Savage Henry Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Hope Solo on the BBC now. Dion Dublin’s also there, if that’s what floats your boat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.A.F.C Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Hope solo Dion Dublin BBC.I'm sure theres a joke in there somewhere. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnHearts Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 4 hours ago, Scary Bear said: I hadn’t heard of this. Just googled ‘Hope Solo Naked’. Well, well, well. ....she was glorious on tonight’s BBC coverage as well. Felt a bit odd watching and listening to her and thinking ‘I’ve seen pictures of your beautiful fanny’ -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 ....she was glorious on tonight’s BBC coverage as well. Felt a bit odd watching and listening to her and thinking ‘I’ve seen pictures of your beautiful fanny’ I watched a bit too, before the wife stuck Bohemian Rapsody on. I shouldn’t have viewed those images because all I could think was ‘I’ve seen your fanny’.Anyway, I will watch the Scotland games. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnHearts Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 1 minute ago, Scary Bear said: I watched a bit too, before the wife stuck Bohemian Rapsody on. I shouldn’t have viewed those images because all I could think was ‘I’ve seen your fanny’. Anyway, I will watch the Scotland games. I'm just hoping we've no got Susan Boyle in goal. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 I'm just hoping we've no got Susan Boyle in goal. What were those photos all about and how did they get on the Internet? Did she think ‘I know what would be a good idea!’ or did her phone get chored? I’m quite up for a women’s World Cup. I’ll give it a go. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 13 hours ago, GordonS said: Is it possible to talk about women's football without talking about their genitals or appearance, please? As for the OP, he's an omnitwat across multiple forums, but I wonder if he knows how much money the US women's football team brings in compared to the men. Do you think women don't talk about men's football like that? Who cares, are the USWMT running the world cup? Do they pay for it? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnHearts Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, Scary Bear said: What were those photos all about and how did they get on the Internet. Did she think ‘I know what would be a good idea!’ or did her phone get chored? I think it was a hacking thing, but not 100% sure. Would love to have a hack at her fanny with my knob instead of a keyboard, that's for sure. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 (edited) 13 hours ago, GordonS said: Is it possible to talk about women's football without talking about their genitals or appearance, please? As for the OP, he's an omnitwat across multiple forums, but I wonder if he knows how much money the US women's football team brings in compared to the men. A wee stat for you, the last women's world cup generated revenues of $73 million. The men's generated $4 billion. Thats four thousand million, or fifty four times as much as the women's. Hope Solo wants parity with the men's on $315 million. That's almost four times the entire revenue generated, where do they get the money from? Edited June 7, 2019 by Kuro 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnHearts Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Just now, Kuro said: A wee stat for you, the last women's world cup generated revenues of $73 million. The men's generated $4 billion. Thats four thousand million, or over fifty times as much as the women's. Hope Solo wants parity with the men's on $315 million. That's almost four times the entire revenue generated, where do they get the money from? The Labour party. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 It seems the figures I quoted were conservative, the women at the world cup are actually grossly overpaid, which is obviously unfair to the men's WC. Equality works both ways.. News today that France earned $38 million from FIFA for winningsoccer's World Cup in Russia, while the women's champion in Francethis summer will earn just $4 million, has prompted outrage. The total prize money for the Women's World Cup in France this July will be $30 million compared with total prize money of $440 million for the men's teams at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. “The difference between the men’s and women’s prize money is ridiculous,” Tatjana Haenni, who oversaw women’s soccer for FIFA before stepping down in 2017, said, according to the Associated Press. “It’s really disappointing the gap between the men’s and women’s World Cups got bigger. It sends the wrong message.” Nonsense. When viewed appropriately—based on how much money they generate—women actually make more than men. As Dwight Jaynes pointed out four years ago after the U.S. women beat Japan to capture the World Cup in Vancouver, there is a big difference in the revenue available to pay the teams. The Women's World Cup brought in almost $73 million, of which the players got 13%. The 2010 men's World Cup in South Africa made almost $4 billion, of which 9% went to the players. The men still pull the World Cup money wagon. The men's World Cup in Russia generated over $6 billion in revenue, with the participating teams sharing $400 million, less than 7% of revenue. Meanwhile, the Women's World Cup is expected to earn $131 millionfor the full four-year cycle 2019-22 and dole out $30 million to the participating teams. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 knew this would be an inevitable argument because a lot of people either don't know anything about professional sports or economics. Or both. It seems a lot of people, including a Portland city commissioner, are up in arms that members of the USA's winning World Cup soccer team weren't paid at the same level as members of the men's team: Questions started when fans heard how much money the U.S. Women's National Team got for the historic win over Japan. They received $2 million. When the men's team lost in round sixteen of last year's tournament, they got $8 million. Sounds terribly unfair, doesn't it? Especially if you don't understand the inherent difference in the finances of the women's game vs. the men's game. Or if you live in Portland and are a fan of the Thorns, the most successful women's soccer team in the country -- which clouds your judgment a bit. But the fact is, women's soccer just doesn't generate the sort of money -- at least so far -- that the men's game does. There is a big difference in the revenue available to pay the teams: This years figures have not been released, but four years ago the Women's World Cup brought in almost $73 million. The 2010 Men's World Cup in South Africa made almost $4 billion. Those players got $348 million, or 9 percent of the total revenue. The women's team got a higher percentage with 13 percent, but the bottom line was still much less, $10 million. So, as you can see, there is unfairness here -- but it's toward the men. Women got a higher percentage of the revenue than men did! In many pro sports with salary caps, percentage of gross revenues is the major determination of player salaries. It's how the whole thing works. This sounds like an argument that will be louder in Portland than just about any other city in the country. This soccer hotbed supports the women's league like no other city. Two women's pro leagues have already failed and the NWSL averages only 4,400 fans per game -- playing in sub-par facilities in many cities. To make an argument for equal pay in this sport is premature, at best. In most cases, the money isn't there. The major revenue generator of all sports -- a lucrative national television contract -- is absent in the NWSL. Someday, perhaps. But there's no Title IX in the real world -- it's a law to make sure our youngsters involved in scholastic sports get fair treatment regardless of gender. But when you get to the real world, the only "fair" thing is that you hope players get a percentage of the revenue they generate. But let's face it, there are a lot of factors that determine pay in pro sports. LeBron James makes a lot more money than some of the others on his team. Often, you're paid for what you've done in the past rather than what you'll do in a current season. Or you're paid for what you could get on the open market. You get different pay in different sports and it doesn't have a lot to do with gender. But for those who believe there should be some sort of "living wage" paid to athletes of any gender or any sport, I'm sorry -- it isn't going to happen. Pro soccer players aren't going to earn what NBA players get paid. Pro miniature golfers don't earn the same money as PGA golfers. And WNBA players aren't going to be close to their NBA counterparts in salaries. There is no minimum wage across the board in pro sports. Each sport has its own minimum salary based on revenue but it differs due to the success of the sport. And if you want to change that, you really ought to buy a franchise in the NWSL and try paying players what Timbers players earn. And good luck to you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 Hope Solo is wrong, and badly misinformed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 Can someone explain who this c**t was in a previous incarnation? Absolutely tedious. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 ThinkProgress is in a huff because the real world insists on standing athwart its unicorn paddock: The U.S. women’s soccer team defeated Japan on Sunday to win the World Cup. For their dominant performance, the team will collect $2 million from FIFA, the international body that runs the tournament. The championship prize for women pales in comparison to the $8 million in prize money awarded to men’s teams who lose in the first round. Every men’s team was awarded $1.5 million just for participating. Gosh, why could that be? Perhaps it’s because there is an entrenched worldwide conspiracy to be mean to women. Or perhaps it’s because the women’s World Cup doesn’t bring in much revenue and the men’s World Cup does. Per the right-wing apology website Huffington Post: “The World Cup pays for all the 20 World Cups FIFA organizes, the under-17, under-20 men and women, club football, beach soccer all is financed by the men’s World Cup which brings directly $4.5 billion to FIFA.” The women’s game continues to grow in popularity with next year’s finals featuring 24 nations, up from 16 in 2011, for the June 5 to July 6 at six venues across Canada. The Canadian Soccer Association said it expects attendance to come in a close to 1.5 million. COMMENTS The actual figure was far below that, even after FIFA reduced the price of tickets to try to gin up interest. By contrast, the 2014 World Cup in Brazil attracted 3,429,873 people to the games, and 5,154,386 fans to all FIFA events. Likewise, according to the openly misogynistic New York Times, the Women’s World Cup of 2011 “brought in just $5.8 million, while the men’s cup in 2014 netted $1.4 billion.” Advertisers, the Times confirms, will pay 80 times as much to cover the men’s competition as the women’s. The women are being stiffed. Stiffed, I tell you. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 Advertisers pay up to 80 times as much for the men's WC than they do the women's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scary Bear Posted June 7, 2019 Share Posted June 7, 2019 A wee stat for you, the last women's world cup generated revenues of $73 million. The men's generated $4 billion. Thats four thousand million, or fifty four times as much as the women's. Hope Solo wants parity with the men's on $315 million. That's almost four times the entire revenue generated, where do they get the money from? Will this be the break through World Cup for the women’s game? In this country that’ll depend how the home nations do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuro Posted June 7, 2019 Author Share Posted June 7, 2019 5 minutes ago, Scary Bear said: Will this be the break through World Cup for the women’s game? In this country that’ll depend how the home nations do. Who cares tbh. -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerberus Posted June 8, 2019 Share Posted June 8, 2019 She’s kinda hot but that photo- 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted June 8, 2019 Share Posted June 8, 2019 1 hour ago, pandarilla said: Can someone explain who this c**t was in a previous incarnation? Absolutely tedious. Yes, I think we all know where the worst tucked kebab is in this thread. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.