World Cup sexism row

The Bronze

The Bronze

Rogue Demon Hunter
Joined
Jul 11, 2013
Messages
3,742
Age
40
Location
Essex
Black Thorn
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29453614

So I've just read the above article and I'm a little confused. The short version is that a group of top female players are attempting to sue FIFA for sexism because their world cup will be played in part or fully on artificial pitches.

I'll start by saying that FIFA are a complete farce so I'm not shedding any tears for them, if someone can actually lay a glove on them for whatever reason then great. However I can't wrap my head around how this is sexism. I'm sure I've seen Champions League games played on artificial pitches. I've seen European qualifying matches played on artificial pitches as well. It's not unheard of in the male game. The main thing that gets me though is that the mens world cup is going to Qatar. I suspect conditions there will be far worse than an artificial pitch. This indicates to me that this decision is based, like all FIFA decisions, on money and not gender.
 
Yeah, to FIFA money is God- just look at the Quatar fiasco. The most obvious case of bribery in sporting history and their all just shaking their heads and claiming to be innocent.

Football is a pretty racism sport, (judging from a lot of the fans in european countires and the pathetic punishments metted out by FIFA in attempts to stamp it out) but I'm not sure the governing body is concerned with gender.
If women's football became more popular overnight then FIFA would respond immediatly to get their hands on the cash- its that simple.
 
Absolutely no doubt that the more money the suits at FIFA can see in it for themselves the more interest they'll show. I don't think football is a racist sport though. It's a global and reflects the issues of various different countries. For the most part people just want to play, watch and enjoy. The troubles with racism just reflect problems happen within a country at any given time not the game. FIFA won't get involved anymore than they have to unless it affects their income which is a shame. It's up to players, managers and fans to draw attention to these problems unfortunately.
 
I certainly don't think all, or most, football fans are recist. And yes, there are issues related to individual countries.

I just don't see nearly the same level in other international sports such as cricket or rugby, which is the strange thing.
And FIFA (who ideally should represent the best of their sport) has done little to nothing to stamp it out. The penalties given to clubs who's fans indulge in such behaviour are pathetically small fines.
If they wanted to tackle it, they could- they just don't care enough.

Which is why this other thing isn't sexism exactly, it's probably just simple apathy.
 
It's sort of sexist because a men's World Cup would never be made to play on artificial turf but then again if Canada bid to host the men's World Cup their bid would have to include artificial pitches, just as it has done for the women. So the question is, should FIFA have allowed Canada to bid for the right to host such an event or should they have applied the same standards to the process as they do for the men's?
It's a tough one really. Of course, for many of the participants it's just that they have an issue with artificial turf, rather than that they feel truly discriminated against (at all previous women's world cups, games have been played in stadia where facilities, including the turf, would have been deemed unfit for the men's World Cup, that is as sexist as the artificial pitches in Canada but there was never legal action before). Still there may be a sexism issue there, although for all FIFA's faults, I doubt it was deliberately sexist in its decision making.
I really like artificial turf, personally, at least it's the same all year round and gives you somewhere to play when your grass pitches are under snow or waterlogged or too muddy to allow for good play, which is two-thirds of the year hereabouts, unless you're a pro club with a dedicated team of gardeners and ground staff. Some studies have suggested Astro-Turf causes injuries but other studies have refuted that. Who's right, who knows?
Having said all that, this sport has been played on grass for nearly 200 years and if there's one thing soccer likes to embrace it's tradition. And, playing on grass just feels better (weather permitting). And of course, it is true what they say: this definitely wouldn't have been allowed for the men's World Cup. Either way, I don't think suing is the answer. IMO, the answer is to play on and if there are issues caused by the artificial turf then you campaign to make sure you don't have to use it again and if there are no issues then all's well that ends well, surely?
 
Playing in turf sucks, it increases risk of injury and changes the ball movement. Players don't like it...they (male and female) have made it clear.

No major men's tournament has been played on artificial turf so why should the women be forced to? FIFA wouldn't pull this crap with the men; and if they did they probably would have listened when numerous athletes voiced their concerns.
 
I don't know much about soccer, but from my understanding this is not something they would have pulled on the men. If it's something that they would have never done to the men, then yes it's sexist.

Now again I'm not saying that it is sexist because I don't have enough knowledge on the sport to know.
 
Blaze said:
I don't know much about soccer, but from my understanding this is not something they would have pulled on the men. If it's something that they would have never done to the men, then yes it's sexist.

Now again I'm not saying that it is sexist because I don't have enough knowledge on the sport to know.
Click to expand...

For a bit of background I'll fill you in on their plans for the men's world cup in 2022. They've awarded it to Qatar. The average temperature in Qatar in July is over 40 degrees. This often reaches 50 degrees. Those temperatures make being outside uncomfortable and playing sport ridiculous and dangerous. Far more dangerous than an artificial pitch in my opinion. This shows the level of contempt that Fifa shows to the men's game, players and fans.

I think if a big enough brown envelope was put in front of these people they'd hold the men's world cup on the moon never mind artificial pitches. I don't think this is a sexist issue, it's just that FIFA hold everyone in equal contempt.
 
There's a history of sexism in the organisation. The president saying female players should wear tighter clothing to draw in the crowds still makes my flesh crawl to this day. Nonetheless, it's true that those running the game pretty much care equally for everyone who isn't themselves - i.e. not at all - regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation or any other factor.
 
Still a Scoobie said:
IMO, the answer is to play on and if there are issues caused by the artificial turf then you campaign to make sure you don't have to use it again and if there are no issues then all's well that ends well, surely?
Click to expand...

But turf has been played on before, that is why these players are complaining about it. Look at this pic. This isn't a new debate or complaint its a second rate field to play on.

The Bronze said:
For a bit of background I'll fill you in on their plans for the men's world cup in 2022. They've awarded it to Qatar. The average temperature in Qatar in July is over 40 degrees. This often reaches 50 degrees. Those temperatures make being outside uncomfortable and playing sport ridiculous and dangerous. Far more dangerous than an artificial pitch in my opinion. This shows the level of contempt that Fifa shows to the men's game, players and fans.

I think if a big enough brown envelope was put in front of these people they'd hold the men's world cup on the moon never mind artificial pitches. I don't think this is a sexist issue, it's just that FIFA hold everyone in equal contempt.
Click to expand...

Interesting you bring up heat, because one major complaint about the artificial turf is how hot it gets. Also, the concerns about the temperatures in Qatar aren't being ignored....Qatar has said that they are building stadiums that will have solar powered cooling technology and they estimate the temperatures will be closer to 80*f. So FIFA can be bothered to care about a men's tournament 8 years in the future but don't have the time to worry about the women's that's scheduled for next year?

I love how Canada's men's team refused to play on artificial turf in the 2014 World Cup qualifiers; but now Canada plans on hosting the Women's world cup on only artificial turf. Yeah...no sexism. 🙄
 
That's because Quatar coughed up the cash to pay FIFA, that's why they care. Quatar is one of the most unsuitable places to play Football ever, and Quatar only started building their stadium after the bribery scandal came to light. (There was intially serious talk of moving the World Cup to another time of year. 😵)

The motivator for them is always money, not gender. It's the only factor in their thinking.
All you have to do is look at their attitide to anything- racism scandals, charges of corruption, if it doesn't affect their bottome line they don't care about it.

If women's football were more popular, or even perceived to be more popular, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Not all inequality is based on an '-ism', some of it is just plain greed.
 
Ethan Reigns
Ethan Reigns
True! When in doubt, follow the money.
So because the women's game doesn't bring in the same amount of money as the men's its ok to give them a lesser quality field? IMO, money is an excuse for their lack of respect for the women athletes.

Come on, in 1994 FIFA required the playing surfaces be changed to real grass for the men's World Cup (which cost about 2 million and required them to figure out how to keep grass alive and well in a covered dome for over a month). Just a couple months ago sod was installed at The University of Michigan football stadium for a single game; it's not like its an uncommon or hard to do these days. But its not necessary because women make less money for them and that makes them less important?

FIFA paying to install sod on the artificial turf would be a drop in the bucket compared to their 2 billion dollar earning they reported from the World Cup earlier this year.
 
I never said it was 'okay' for FIFA to do what they do, I simply said that the decision was based on the percieved popularity of the sport, not gender.

Saying its sexist is missing the point about the problem that is FIFA- all their decisions are based almost entirely on money, and not the wishes of the fans or the players (of either sex) unless it costs them money.

They just don't care enough to spend anything to rectify the inequality. 🙁
 
brinkster130 said:
So because the women's game doesn't bring in the same amount of money as the men's its ok to give them a lesser quality field?
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, actually. Why shouldn't all games, from 5 year olds to high school to university, have to be played on real grass?

I've played on astroturf, it's terrible, it hurts. But if that's what you have, that's what you have.
 
thetopher said:
I never said it was 'okay' for FIFA to do what they do, I simply said that the decision was based on the percieved popularity of the sport, not gender.

Saying its sexist is missing the point about the problem that is FIFA- all their decisions are based almost entirely on money, and not the wishes of the fans or the players (of either sex) unless it costs them money.

They just don't care enough to spend anything to rectify the inequality. 🙁
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I do agree that FIFA making decisions based on who throws the most money at them is out of control; but in this case I don't think its so black and white. I think that money is only part of the reason, no way did they want to spend extra money on men's teams in the past but they have because people would care (can't risk the integrity of the men's game), but now they are shrugging their shoulders acting like their hands are tied when in reality they are actively ignoring the requests of the women's players and are expecting people just to accept it because they are less popular. By treating their women athletes this way they are sending a clear message that they don't value or respect them (they also know that most of these women are in a position where they can't boycott or sit out).

They should have the best surface available for the sport’s biggest global women’s competition just like they do for the men's. The fact that this very issue has come up in the men's side before and has been immediately addressed shows that there is some sort of discrimination going on. I mean, isn't it fair to ask why now? why has this been unacceptable for the men but ok for the women?

Buffy Summers said:
Well, yeah, actually. Why shouldn't all games, from 5 year olds to high school to university, have to be played on real grass?

I've played on astroturf, it's terrible, it hurts. But if that's what you have, that's what you have.
Click to expand...

Well in a perfect world....

The thing is this is the World Cup we are talking about, not some rec league. This is suppose to be one of the most important competitions in the sport and they've decide that its fair to be held on a sub-par field because its the women and they aren't as popular. And, yeah "it's what they have" but it can be easily changed....temporary natural grass is not at all uncommon or complicated; they just don't want to be bothered having to do a little extra work for the women's teams.



Side-note: Canada has been very vocal about their plans to place a bid to host the 2026 men's World Cup, numerous male soccer players have spoken out in support of the women, I wonder if and how this will affect that bid.
 
I think there's also an element of FIFA wanting to open up countries which might not have been traditional soccer-playing countries in the past, for which sometimes you have to make compromises. They're now looking at rotating the World Cup between all the continents on a permanent basis, but for a 32-team competition there are perhaps only the US, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina with the number of cities and stadiums to cope with the schedule, so it makes sense to try doing some of the groundwork for Canada to be able to bid for 2026. The Canadian attitude might be that they'll look at relaying the pitches with grass when they know that they're getting the men's World Cup so they have some sort of return on their investment.

And yes, I've burnt my hands and knees on astroturf before now!
 
Here's the question: will the Women's World Cup profits recoup the cost of replacing the turf? I don't know the answer to that, but that's really what it comes down to.
 
Buffy Summers said:
Here's the question: will the Women's World Cup profits recoup the cost of replacing the turf? I don't know the answer to that, but that's really what it comes down to.
Click to expand...

Yes, it should. Kinda hard to find accurate financial stuff from FIFA (no surprise, lol) but it looks like they reported 7.6 million Euros (about 9.6 million usd) in profits from the 2011 World Cup in Germany; so I think its safe to assume they would make a profit again in 2015 (especially with the expansion). Estimated costs for putting in temporary sod is 2 million. Then again, it could be Canada dragging their feet and not wanting to fix 5 of the 6 stadiums ( 1 is natural grass and they plan on removing that) and FIFA just doesn't give a crap about what they do or don't do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom