You could be forgiven for being unaware that England’s women footballers were playing in a Euro 2009 tournament this summer. During the build-up, it wasn’t mentioned anywhere in the mainstream media.
Then, as the team started to rack up wins, BBC Breakfast suddenly – and rather alarmingly – decided to fulfil its remit for once and spark some interest. It was late in the day, and it was reactive rather than proactive reporting, but hey – it was something.
Football is often billed as the nation’s favourite game, and whether you like it or not, the numbers of people going to watch it live each week backs that up. And every move of England’s men’s team is so closely monitored that if David Beckham sneezes, the media devotes reams of words to analysing how it may affect the team’s performance in a friendly against some little-known eastern European country.
Same game?
We do not wish this on the women’s team. But this is the same game played by a different sex, and all England’s appearance in the final of the European Championships can muster is a late-afternoon BBC2 slot. With Martin Keown on the discussion panel, trying not to smile too much and talking rather patronisingly about “us” and “we”.
Criticising the BBC’s broadcast is not our aim here. At least they bothered to show it. But now that England have been beaten and the tournament’s over, is that it? What happens next? The BBC must have felt a groundswell in public opinion. They must have decided that it was worth devoting airtime to the match. Yet we suspect that women’s football will now slip quietly back into the rather large shadows cast by the men’s game.
A bit of perspective
Is it too much to dream that this coverage will kickstart a revolution in the women’s game? That it will encourage investment, sponsorship, training programmes and widespread media attention? Men often say – and they are often right – that watching a women’s game can be a deathly dull experience, and that even international matches lack quality. But how many boring men’s matches are we forced into caring about each year? Friendlies against Andorra, where overpaid blokes wander around a pitch for 90 minutes, hardly breaking into a sweat?
We’re asking for perspective, that’s all. The women’s game can only improve with investment, but without the media exposure, it will continue to rumble on below the radar. England’s women got thumped by Germany, but hopefully the team’s performance in reaching the final will spur the game on to the next level in this country. And then they’ll be back for revenge.
I’m no great admirer of America in any shape or form but I do admire the fact that it celebrates and recognises sporting prowess. I could well be wrong here (and I’m sure someone will tell me if I’m wrong) but I believe the current England women’s squad have to look to the States for any kind of professional recognition (unlike the Dutch team who, I understand, have been offered professional contracts by the state).
Most other nations on earth would have been proud if their team had made it to the final of a European championship (regardless of gender). We in the UK appear to be happier bailing out people in the City who are plainly not very good at what they do for the wrong reasons (greed) rather than supporting people financially who are plainly very good at what they do. Much like the Americans in fact . . .
OK, the England team were beaten on the night quite soundly. But they had a great tournament (bar the Italy game).
When this country values sporting achievement above greed I guess we might have a chance of winning something (and that applies to both sexes).
Academia and a damned good Oxbridge education followed by a nice position in the City vs sporting achievement: equal but different?
I don’t think so.