Leicester City Women
- Thread starter Jeff
- Start date
mabrah
Well-Known Member
If they had a Buckethead, I'd go and watch them.
Brown Nose
Well-Known Member
This will just mean more talk about women's football around Leicester City won't it?
It doesn't remotely interest me. I mean, fair play to them but there are not the team that I support. As far as I can see, they are just likely to take money away from my team because KP will have to substantially subsidise them.
Increasingly, it is creeping into things like the BBC Football site, the Athletic and local and national podcasts. They are all doing sections about the WSL as though it's the same as the men's game. It isn't. It's a different thing entirely.
If you want a men's football section on a website, and a women's section, fine. If you want a podcast about women's football, fine. But don't pretend that the vast majority of football supporters are remotely interested in women's football, but we're not. It is not all part of the same story.
What happens now is that there is a headline somewhere about Chelsea win da da da, and I click on it and it's a women's football story. I'm convinced that they're doing it deliberately to increase clicks for women's stories.
Some are interested and that's absolutely fine. But I'd rather hear about a U12 boys City side because there is a possibility that they might make it to the City team one day. The women's team are as relevant to me as the Leicester basketball side is.
Unless of course a woman can actually play for the real Leicester City. In which case, I'm all for it. But I don't think they can. It doesn't really make any sense to me why they can't. If they can officiate, surely they should be able to play?
Anyway, it's annoying.
It doesn't remotely interest me. I mean, fair play to them but there are not the team that I support. As far as I can see, they are just likely to take money away from my team because KP will have to substantially subsidise them.
Increasingly, it is creeping into things like the BBC Football site, the Athletic and local and national podcasts. They are all doing sections about the WSL as though it's the same as the men's game. It isn't. It's a different thing entirely.
If you want a men's football section on a website, and a women's section, fine. If you want a podcast about women's football, fine. But don't pretend that the vast majority of football supporters are remotely interested in women's football, but we're not. It is not all part of the same story.
What happens now is that there is a headline somewhere about Chelsea win da da da, and I click on it and it's a women's football story. I'm convinced that they're doing it deliberately to increase clicks for women's stories.
Some are interested and that's absolutely fine. But I'd rather hear about a U12 boys City side because there is a possibility that they might make it to the City team one day. The women's team are as relevant to me as the Leicester basketball side is.
Unless of course a woman can actually play for the real Leicester City. In which case, I'm all for it. But I don't think they can. It doesn't really make any sense to me why they can't. If they can officiate, surely they should be able to play?
Anyway, it's annoying.
City Fan
Well-Known Member
I feel exactly the same.
I find it pleasantly nice that a team from my area are doing well, just as I would Leicester Riders or Leicestershire County Cricket Club. But that’s as far as my interest goes with this.
mabrah
Well-Known Member
I agree that they are best treated as separate, and different, games.
Coincidentally, watching this afternoon, I was thinking that the women's team will need a significant injection of funds to keep apace with the other teams in the WSL, there's a gulf of difference at the moment. I thought they were lucky to have KP there to help out, so it pleases me to read mention of this TV deal
Coincidentally, watching this afternoon, I was thinking that the women's team will need a significant injection of funds to keep apace with the other teams in the WSL, there's a gulf of difference at the moment. I thought they were lucky to have KP there to help out, so it pleases me to read mention of this TV deal
Skitzo
Well-Known Member
they played at least one WSL team already this season in the cup, weren't too far off that level so not really sure home much investment would be needed, the biggest investment was already made, Belvoir Drive
Skitzo
Well-Known Member
Man City, Arsenal and Chelsea maybe, Man United playing catch up, the rest is much of a muchness
Graz
Well-Known Member
I see Women's Football as more like another league (like the Dutch, French or Belgian league) where it is other goings on in football, but not the teams/league I follow.
But with the new TV deal for the WSL and now the Leicester team being a part of that, I'll probably give Women's Football more of a chance next season.
But with the new TV deal for the WSL and now the Leicester team being a part of that, I'll probably give Women's Football more of a chance next season.
Championship
| P | Pld | Pts | |
| 1 | Ipswich | 43 | 89 |
| 2 | Leicester | 42 | 88 |
| 3 | Leeds Utd | 43 | 87 |
| 4 | Southampton | 42 | 84 |
| 5 | West Brom | 43 | 72 |
| 6 | Norwich City | 43 | 71 |
| 7 | Hull City | 42 | 65 |
| 8 | Coventry City | 42 | 63 |
| 9 | Middlesbro | 43 | 63 |
| 10 | Preston | 43 | 63 |
| 11 | Cardiff City | 43 | 59 |
| 12 | Bristol City | 43 | 58 |
| 13 | Sunderland | 43 | 56 |
| 14 | Swansea City | 43 | 53 |
| 15 | Watford | 43 | 52 |
| 16 | Millwall | 43 | 50 |
| 17 | Blackburn | 43 | 49 |
| 18 | Plymouth | 43 | 48 |
| 19 | QPR | 43 | 47 |
| 20 | Stoke City | 43 | 47 |
| 21 | Birmingham | 43 | 45 |
| 22 | Huddersfield | 43 | 44 |
| 23 | Sheffield W | 43 | 44 |
| 24 | Rotherham Utd | 43 | 23 |
