Why do I know so little about women’s sport? It’s an interesting question, with quite an uninteresting answer, that being: I’m lazy.
But if my own sloth and apathy is to blame for my shameful lack of knowledge of the female half of the sporting world, I can possibly offer the mitigating factor that the world makes it so damn easy to know about men’s sport.
Men’s sport is served on gleaming platters to me. I never have to work to find out what’s happening in the men’s sporting world: I’m fed a constant stream of information.
On TV, the radio, the internet: it’s all laid out for me. If I want to watch men’s sport, it’s a click away. If I want to know the scores, I know exactly how.
The fact is taking a close interest in women’s sport requires a lot more effort. Women’s sport is rarely televised, and when it is, it’s sparsely advertised. Results are generally relegated to the lower reaches of news sites and the later segments of bulletins, if reported at all.
The personalities of women’s sport are mostly obscure – few of them get to flex on TV ads or grin from billboards, and if it takes some work to learn the names of a national women’s team, it’s double the effort to put faces to them.
And so we have the situation I find myself in: although I call myself a supporter of women’s sport, my confession is that off the top of my head, I could probably name, at best, three quarters of the Australian women’s cricket team, only one or two of the Matildas (and one of them is also one of the cricketers, so I don’t know if it should count), a handful of netballers and basketballers, and absolutely zero Australian women rugby or Aussie rules players.
When it comes to female athletes from outside this country, it’s a non-starter – only in the fields of athletics and tennis am I au fait with non-Australian sportswomen at all.
This is not because I dislike women’s sport. Women’s soccer I find isn’t a hell of a lot different to men’s. Women’s cricket, on the other hand, is quite a different game to the male version, but for that very reason brings a different aesthetic and variety of skill to appreciate.
Women’s basketball is, for me, frequently more entertaining than the men’s, because of what some would probably say is its weakness: the lesser influence of freakish feats of individual athleticism helps showcase the full range of ball skills. And netball, though far from my favourite sport, is second to none in its ability to generate supreme tension and drama in a close finish.
But I neglect them, because I’m lazy. I admit it. I should know a hell of a lot more about the many outstanding athletes currently plying their trade. And I hope that I can ameliorate my ignorance in future.
But if we are to elevate women’s sport to a status equal to that of men’s, I fear we can’t just all make personal pledges to try harder – there’s a system here that needs to be changed.
There are a few green shoots showing through – the Diamonds’ World Cup victory attracted some promising attention, as did the Matildas’ brave showing in the last soccer World Cup. The Southern Stars’ exploits in the Ashes have sparked enough interest that, miracle of miracles, the final T20 is actually to be shown on free-to-air TV next week.
And then there was the women’s AFL game that actually outrated the men – admittedly the men’s game it outrated was the depressing spectacle of Adelaide dismembering Essendon, but it is an excellent indicator of potential.
So how do we build on these green shoots? How do we push forward with the promise already shown, so that eventually women cricketers, footballers, netballers and basketballers are equal in acclaim and reward to their male counterparts? It surely can be done – if women’s tennis can create millionaire celebrities, why can’t women’s soccer?
It can, I am sure, be done. But I am not naive enough to claim I know exactly how. To be honest, I’m open to suggestions. I know there’s a vicious circle to be overcome here: interest in women’s sports is low, which means media coverage is minimal, which means the money isn’t there, which means players can’t be full-time professionals, which means observers dismiss the sports as lower standard, which means interest remains low, which means…it goes on and on.
At some point there must be a circuit-breaker: either a groundswell of interest despite the lack of media coverage, or a big injection of cash despite the absence of proven mass following, or… something else.
Whatever the answer, a shift in attitudes is necessary, I’m sure. Has that begun already? Possibly. Certainly, though the coverage of women’s sport is shamefully lacking, it’s significantly improved from, say, 20 years ago. We’re starting from a low base, but playing the optimist, I suggest we have at least started.
But as I said, I do not actually know the best way to effect major change here. But I have some ideas, and I humbly present them here, in the hope that even if I’m wrong, I might get people talking (it’d be really nice if you all say I’m right though).
First, let’s stop forever comparing sportswomen to sportsmen. This is perfectly obvious when it comes to, for example, people pointing out that women cricketers can’t bowl as fast or hit the ball as far.
Negative comparisons are self-evidently damaging to the cause, and moreover miss the point that here we have skilled practitioners playing a different game, who should be watched and admired on their own terms, not on how well they match up to the benchmarks set in a different sport.
But positive comparisons can be damaging too, when they serve to patronise. Look at the way the Southern Stars’ Ashes campaign has been remarked upon. So often we hear, ‘The women have done what the men couldn’t’, ‘The men’s team is rubbish, check out the women instead’, and variations thereof. Very well-meaning, but it’s a problem for a few reasons:
1. It’s an illogical comparison anyway – to say ‘the woman have done what the men couldn’t’ suggests that the men’s and women’s team were facing exactly the same challenge, when in fact they were playing against different teams, in different conditions, and indeed different games. To say the women’s team is ‘better’ than the men’s makes as much sense as saying that the Hawthorn Hawks are better than the Socceroos. But more importantly than that…
2. It perpetuates the sense among the public that women’s sport is a consolation prize for the public – to be turned on and enjoyed only when the men’s edition has disappointed. If women’s sport is to gain mass consciousness the way men’s sport has, it can’t be marketed as ‘if the main team’s losing, check out the ladies’.
3. Moreover, if we say that women’s teams are a good alternative for when men’s teams are losing, the logical conclusion is that when women’s teams are losing, we should turn them off too. In men’s sport it is generally accepted that when you follow a team, you’ll keep following them when times are tough – that’s a mentality that has to apply to women’s sport too.
It just does no good to talk of sportswomen in terms of how they compare to sportsmen, particularly at this stage of history when so many women’s sports remain amateur or semi-professional even at the elite level. Women’s sports have their strengths, attractions and beauty, and they can be appreciated for them without genuflecting in the direction of male megastars as the standard by which everything can be judged.
Cathy Freeman would not have won a gold medal in the men’s 400m and Serena Williams could not win Wimbledon against the men, but we know they are magnificent sportswomen and we justly acclaim them as such. We can similarly acclaim Meg Lanning’s sensational skill with the bat, or Lisa de Vanna’s thunderbolt goals, without bothering to wonder whether they have the power or pace of men in the same position.
Next, it is absolutely vital we speak of sportspeople as sportspeople. Commentators given responsibility for covering women’s sport should be instructed in the strongest terms to avoid condescension or puffery. The excruciating sight of Australia’s best cricketers being quizzed on their appearance or relationships by Channel Nine‘s buffoons should never be repeated.
It would be nice to reach a level of sporting punditry where it would never even occur to anyone to write a column like Graham Cornes’s recent doltish blithering about lady footballers and the discomfort they cause in his reptilian hindbrain.
The musings of Cornes, who experts estimate is two thousand years old, on how women manage to chase a footy and have breasts at the same time, should become as unthinkable as an article wherein a respected commentator questions how men manage to play with those awkward dangly bits flapping about between their legs.
It’s a fairly simple rule, really: if you wouldn’t comment on it or ask about it when it’s a man, don’t do it when it’s a woman. This goes for matters of physical attractiveness, fashion sense, romantic escapades and questions about child-rearing.
Of course, this also means women need to be subject to the same scrutiny as men. Male sports stars aren’t immune from comment on their looks or speculation about their love lives, and while it may be desirable that this not be so, we don’t expect that women’s sport, if it achieves widespread popularity, be any more bereft of tabloid silliness than men’s. And professional sportswomen will have to deal with all the criticisms of form, fitness, commitment, body language and off-field poise and etiquette that the men have to put up with.
Basically, I believe there needs to be a recognition that women’s sport is, well, sport. We fans can follow and support and love and obsess over the games that women play quite as easily as the games men play. And some women’s sport we may adore, and some may leave us cold. That’s sport for you. But it behooves us to help achieve a level footing before we make up our minds.
That level footing might be a long way away, and will require manoeuvrings of administrators and money far beyond my humble standing in the world. But hopefully I, and many other fans who support women’s sport but have until now allowed themselves to remain far too ignorant of it, can help the cause along a little by making that effort – to watch, to understand, to appreciate, and to spread the word.
Because the best reason to change the way things are is simply that there’s some brilliant sport being played out there, and as lovers of brilliant sport, if we don’t make the effort, we’re the ones missing out.
stevedeanski
Roar Pro
This is a great article! The main point for mine: "stop forever comparing sportswomen to sportsmen". Unfortunately some of the other comments in relation to your article still can do nothing but compare the two - but at least the ball is rolling now, so to speak...
Zim Zam
Roar Rookie
I reckon netball has got to be pretty key to raising the profile of women's sport, being one of the few international Australian women's sport teams that has doesn't have an equally or far more celebrated male counterpart to compete with. I think women's sport does, in general, look and feel a bit different to the men's game, and 'cause a lot of the time we're more used to the men's game than the women's, that puts people off. Netball, being a sport that we're far more used to seeing women play than men, doesn't have that immediate sort of buffer to get past. If you're going to watch the netball, you're probably going to watch the women's netball whichever gender you are, because A) the fitness, pace, skill and athleticism of professional netball makes it simply great sport to watch in its own right, and B) the women's netball games - both the ANZ Champs and the international tests - are so much more easily accessible than the men's. Those are pretty much the same reasons a lot of people - me included - don't bother looking up the female versions of more male-dominated sports, like cricket: it's harder to follow, and the men's version is great to watch in itself, so there's no reason to go hunting. As you said, Ben, the Netball World Cup in Sydney did a lot for netball in Australia, they broke the standing world record netball crowd three times during the competition, most recently in the final, which had about 16,700 spectators - I was one of them, and the atmosphere was unbelievable. The ANZ Final this year was also an absolute cracker of a game, edge-of-your-seat stuff for the whole 60 minutes. As long as netball continues to show itself to be absolute top quality sport, and the other women's sports teams that people are more reluctant to watch continue to do the same, I think it paves the way for other women's sports to be viewed that way as well.
Zim Zam
Roar Rookie
I'd watch anyone rather than Sharapova play. She screams literally every - time - she - hits - the - ball. I don't watch a lot of tennis, but from what I've seen, on average the women do a lot more irritating screaming than the men. It'd really be a good thing if they could get rid of that. They certainly don't need to scream - ever noticed how abruptly they cut off when something happens they don't expect? It's hilarious.
Sam can
Guest
But it's so much easier to say 'but I just don't like watching women's sport'. Congrats great article!
RobC
Roar Guru
Thank you Ben. I miust admit I was looking for they comic part, or the punchline. A good article in any case! Everybody loves a winner. Our women are winning. Time to showcase them. And we also need writer who follows women sport. Who are generally women, I think
MH
Guest
Well said Dave. There is no need to view interest - or lack thereof - in watching women's sport as any sort of moral issue. People will and should watch whatever entertains them and aggregate demand will determine what gets broadcast, when and how often. End of story and no further hand-wringing required. Gentle Ben, a gentle suggestion - give some thought to dialling back on the moral smugness. You're starting to approach Pedestal Pete Fitzsimons level which is a truly horrible place to be.
Ben Pobjie
Guest
Touché, Oscar.
Ben Pobjie
Guest
I think you're agreeing with me?
onside
Guest
The problem with women's sport is simply that it is not supported by women. " Why do I know so little about women’s sport? It’s an interesting question, with quite an uninteresting answer, that being: I’m lazy." Self depreciation narrowly vindicates the answer, but doesn't address the question. People can only fit so much in. Take International Ice Hockey ,how much do Australians know about the men's game, let alone Women's Ice Hockey. The list of International sports is endless.(above sentence change sports) Half the population is female.There's the answer. Blokes aren't the problem.
Matthew Skellett
Guest
Well umm actually funnily enough televised women's sport is going through a Burgeoning epoch right now -a new deal for the FFA's W-League on Fox , the new WBBL on Free to air -England will have its own Womens' 20/20 professional Super League next year , the record breaking Netball World Cup has just been and gone among other news .So YES Womens' televised sport is well on it's way to be accepted mainstream fare for the sports-lovers among us :-)
Garth
Guest
Does that apply to men's team as well?
Mitcher
Guest
BTW, if it's not already obvious I didn't read the article. Apologies. Ben your stuff is usually high quality so no doubt the same here. I'll read the next one. Promise.
Mitcher
Guest
I can see that as an A League follower it could easily be argued I'm settling for way below the optimal standard available to me. Yet I'm passionate about the Wanderers. On the other hand in my eyes I see watching W League as equivalent to going down and watching (name your appropriate level lower league level) matches - which I wouldn't. I'm sure someone could easily pick apart my logic. But it doesn't change the fact I won't watch either. I don't know if it's sexist or some form of exotic 'ism'. But, I guess the challenge is convincing dinosaurs like me to reconsider that position, despite my self hypocritical awareness.
Stripes
Guest
Do I support women's sport? Well not actively, I’m not really interested, but absolutely they should have every right to go out there and play sport and if they can get good coverage and money good on them! But do they deserve equal pay and tv coverage to men’s? Well no. You’re arguing with Market forces on that one. Quite simply, they will get more, when they deserve more. Why do our top male cricketers earn a few million a year and our top women have to keep a full time job? Well because the males actually bring in millions of dollars too. Relatively, it is equal really. None this might sound very PC but I promise I mean this in the least sexist way, because if people want to promote, engage in it and see it be successful, then hell yeah go for it. Just don't expect to be entitled to it! For me it sounds similar to suggest our Rugby Union (or too another extreme Hockey) players are treated unfairly because they don't get the same coverage of Rugby League. "I love Union/Hockey and they train as hard and are just as skilful in their own way and blah blah...." but no. Union/Hockey isn't as popular in Australia, as much as I would like it to be. I can try engage in it and promote it to make it so it is more popular, but I can't argue that it deserves more coverage or more money if people don't care as much, so therefore it doesn’t bring IN as much money. Take netball, the females get WAY more coverage than the men!! Outrage right? Nah, not really, no one cares (except maybe a handful male netballers probably, I don’t). Netball has a lot of potential in that in that it is our highest participated sport in Australia (last I saw, which admittedly was a few years ago) so if all these participants and their supporters really sat up and paid attention it could go a long way. But really, as a spectator sport, it is not perceived by the majority to be THAT interesting (same as Union ). This is all perception of course and can change. “‘It just does no good to talk of sportswomen in terms of how they compare to sportsmen” …well okay, sorry it doesn’t do any good if you’re trying to say women deserve or should have the same recognition as men, because it’s a bloody relevant point when you try to work out why they don’t. Why do you not prefer to watch Australia A play England A? It is because (Deep breath)…. They aren’t as good. They aren’t, I am sorry, but they aren’t. They aren’t as big or as fast. They do not possess the same level of power, or strength and they have more time to make their decisions. This is all very generalized of course because there could be a 13 year old girl in the making who might grow up to bowl faster the Mitch Johnson. But she would be an outlier, the overall intensity of women’s cricket/football whatever physically charged sport still wouldn’t compare to men’s, and that’s just down to simple physiology and the lack of testosterone. We can’t pretend it doesn’t exist because that’s why we have male and female competitions separate in the first place. What this does affect is the appeal to the viewer in that they know these aren’t the best athletes playing the toughest of environments. Because although “Women’s sports have their strengths, attractions and beauty…” So does the Brisbane Rugby Premier Grade, you won’t see half the penalties you get in test rugby, you will even see more running and backline movements... but that still doesn’t capture the attention compared to Professional rugby, because like why the Wallaroo’s they ARE playing the same sport, really well even, just nowhere near as well as the wallabies. And that’s okay, you can appreciate it, but don’t expect tickatape parades if the quality or the stakes aren’t as high. In the end a lot of it is about a mixture of tribalism + quality that creates popularity hence the NRL exists when State of Origin is clearly higher quality, and Super Rugby under Tests. South Sydney win the NRL they are ecstatic they could produce THE best club team in Australia. If they produced the best women’s club team, then it would…well be the best women’s club team in Australia…that is a strong difference of mindset. Representing Australia on the biggest stage though, say the Olympics, and that’s where greater levels tribalism and higher stakes set in and we get behind our otherwise unknown female and male athletes. “Cathy Freeman would not have won a gold medal in the men’s 400m and Serena Williams could not win Wimbledon against the men, but we know they are magnificent sportswomen and we justly acclaim them as such.” We sure do, but have a guess what would happen if an Aussie male won the 400m Gold, it would have gained probably another x4 levels of publicity and endorsements and whatever because we are now talking about the fastest person over 400m FULL STOP. Not the fastest person of one particular half of the population. It’s still an awesome achievement but If Cathy could beat the men than HOLY-DOOLEY she’d broken the constitution and automatically become PM. It even bugs me a little that tennis Grand Slam Prize winnings were made equal. Why were they? Women’s tennis gets plenty of publicity and money to be sure, but I am quite certain it doesn’t stack up to what the men’s brings in. You can’t even say they play as hard, I mean I’m sure the effort is there but their games are only 3 sets so they literally don’t have to play as hard/long for their money (I am quite certain they would train as hard, but in the end winning is what matters, you’re not paid to train). In a way it’s actually not equality. But the amount of money generated and the pressure from the PC brigade probably meant it was just easier to pay them the same, and in the end what did it matter to stop bad press? No objections from me, it means more money for the athletes and you can definitely say no one is being hard done by. I just can’t sit here any honestly say they deserve more money unless they have brought in more money. I fully appreciate this article is far more about generating support for women than it is about expecting hand outs, and in that it has my full support. If they can generate the support and money all the better to them because if that’s what the people want, and you go make it happen then hellz yeah you deserve it. But the lines suggesting that comparing men to women’s sport “misses the point”, I think, misses the point. If you want increase awareness, you need to realise what you’re up against. Sport is all about comparisons, it’s all about winning, and it is most definitely at elite level all about generating as much interest as possible so that basically they are walking advertisements to bring in gazillions! In the end comparing Men and women in most sports (at least highly physical sports) is a comparison, realistically, of the Best in the world/Country vs the best of one specific half of the population in the mind set of the population. Why don’t administrators invest in women or young girls like they do men? Because they are business people, they know where their best investments lie, and basically that is what is all down to. This may all sound a bit brutal, and I apologise if this has all sounded sexist but to me it really isn’t; but being paid to be a sports person is being paid because people pay attention to you. Your speed, strength, skill, achievements, your loud mouth and looks. If your feats don’t stack up compared to someone else’s in the same market, then you won’t earn as much – unless you’re Anna Kournikova and people have a completely different reason to pay attention, or Anthony Mundine and people want to see you get knocked out. It’s the same issue for the best female player then it is for the 2nd best male player. In all though I really like the tone of this article as it essentially suggests, if you want to make it happen, get involved and do it yourself. That’s the exact attitude that’s needed.
Dave
Guest
Yes there is. Reality. Women either largely do not follow sport with near the same passion as men, or for those that do, recognise the quality and capabilities of men far exceeds women. Women's sport is appealing to a broader audience at the individual level - namely the Olympics - but outside of the Olympics it will eternally struggle in a free market. In the US, soccer, softball etc are very popular at College level as participation sports for women. They really enjoy it and get involved, but once football or basketball starts, there is zero doubt where their viewing preference is. The females at College if anything are more devoted followers of those sports than the men, but even there you could argue its largely the social aspects of the college system (preparing banners, rallies, tailgating etc) that is the appeal for them.
really
Guest
AFL is a unique sport that isn't played elsewhere. So while the talent pool wouldn't compare to something like Soccer or Basketball. there is no better version of australian football available to watch for AFL fans who are passionate about their sport. That's not the point i meant to make. Soccer in Australia is a great example as it constantly has to deal with being an inferior version of a game where a better version is easily accessible. This very problem, where many fan's choose to ignore a local inferior league (A League) for the elite competitions based in Europe like the EPL, La Liga, Serie A ect. is something the FFA would desperately love to solve. There are Die hard supporters who will watch champions league games at ungodly hours. Yet these same football enthusiasts wouldn't be caught dead at an A league game. The FFA is working very hard to try and get these fans on board. With minor success. If there is really nothing wrong with the term "women's sport" How come the ANZ Championship isn't called the Women's Netball League, or something similarly patronizing. That would be ridiculous right. The ANZ championship is the premier netball competition on the planet and its name reflects that. With correct marketing in Australia it could easily be as prominent as a sport like the AFL or NRL or even cricket, While as a unique game the gender of it's participants would be irrelevant. I think its great for all people (boys and girls) to be able to be active and healthy and playing sport, but i'd much rather we as society treated talented female athletes as just like we would any male athlete with appropriate developmental pathways to play against the best possible competition (of either gender) in their chosen sport
nickoldschool
Roar Guru
what, biathlon, alpine skiing or cross country skiing popular in Oz? Dunno whats the audience of the winter sports season broadcasted on eurosport in oz but I don't think its that popular at all. Most aussies I know don't know anything about winter sports and I have never seen an aussie athlete in any of these disciplines in the last 30 years. (nothing wrong with that, winter sports are just not an aussie thing at all for obvious reasons)
tinfoil hat
Guest
How about getting rid of sexism in sport by having competitions where gender is not a basis for being allowed to compete. Then the best athletes will rise to the top and we won't have our character questioned by a guy who thinks we are 'lazy' if we don't act in accordance to his wishes.
tinfoil hat
Guest
All of which is totally subjective. To call people lazy because they don't like watching the same sport as you is.... probably not the best way to approach getting them the give your ideas a go.
True Story
Guest
Danielle I didn't assume anything at all, just trying to think of a way to get people interested in women's sport without spending too much money. I have always been interested in women's sport as I have five sisters, a wife and two daughters and a grand daughter. I hope your websites are successful and I will follow the progress with interest. Good luck although I don't think you will need it as being passionate about a subject is often enough.