Posted on 03/13/2020 6:29:12 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Since most of the US women’s team is communist I am sure they agree with Marx’s From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs motto. Right?
Isn’t that a white supremacy sign these days?
Why the picture of the Hitler Youth giving the Nazi salute?
How do you define ability? The offending quote was "requires a higher level of skill based on speed and strength." But the U.S. Women's Team are one of the best globally, and the U.S. Men's team is cannot consistently perform.
The male players may be faster and stronger, but only the women are bringing home championships. Furthermore, to one of your points, the women are also bringing in more revenue now. So I don't think it is unreasonable for the women to think their performance has earned more pay. They may be entitled brats, but they are bringing home championships and money to the organization.
The crowds may be smaller, but since 2015 they have actually brought in more revenue than the men. Some of the women players may be unrepentant jerkasses, but I understand their being annoyed that poorer performers are making more than they are.
I thought all the Woke crowd said, that was the White Power symbol.
Abolish “women’s teams” and allow women to compete in the united soccer league. Why have a women’s team? Is there a black team?
Entertainers should negotiate compensation by promoters based on their ability to generate revenue for the promoters. If female athletes generate equal revenue, it’s reasonable for them to demand equal pay. Not sure why a court would have anything to do with this — the athletes are free adults who can either agree to a contract, strike, form their own league, get a job, etc. Case dismissed.
So if we had an under-13 team that won championships, they should be paid more than the National Team?
ML/NJ
Pay results from company earnings
Nobody watches Women’s soccer and is willing to pay. Therefore less pay.
that really was the dumbest thing he could say. He really should have gone with the revenue stream. That would have given a good picture without basically saying “eh women athletes suck”.
Then they should negotiate more pay instead of suing over "gender discrimination."
They negotiated their own pay terms.
Let's keep something else in mind, folks. In nearly every other team sport, U.S. players earn almost nothing when they play for the national teams. For professional sports like basketball and hockey, the biggest consideration for those players is protecting themselves under their separate professional contracts in case of an injury. I believe the standard protocol is for the applicable U.S. national organization for that sport (USA Hockey, for example) to buy insurance coverage that compensates a professional team in the event one of that team's players gets injured while playing for the national team.
The reason these women are complaining about their compensation while playing for the national team is that their professional sports leagues -- to the extent they even exist -- are awful, and may even just meet semi-pro standards when it comes to how much they pay their players.
The statement was made in a formal court filing as a defendant in a lawsuit. In that situation, you say anything and everything that might support your case.
If you run over a 95 year-old woman who wanders into traffic in front of your car, your insurance company is going to do whatever it takes to defend you in a lawsuit -- regardless of how badly the woman's family might be offended when the court filings make her seem like an addled, drunken old bag.
Don’t worry, the trannies will take over women’s soccer soon and then this won’t be an issue any more, because we won’t need to pay the women anything at all.
You’re worth what it costs to replace you. I suspect the best players on the men’s team have substantial opportunities elsewhere, so they need to be paid enough to retain. Women probably don’t have big opportunities elsewhere.
Lol. Any decent HS boys basketball team would humiliate any WNBA team.
Exactly, it would hold true for any sport, even tiddly winks if that were a sport.
Problem is when the lawsuit is basically a discrimination case what you definitely don’t say is anything that sounds discriminating. Especially when he had 2 real solid arguments: CBA, and revenue discrepancy. Never let your mouth run in court, short well thought out sentences. As soon as you start waxing prosaic you’re gonna get bit.
All professional sports are ultimately entertainment businesses. Revenue and salaries ultimately will be based on butts in seats and eyeballs on the tube. Keep the argument focused there. And in doing so, U.S. Soccer should ensure that EVERY public statement is built around its commitment to building the women's game, filling stadiums, and developing the fan base to support higher women's salaries. As well as building a men's team that can reliably beat Jamaica, Costa Rica, Panama and T&T. That should be common ground. That's where the flag should be planted.
What is NOT useful are statements like:
"WNT [Women's National Team] and MNT [Men's National Team] Players Do Not Perform Equal Work Requiring Equal Skill, Effort, and Responsibility Under Similar Working Conditions …." or
"The overall soccer-playing ability required to compete at the senior men's national team level is materially influenced by the level of certain physical attributes, such as speed and strength, required for the job." USSF's lawyers argued in the court filing that it's not "a 'sexist stereotype' to recognize the different levels of speed and strength required for the two jobs, as Plaintiffs' counsel contend. On the contrary, it is indisputable 'science,'" they added."
Certain physical attributes such as speed and strength? [Groan] These statements are tantamount to an open declaration that, in the view of USSF, women's soccer is inherently second rate because men are bigger, faster and stronger. Some people on this forum agree with this sentiment and take pride in advertising their complete disdain for women's athletics. Such people are entitled to their opinions. If they want to sneer at Katie Ledecky because she would lose to Michael Phelps, or mock U.S. women gymnasts, ice skaters, sprinters, etc. at the Olympics because they're "just girls," that's their business.
But when U.S. Soccer is the organization responsible for developing and fielding U.S. women's teams in international competitions, it is clownishly stupid for its lawyers to be making a "girls are inherently second rate" argument. Especially in today's political and legal climate. Especially when both the men and women players are ...like, you know, what's the word? … your employees. ("Hi. I'm the boss. We're here to talk salary. And just to clarify things, let's have the second class group of people sit in the back of the room, and the first class people all come to the front." Yeah, that's the ticket ….) And also especially when the USWNT wins world championships while the men lose to T&T and don't even qualify for the World Cup. The women don't play with equal skill, effort and responsibility? Really? The women hoist championship trophies. The men slink home with bags over their heads. Management shouldn't be telling its world champions that they're still second rate because the men, chronic losers though they may be, are still bigger and stronger. If U.S. Soccer can't grasp the concept of class competitions and strive unreservedly for excellence on both sides of the gender binary, break it up and establish separate organizations.
Then there's this, just to dig the hole a bit deeper:
The federation also argued in the filings that male and female professional players work "materially different jobs" because of the hostility male players face from fans. "Opposing fan hostility encountered in these MNT road environments, especially in Mexico and Central America, is unmatched by anything the WNT must face while trying to qualify for an important tournament," lawyers for the USSF argued. "Even the hostility of fans at home crowds for the MNT in some friendlies can be unlike anything the WNT faces."
Oh, my. U.S. Soccer wants you to know that those poor, delicate men deserve higher pay because of hostile crowds, especially in games in Latin America. Mind you, the women can win a World Cup knockout game against France, in a game played in Paris in a sold out stadium, and that doesn't qualify as a tough venue, but those poor men have to play road games in Central and South America. I'm sure it is true that crowds are much better behaved at women's soccer matches. Women's soccer still draws a family audience with a lot of youth players in attendance, even at big games with expensive tickets. Women's soccer doesn't have the vicious, drunken hooliganism that mars the men's game in too many places. But is that really the case you want to make for paying the men more?
Finally, I could only laugh at the acknowledgement by U.S. Soccer that the USMNT often faces hostile crowds at home. That's because the men are third raters on the international stage, and a lot of the crowd at a USMNT consists of foreign nationals turning out to see "their" team -- i.e., the foreign team -- beat up on the Americanos. That's especially true when the U.S. plays Mexico in Mexican cities like Los Angeles or Houston. And this is, in truth, a major difference between the USMNT and the USWNT; at the women's games, the crowd is actually there to root for the U.S. team, and the women even have a large contingent that follows them to road games. Every U.S. game in France during the World Cup run had a large and noisy contingent of (very well behaved, sober) U.S. fans in the stands, though they were of course outnumbered by the French in the game in Paris. At a USMNT game, a lot of the crowd is there to watch the Washington Generals lose to the Harlem Globetrotters.
U.S. Soccer's last filing was a public relations disaster. The only thing I can think of is that a bunch of high priced lawyers with no feel either for the game or the larger public context sat around and drafted an "everything including the kitchen sink" brief, thinking that no one except the judge would ever read it. This is Wile E. Coyote level strategizing, and it had the same predictable result. The bomb blew up in their faces. It didn't take a week: Carlos Cordeiro has resigned. USSF Vice President Cindy Parlow Cone is taking the reins. At least Cindy will probably be able to make it through the day without going out of her way to insult the women.
Where does USSF find people like Cordeiro? He is indeed of Latin heritage, but he came to the U.S. as a boy and has Harvard degrees and a career in investment banking. Did he think that to do big time soccer, he needed to imitate Latin American sexist pigs? I think that by now, even the southern European men know better. As do all the Asians.
Sorry for ranting, but USSF's stupidity is aggravating a very complex negotiation. At this rate, USSF will be trounced for political reasons that have very little to do with the merits of the issue. And it will be their own fault.
If I were US Soccer president I would kick every one of those traitorous, greedy skanks off the team. I’m sure there are hundreds of other players who would love to replace them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.