Please stop telling us that women's sport is as good as men's - it isn't! Discuss

Coming on to the subject of the article, surely this is a subjective matter. The games are different. In tennis I prefer the woman's version but that is aesthetic. There is a grace and beauty which as a heterosexual male I respond to. There is no doubt that it is inferior in strength and speed however and no woman in history could beat a man currently in the top echelons.

Netball and women's hockey are similarly appealing, because of the grace and beauty of the players.

Where I think Lawson is right is that in sports like Football and Cricket the difference in quality is embarrassing. I find the female versions of both sport unwatchable, for the same reasons that I find the lower reaches of the male versions of the game. Watching the best you get spoilt. Having seen Ronaldo and Messi you get generate the same excitement over a journeyman striker in non League football.

Others disagree, but not enough. And that is why the BBC's PC campaign for women's versions of these games will have limited success. Football, for example, is a global sport. Wherever you go in the world you can discuss the Premier League. The money it generates is astonishing as is the viewership. That will never be the case for the female version of the game. You won't get into a cab in Vietnam or Mexico City and spend the time discussing Arsenal FC Ladies' latest signing.

Not going to happen.

Nah, have you seen the cloths American football players wear in the female league? Trust me, its definately better.

The trash comes from you.

There is a debate to be had on the subject of women's sport. It is a reasonable debate, with legitimate opinions on both sides. Lawson makes a contribution with which one can agree or disagree furnishing reasons.

You are unwilling for his side of the debate to be made. You attempt to discredit his argument, even his right to express it, tacitly, by attacking the medium in which he makes it, the Daily Mail.

This is true of anything which the Daily Mail might campaign for as a right of centre newspaper, or in this case simply an opinion piece by a columnist.

Argue your corner, disagree to your heart's content. That is what we do in a democracy with a free press.

But don't think you can get away with attempting to stop any discussion or expression of views by this shallow and tawdry tactic of smearing the vehicle in which the opinion is expressed. It has no basis in logic and is profoundly undemocratic, fascist even.

Despite DM, Dominic Lawson always writes exceptionally well, interesting article. I know it's sports orientated, but I think it covers more than just sport

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4745054/Stop-telling-women-s-sport-good-men-s.html

I have to disagree...

The BBC has an obligation as a public broadcaster to show these things. If you don't like it, don't watch it.


But if your argument is that these sports are crap because they're not of the same standard as the professional men's, why aren't you having a go at disabled sport as well? The World Para-athletics was the week before last. Why isn't that on your list?

The players are of a noticeably lower standard so women's sport is inferior (as a spectacle, some people prefer to watch women just in general). In time, with more infrastructure so more women can be professional (and support for girls so they can go into sport) they can develop their skills better (so no reason women can't be as good at snooker, motor-racing, horse-racing etc.), but if there's an element of physical strength or speed then the men's sport will always be superior. There's a reason they have to have women only competitions.

You've never attempted either of these things at a decent standard, have you?

Motor racing involves a lot of strength to hold the car and deal with the forces.

Cue power generation in snooker is one of the hardest things about the game.

Even darts, a sport where you really wouldn't suggest there was any physicality needed, women end up using equipment to the men.

Motor racing has got very little to do with the G force limits between genders.... it is the inherent risk taking part of the brain which young males possess, being able to take gaps, not brake until late, start accelerating earlier etc... you can see this when Schumi made his comeback, he was more risk averse after his time out, and noticeably far less aggressive.... Suzie Wolff and Sabine Schmitz both concur that this is the major reason holding women back, despite Sabine being in better shape than most of the current f1 grid

Snooker? Reanne Evans agrees with steve davis in saying that it's nothing to do with power generation - the mens no3 and no5 both have crap power..... They agree by saying it's the 'simple' nature of a male brain, to 'obcess' over something so small, be it snooker, a train sets, stamp collections etc.... whereas women generally will be focusing on 101 other things... yes, the lack of funding prevents any opportunity

Darts... i can't speak for that, as I know nothing about it, but I have to believe its for similar reasons

Your point was it had nothing to do with strength, well that point is wrong.
In all 3 sports, strength does play a factor.

I will agree with you that men tend to become obsessive far easier than women. Even if you take gaming (not necessarily video games, but chess, scrabble, poker) contests that require zero strength, the elite all seem to be male.

As a former amateur racing driver, I can catergorially tell you that strength plays a tiny role in the success of women... one 22 year old girl who regualrly placed 3rd or better was skinny as hell, never went to the gym to do strength training, and actaully would black out sometimes.... Please, divulge as to how you know i'm wrong