Greetings, gentle readers.
The principles of egalitarianism and competitive parity have been bandied about throughout the history of sports, and the gender divide between men and women has been particularly contentious. While there have been occasional forays by women into men's sports, such as Hayley Wickenheiser in the Finnish and Swedish men's hockey leagues, and Mireia Rodríguez in the Spanish men's handball league, it is generally considered a good idea to segregate the sexes. The simple scientific reason is pure physiognomy. Elite male athletic performance is 10-12% greater than women's, and thus direct competition would be unfair. That being said, there are many calls for financial equality between the male and female classes of the same sport.
Equal Pay
In tennis, for example, men and women play on the same surfaces at the same Grand Slam events; grass in Wimbledon, clay in the French Open, etc. One side of the argument says that the men and the women should receive equal pay and rewards for playing the same game with the same rules in the same stadia. On the other hand, women only play best out of three sets in each match, while the men play best of five. Similarly, the techniques and tactics differ broadly between the sexes, and the direct comparison is shocking.
Venus and Serena Williams managed to lose consecutive matches against the same male opponent back in 1998. Serena lost 6-1 to 203rd ranked men's player Karsten Braasch in Melbourne, when this happened:
Venus, who supported Serena from the stands, challenged Braasch immediately after the set to only a slightly better result. The German, who had a fondness for smoking Marlboros during some changeovers, extended rallies and deployed the same disorientating array of spins defeating Venus, 6-2.
Years later, during an appearance on the David Letterman Show, Serena emphasized that any attempts to blur the distinction between men's and women's tennis was unadvisable.
"If I were to play Andy Murray, I would lose, 6-0, 6-0, in five to six minutes, maybe 10 minutes," Williams told Letterman. "The men are a lot faster, they serve harder, they hit harder. It's a completely different game."
In football, women in countries that have historically triumphed in the women's game but underwhelmed in the men's category have always felt aggrieved that the men earned more money per appearance and received greater performance bonus payments. The American Women's National Team won a court settlement on 22 February, 2022 that not only guaranteed equal pay for international competitions between the genders, but authorized the distribution of equalization back pay for previous competitions. The Canadian Women's Team reached a similar agreement in the following month.
The problem here is equal financial compensation for unequal revenue generation. The Buffalo Bandits just won their fifth National Lacrosse League Cup in a league where the average player salary is $19375.21. Why do Lacrosse players get paid less than NFL players, whose average salary is around $2,700,000? Answer: more people pay more money to attend and view the games, and advertisers and sponsors spend more money to reach those audiences. It is just a fact that more people fill larger stadia and the worldwide television audience is larger for the Men's World Cup than it is for the Women's World Cup. If nothing else, FIFA's egregious corruption and the enormous amount of wealth sluiced around during every World Cup Host bidding convention are testament to the filthy lucre that the men swim about in, compared to the frugal and conservative events coordinated on behalf of the women.
Harrison Bergeron
But the quest for equality extends beyond the gender divide. Most North American sports hold high in esteem the concept that not only must all teams compete on a level playing field with neutral officials using universal rules and regulations, but they must also be of comparable talent and athleticism. Teams that perform poorly are rewarded with early draft picks so that they can become more competitive. Salary caps are implemented to prevent teams from stockpiling too much expensive talent. Expansion drafts are used to siphon talent from existing franchises to augment new ones. The successful are handicapped, and the mediocre are supplemented season after season with the overall objective that every team has a reasonable probability of winning against any opponent.
Davida v. Goliath
Unfortunately, competitive parity is boring. It may be unfair, but goals in football create buzz. For non-fans, the stereotypical footy match consists of a bunch of people falling over, rolling about on the ground, and clutching one body part or another for ninety minutes until the game winds down to a goalless draw. In reality, teams that are very closely matched in a high-tension competitive environment are sorely tempted to clog the midfield, stifle the opposition's outlet passes, and play with a high defensive line to turn any over-the-top long pass toward their net into an offside one. It's a risk-averse strategy, and helps to narrow any discrepancy in talent or prowess between teams. It's also a bit dull. The NHL dealt with this in the late 1990s and early noughties with the advent of the neutral-zone trap. It increased parity, but caused a profound drop in offensive production for all teams across the board. The ensuing ennui caused profits to drop, and fan enthusiasm to flounder.
The Solution
Mercifully, this year's Women's World Cup may help address the issues of inequality in a very organic way. The tournament has expanded the pool of teams from 24 to 36 this year, meaning that there will now be a greater gulf between the best teams in the competition and the worst. That greater inequality will provide fertile opportunity for more goals in one-sided blowouts, thus increasing fan enthusiasm and engagement, which will increase tickets, gate revenue, broadcasting demand, advertising, etc. and thus give more financial leverage to the women's game vis-à-vis the men's. The lack of parity is what will generate excitement, contrary to what appears to be a central tenet of North American sports.
For Example
 |
| Christine Sinclair |
In Canada, the Women's World Cup is broadcast on a cable sports network with three separate time-zone-linked channels. Because the tournament is held in Australia and New Zealand, the time difference means that the games are broadcast in the dead of night, and then rebroadcast repeatedly over the course of the pursuant day. Seventh ranked Canada's opening game against 40th ranked team Nigeria was notable for a penalty shot by Christine Sinclair that was saved, but very little else.
The remainder of the game was a cold slog through the centre of the pitch with precious few jolts of adrenaline. Those who were bored and disinterested with the live game were thereafter given nine more opportunities to revisit the tedium over the next eighteen hours or so.
 |
Ballon D'Or Winner Ada Hegerberg |
Similarly, Switzerland and Norway butted figurative heads in a futile attempt to score a goal in a slightly less dry demonstration of clean sheet-keeping. The fact that Swiss quarterbacking maestra Luana Bühler and Norwegian goal-machine Ada Hegerberg were absent from the match through injury and illness respectively explains much about the dearth of offensive results. Norway are ranked 12th in the world, while the Swiss clock in at 20th, providing an example of a game that, at least on paper, was contested by teams of comparable quality. This offers at least anecdotal evidence that having teams proximate to one another in terms of competitive advantages does not directly equate to a better or more entertaining end product for the consumers.
In short, even the players involved in the other nil-nil draw thus far in the tournament will be hard pressed to remember the details of the affair, and will not have served the cause of either football or women's sports by plodding through a dour couple of hours in the antipodean winter wind. By the time of the final whistle of the France v. Jamaica game, even the most musical fans of the Reggae Girlz were subdued and dispirited.
 |
| Melanie Leupolz |
In contrast to the previous two games, perpetual contenders and second-ranked Germany faced 72nd ranked nation Morocco in their debut appearance. Although two of the six German goals were credited as own-goals against the Moroccan defenders, the result did not flatter the victors. This was a game filled with flare, skill, and untrammeled exuberance. The Moroccans were exposed as being weak in the air and prone to positional decomposition across the pitch. The Germans expertly passed the ball about through Sara Däbritz, Lina Magull, and Melanie Leupolz in midfield and although 32-year-old Alexandra Popp had a brace of goals, she could have been credited with more. The crowd cheered and sang, the Germans were triumphant, and minnows Morocco could hold their heads high that they faced the two-time champs and acquitted themselves well in their first attempt on the big stage.
Finally, Group C has already completed its eliminations after only two rounds of games. Zambia and Costa Rica have one last meaningless game to contest against each other before they go home, but they were able to provide the backdrop for some gorgeous play from the Spaniards and the Japanese, who will now play one another for first place in the group. Has the marked difference in quality between the top two teams and the bottom two diminished the value of the competition? I would assert not. In fact, the race for goal differential provided an added element of tension and drama as Spain sought to score a fifth goal against the Zambians on Wednesday.
At least the Zambians have the notable distinction of fielding the most players with the surname Banda on the pitch of any team in WWC history. That's got to be worth something.
That's all I can do for now. Until later,
—mARKUS