Try to avoid just being sexist folks ..... I was speaking recently to a femal friend who used to play, who is of the belief (Like many others) that WSL should be paid the same as Premier League players. I am a season ticket holder at Reading Woman and enjoy the WSL, but one of my points (I had a few) was that women are paid MORE than men of the same standard I suggested that if a tournament were held, containing the big 4 of the WSL (Man U, Man C, Arsenal and Chelsea) and the top 4 in the Vanerama National League (Currently Notts County, Wrexham, Woking and Chesterfield), the non-league mens teams would finish 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th, while the women would be getting paid more than them! She was fuming, as she genuinely believes the WSL is a much higher standard. Watching it week in, week out, I am convinced it isn't. It's enjoyable and IMHO good value for the lower price I pay, but the skill and physicality are below that of the Vanerama National Does anyone think otherwise?
I think the most mental thing here is the assumption that WSL players are getting paid more than Wrexham players.
National League- none WSL- a few, no full 90s but all minutes added maybe 5-10 90s Edit: And My reason for thinking that WSL >NL is because there would be way less focus in the womens game if they were worst than the NL, the 5th tier of English football
I think it’s accepted the ladies quality generally is less than the Mens but they don’t see it as a competition. Rather concentrate on improving their own game .
The focus on the WSL is entirely down to broadcasting companies trying to push it due to it having the potential to explode in popularity. There’s reports of boys teams trouncing top level woman teams. Any NL side would obliterate a woman’s team. It would be double figures, the difference in physicality alone is mental. You don’t have to have an opinion on absolutely everything by the way. It’s okay to say nothing when you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I just did a little search. I can't verify the figures given, but according to The Sun, top WSL players are on around £250K per year (£4.8K per week). Chelsea's Sam Kerr made big news whe she signed in the WSL. According to this article, she is reportedly on £417K per year (£8K per week), only topped by retired former Man City forward, Carli Lloyd on £432K per year (£8.3K per week). Former Spurs player, Alex Morgan weighs in at £375K per year (£7.2K per week) According to this article, Paul Mullin is Wrexham's top paid player on £4.5K per week (£232K per year). Only he and Ollie Palmer are on more than £3K per week (£156K Per Year) and remember, Wrexham are the exception to the rule. Players at the other three clubs will not be on that much. The lowest paid WSL players get around £20K (£385 per week). That will be squad players at teams like Reading, Leicester, Brighton etc. and not the players playing regularly for the top teams. I fully expect many of the players on top 4 Vanarama teams to be on less than that In addtion, any of the WSL players who play for England get a further £2K per game, just as the England men do. Last year, Lionesses played 20 games, so if a player played in just 3 out of every 4, they would have a further £30K for the year
Most of the teams in the National League are professional now. If you think a player at somewhere like Notts County is on less than £20,000 a year then fair play but you’re mental. You obviously didn’t even fully read some of the articles you posted because one of them states “With the average National League weekly wage sitting around £1,000 to £1,500, it’s clear that Wrexham’s enhanced financial muscle is a factor for some to join the club.” If we’re going to believe some asinine, almost certainly fabricated figures in an article then this article claims that the average wage of a woman’s team player is £70k a year. Which would put them at bang average for the NL. How much Man Utd's women get compared to men's team with staggering huge pay gap So if Man United are paying the average for the NL and Wrexham have a financial advantage in the NL…
I believe the US national women's team were once comprehensively beaten by an under 15's boys team. The conference side would win easily.
In a hypothetical world where this match up happened and the men's National League team approached the match with full seriousness and didn't hold back in their challenges and used the same level of determination and physicality as they would use against another men's team, then the National League team would win easily. At the end of the day there's an enormous gulf between men's and women's football. Through no fault of the women themselves, it's all down to a combination of biology and cultural factors which mean that far, far more boys and men play competitive football than girls and women which means that there's a significantly deeper talent pool in men's football than women's. And when that's added to the massive biological advantages that men have in terms of strength, height, power, speed etc then that's why there's such a huge gulf. The National League is quite a high standard. Wrexham recently beat Coventry who are comfortable mid table in The Championship and almost beat Sheffield United who are second in The Championship and in a strong position to win promotion to the Premier League. And even though Wrexham are a bit of an exception, the standard throughout most of that league is similar to League Two. The reality is that you'd have to go quite a long way down the men's football pyramid before you found a level where the WSL teams would be able to compete, maybe step 4 or step 5 of the non league pyramid at a guess. That's not to demean women's football at all. Just because elite females can't reach the same performance levels as elite males doesn't make female sport pointless, it's just rightly kept as a separate category so we have the best of male sport and best of female sport with competitions and trophies in each category. The fastest woman in the world isn't demeaned in any way because she wouldn't have qualified even for the heats in the men's event etc, she's rightfully held up as the best woman in the world in her sport. Same in the football.
I know it’s not this linear, but I would consider a team like Sheffield United, challenging for automatic promotion back to the premier league, would easily beat a top WSL side. When you see that there’s teams like Wrexham towards the top end of the NL who have recently ran Sheffield United very close in the FA cup, I think the NL sides would edge it over the WSL sides
So Everton would lose then. Seriously though i doubt The Red Lion would beat a group of professional full time athletes.
Good to see the Evening Standard treating the article seriously, ending with "Van Egmond will presumably hope that their next opponents New Zealand don’t have any plans to sneak any children into their side."
Guys playing on a Sunday morning from the local pub team with raging hangovers, sick as dogs then the women side would slaughter them Being serious though I ticked too close to call, a lot of pro women footballers are dedicated and fit and I think they would give the guys a run for their money as some guys would think "it's only women we are playing...".
I doubt they'd even give them a run for their money, remember the ITV program with all the retired England pros easily beating Crystal Palace womans team.
