Ladies football

[Zulu]

Utter nonsense. The standard was excellent at times with some great scores across the three games. The tackling and physicality in the senior game was brilliant. It's comparing apples and oranges to compare men's and women's sports but taken as a stand alone sport ladies football is a tremendous sport and to say the skills are awful is pure rubbish or that -

On page 2 here you were saying that the standard was poor, now you're saying otherwise.

Anybody who watched the game will know that the standard was poor. Terrible shooting, poor passing, poor handling skills, lack of composure of players in possession.

- is complete nonsense. Many ladies IC footballers have played international soccer, basketball or rugby so clearly their fitness and ball skills are at an elite level. I shouldn't even be engaging with lads like ye on this as it's like arguing with a men claiming the earth is flat.

Dublin tanked early in the second half as they did last year when leading by a large margin.

Cork were poor and basically stuck in the game due to Dublin's poor shooting. They have the cuteness and know how to win games but they are a shadow of even previous Cork teams.

I don't believe the standard now has advanced much, if at all since Waterford and Monaghan were contesting these games in the mid to late 90s.

The quality of the senior game in tough conditions wasn't brilliant like the men's game last weekend but both were compelling contests with huge physicality. If you read the post you quoted you'd see I said it was excellent at times across the three games.

The standard has improved dramatically since then that's not even up for debate I'd have thought.

The standard regardless of comparison to men's, boys or whatever is poor. If you think otherwise and are happy to watch it, pay into games or whatever, well knock yourself out.

But it isn't and thank you I will continue to watch it.

[Zulu]

Well that's the greatest load of bollocks written on here for quite some time, you should be proud of yourself. There's so much rubbish in your post that I haven't the time to respond to it bit by bit but suffice to say that there was some great football played at CP today and whatever about the quality of the last game there was huge physicality and athleticism shown by both teams.

This kind of stuff is typical of the patronising nonsense you hear so regularly during coverage, and it does the games themselves no good at all, as they can never improve if people take such an attitude.

Either treat the sport seriously and recognise that it is far below the standard it could be, or admit that you're treating it pretty much as a sporting charity case.

I prefer to treat the games seriously - the standard today was awful and if women's GAA is to ever advance it  needs to do without the ridiculous, paranoid attitude which tolerates no criticism of the standard.

I agree with everything you said there.

Utter nonsense. The standard was excellent at times with some great scores across the three games. The tackling and physicality in the senior game was brilliant. It's comparing apples and oranges to compare men's and women's sports but taken as a stand alone sport ladies football is a tremendous sport and to say the skills are awful is pure rubbish or that -

Team sports like hockey and basketball have women's games that can be taken seriously. Even a physical sport like rugby (certainly the 7s at the Olympics and the last 15 a side World Cup) contains players who look like genuine athletes with genuine skill. These sports have women that can reasonably be called elite. Women's GAA contains neither proper athletes nor proper skill. It's miles away from being able to call itself "elite".

- is complete nonsense. Many ladies IC footballers have played international soccer, basketball or rugby so clearly their fitness and ball skills are at an elite level. I shouldn't even be engaging with lads like ye on this as it's like arguing with a men claiming the earth is flat.

You seem to be one with his head buried in the sand about the state of ladies football.

Tiddling 20 yard frees with a size 4 ball into the keepers hands is embarrassing.

Nope but feel free to console yourself with the delusion that if you think something it must be right. Again I wouldn't have to check hard for some fairly embarrassing efforts on goal by Tyrone but we don't seem to claim our men's representatives can't play the game.

The ladies game is a stand alone sport and measured as that it is a very good one. But lads if you don't like it don't watch it. I think soccer is the most boring non-entity of sport on Gods green earth and as such I just don't watch it very often. You can do the same with ladies football if you like.

You not liking soccer probably shows you up a philistine.

You bigging up the standard of ladies gaelic football and the "huge physicality" in it probably shows you up as a raving lunatic.

Well I'm happy not to heed the opinion on the quality of sports from a supporter of the over hyped, soulless drivel that is soccer.

[An Watcher]

For what it's worth I thought it was a very good game with tough 50/50 challenges.  You can't expect women to be putting over 45s or hitting as hard as the men but that's understandable.  That game today was better than many of the men's games this summer

[sid waddell]

The quality of the senior game in tough conditions wasn't brilliant like the men's game last weekend but both were compelling contests with huge physicality. If you read the post you quoted you'd see I said it was excellent at times across the three games.

The standard has improved dramatically since then that's not even up for debate I'd have thought.

I disagree for the reasons I've already gone into. I thought it was a really poor spectacle especially for the game's showpiece occasion.

I remember Monaghan beating Waterford 2-14 to 1-16 in 1997 and today's game wasn't a patch on that.

You mentioned Jonny Cooper missing an easy shot last week. It was an easy shot and it was a terrible miss - it was rightly called as a terrible miss and people were not afraid to say that the game was a poor one afterwards.

Far too many times terrible misses or goalkeeping mistakes in women's GAA are not called such and it's an insult to the intelligence of those watching - the point is the standard could be far better than it is, but the games seem content merely to get to a level where they can draw reasonable crowds to finals rather than raising the standard.

Staying in such a comfort zone does no credit to the games.

Women's GAA either wants to be treated as serious sport or it doesn't - and a large part of that is accepting that criticism will be aimed at teams, players, management and the standard of the games in general.

[Il Bomber Destro]

Well that's the greatest load of bollocks written on here for quite some time, you should be proud of yourself. There's so much rubbish in your post that I haven't the time to respond to it bit by bit but suffice to say that there was some great football played at CP today and whatever about the quality of the last game there was huge physicality and athleticism shown by both teams.

This kind of stuff is typical of the patronising nonsense you hear so regularly during coverage, and it does the games themselves no good at all, as they can never improve if people take such an attitude.

Either treat the sport seriously and recognise that it is far below the standard it could be, or admit that you're treating it pretty much as a sporting charity case.

I prefer to treat the games seriously - the standard today was awful and if women's GAA is to ever advance it  needs to do without the ridiculous, paranoid attitude which tolerates no criticism of the standard.

I agree with everything you said there.

Utter nonsense. The standard was excellent at times with some great scores across the three games. The tackling and physicality in the senior game was brilliant. It's comparing apples and oranges to compare men's and women's sports but taken as a stand alone sport ladies football is a tremendous sport and to say the skills are awful is pure rubbish or that -

Team sports like hockey and basketball have women's games that can be taken seriously. Even a physical sport like rugby (certainly the 7s at the Olympics and the last 15 a side World Cup) contains players who look like genuine athletes with genuine skill. These sports have women that can reasonably be called elite. Women's GAA contains neither proper athletes nor proper skill. It's miles away from being able to call itself "elite".

- is complete nonsense. Many ladies IC footballers have played international soccer, basketball or rugby so clearly their fitness and ball skills are at an elite level. I shouldn't even be engaging with lads like ye on this as it's like arguing with a men claiming the earth is flat.

You seem to be one with his head buried in the sand about the state of ladies football.

Tiddling 20 yard frees with a size 4 ball into the keepers hands is embarrassing.

Nope but feel free to console yourself with the delusion that if you think something it must be right. Again I wouldn't have to check hard for some fairly embarrassing efforts on goal by Tyrone but we don't seem to claim our men's representatives can't play the game.

The ladies game is a stand alone sport and measured as that it is a very good one. But lads if you don't like it don't watch it. I think soccer is the most boring non-entity of sport on Gods green earth and as such I just don't watch it very often. You can do the same with ladies football if you like.

You not liking soccer probably shows you up a philistine.

You bigging up the standard of ladies gaelic football and the "huge physicality" in it probably shows you up as a raving lunatic.

Well I'm happy not to heed the opinion on the quality of sports from a supporter of the over hyped, soulless drivel that is soccer.

Cracking game in store at the Artemio Franchi this evening, but if you like the incessant screeching of 10 year old girls for an atmosphere then please yourself.

[sid waddell]

For what it's worth I thought it was a very good game with tough 50/50 challenges.  You can't expect women to be putting over 45s or hitting as hard as the men but that's understandable.  That game today was better than many of the men's games this summer

I'm no critic of political correctness as I think overall it's certainly a beneficial thing for society but that's the type of nonsense that gives it a bad name.

In no way was that game on the same planet as any men's game this year, or ever.

The reality is any decent under 12 or certainly under 14 boys team would comfortably beat the best the women have to offer.

[Syferus]

If only this site had a modicum of moderation.

[An Watcher]

I attended the Ulster  Final this year, believe me, today's game was better

[Zulu]

The quality of the senior game in tough conditions wasn't brilliant like the men's game last weekend but both were compelling contests with huge physicality. If you read the post you quoted you'd see I said it was excellent at times across the three games.

The standard has improved dramatically since then that's not even up for debate I'd have thought.

I disagree for the reasons I've already gone into. I thought it was a really poor spectacle especially for the game's showpiece occasion.

I remember Monaghan beating Waterford 2-14 to 1-16 in 1997 and today's game wasn't a patch on that.

You mentioned Jonny Cooper missing an easy shot last week. It was an easy shot and it was a terrible miss - it was rightly called as a terrible miss and people were not afraid to say that the game was a poor one afterwards.

Far too many times terrible misses or goalkeeping mistakes in women's GAA are not called such and it's an insult to the intelligence of those watching - the point is the standard could be far better than it is, but the games seem content merely to get to a level where they can draw reasonable crowds to finals rather than raising the standard.

Staying in such a comfort zone does no credit to the games.

Women's GAA either wants to be treated as serious sport or it doesn't - and a large part of that is accepting that criticism will be aimed at teams, players, management and the standard of the games in general.

You're entitled to your opinion of course but picking out one game from 1997 and comparing it to one game in 2016 is not a good way to assess the development of the game. However, I think the game has come on in leaps and bounds and there have been plenty of cracking games in the recent past.

I don't get this idea that there is a lack of criticism either and that increasing (media, is it?) criticism will propel the game forward. I coach young girls and boys teams and the girls are treated the same as the boys and want to achieve the same as the boys. The game is, and will continue to develop as a sport and players will continue to get better.

I think the standard, if you don't compare to men's, is very high and some of the players are genuinely excellent regardless of the standard you hold them to. 

[Il Bomber Destro]

I attended the Ulster  Final this year, believe me, today's game was better

Stay away from Ulster finals anymore, they sell out and we can't be doing with fellas who would rather watch womens football there taking a seat.

I doubt you'd see anything likes the point taking of display in the Ulster final from McHugh, McNiallais, Harte, Cavanagh or a hit like Monroe on McGlynn late on in a women's match, ever.

[sid waddell]

The quality of the senior game in tough conditions wasn't brilliant like the men's game last weekend but both were compelling contests with huge physicality. If you read the post you quoted you'd see I said it was excellent at times across the three games.

The standard has improved dramatically since then that's not even up for debate I'd have thought.

I disagree for the reasons I've already gone into. I thought it was a really poor spectacle especially for the game's showpiece occasion.

I remember Monaghan beating Waterford 2-14 to 1-16 in 1997 and today's game wasn't a patch on that.

You mentioned Jonny Cooper missing an easy shot last week. It was an easy shot and it was a terrible miss - it was rightly called as a terrible miss and people were not afraid to say that the game was a poor one afterwards.

Far too many times terrible misses or goalkeeping mistakes in women's GAA are not called such and it's an insult to the intelligence of those watching - the point is the standard could be far better than it is, but the games seem content merely to get to a level where they can draw reasonable crowds to finals rather than raising the standard.

Staying in such a comfort zone does no credit to the games.

Women's GAA either wants to be treated as serious sport or it doesn't - and a large part of that is accepting that criticism will be aimed at teams, players, management and the standard of the games in general.

You're entitled to your opinion of course but picking out one game from 1997 and comparing it to one game in 2016 is not a good way to assess the development of the game. However, I think the game has come on in leaps and bounds and there have been plenty of cracking games in the recent past.

I don't get this idea that there is a lack of criticism either and that increasing (media, is it?) criticism will propel the game forward. I coach young girls and boys teams and the girls are treated the same as the boys and want to achieve the same as the boys. The game is, and will continue to develop as a sport and players will continue to get better.

I think the standard, if you don't compare to men's, is very high and some of the players are genuinely excellent regardless of the standard you hold them to.

Nobody is asking that women's football has the same absolute standard as men's, particularly in terms of physicality, which would obviously be absurd.

What I want to see in a game is:
i) players who can be relied on to score when they get free and put the ball over the bar at least 50% of the time when under pressure, and if they fail to score, to at least get close.
ii) Good kicking skills in general.
iii) Composure on the ball, an ability to make good decisions under pressure.
iv) A high standard of fitness relative to the amount of time played in the match.
v) Genuine tactical awareness.

I saw little of any of those five today, Cork won because they had more of iii) and v) and paced themselves better throughout the game. Dublin completely lost their legs early in the second half, and their heads had already gone before that.

The sport has a future, but it needs to raise the bar a lot higher than it was raised today and a lot higher than it's raised in general.

Women in sports such as athletics, tennis, gymnastics, hockey etc. train just as hard as men do.

If women's GAA players don't do the same it can't ever be taken remotely as seriously. The poor skill levels (for which there is no excuse and which are rectifiable with enough practice) are a dead giveaway that that isn't happening at the moment. If the game wants to be taken seriously, its players have to put in at least something approaching similar commitment to what the men do, otherwise there's no way it can be classed as elite. People might think think it's absurd to ask women to put in similar commitment to what men do, but that's the reality of what top level sport is and to say otherwise is to do the sport a disservice.

[Zulu]

The basic skills at IC level are very high and to say otherwise is absurd. Score taking is certainly an area that can be improved but to say the general skill levels are poor is simply not true.

Can you elaborate on how you know women in sports such as hockey and rugby train as hard as men do but that ladies footballers don't?

By the way, the ladies game has nowhere near the level of financial support that the men's game does so if there is a preparation gap, which I don't know there is, then it isn't because the sport doesn't want to be taken seriously.

[sid waddell]

The basic skills at IC level are very high and to say otherwise is absurd. Score taking is certainly an area that can be improved but to say the general skill levels are poor is simply not true.

Can you elaborate on how you know women in sports such as hockey and rugby train as hard as men do but that ladies footballers don't?

By the way, the ladies game has nowhere near the level of financial support that the men's game does so if there is a preparation gap, which I don't know there is, then it isn't because the sport doesn't want to be taken seriously.

Didn't say female rugby players train as hard as the men. I doubt they do.

Hockey players and rowers for sure do, athletes, gymnasts and tennis players also. Pretty much all sports in which the Olympics is the pinnacle command equal dedication from women I would say. Katie Taylor puts the same amount of time and dedication into her sport as any male amateur boxer in this country.

Even without the same level of funding as the men, women's GAA players should at least be looking to train as hard as men's inter-county players did, say, 10-15 years ago and administrators should looking to attract better sponsorship towards that. It's difficult but it can become a virtuous circle if enough effort is put in - if the standard visibly improves more businesses will want to be involved. Croke Park in September live on national television is an attractive showcase to offer.

[Zulu]

So you don't know that ladies footballers don't put in similar effort as their male counterparts?

So when you were comparing ladies football to other sports you were comparing county level amateur footballers to professional international athletes?

To the best of my knowledge IC ladies footballers put in a similar level of preparation to their male counterparts and certainly compare favourably with men's IC teams from 10 or 15 years ago. Where are you getting the idea they don't?

[Jinxy]

Re womens' rugby, half the national team are ex-GAA players.