many ways, womens football can be more entertaining because there's more space and that allows the better players the opportunity to play a bit more, but it's still a physical game, just a different one.

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #23 on: June 05, 2019, 10:20:17 am »
The Army Apprentices' College (as was) foopball team used sometimes to play against lower-echelon Foopball League opposition.  The squaddies were noticeably fitter than the foopballers according to Lt. Col. Larrington (retd.)’s chum Brigadier W.
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime

Re: England women's football team standard
« Reply #24 on: June 05, 2019, 10:51:57 am »
Modern footballers are a lot fitter than they were in the olden days. You don't see many Jan Molby shaped professional footballers any more.