The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Boys are better than girls.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40
Avatar for Nerry
Nerry
15
Original post by Laissez‒faire
No one thinks girls "can't" play football, they just won't be as good as boys on average because of biological reasons.


Actually, you are wrong. Football is both a game based on skill and physicality. On average - yes men will have a greater physicality. But skill isn’t influenced by gender. So you could theoretically make up for a lack of physicality with an abundance of skill.
Original post by 12ksmith
Actually, you are wrong. Football is both a game based on skill and physicality. On average - yes men will have a greater physicality. But skill isn’t influenced by gender. So you could theoretically make up for a lack of physicality with an abundance of skill.


How utterly stupid, you are wrong. Football is an extremely physical and stamina intensive sport, you can't make up for it with just skill.
Original post by Laissez‒faire
How utterly stupid, you are wrong. Football is an extremely physical and stamina intensive sport, you can't make up for it with just skill.


I said ‘a lack of physicality’. Meaning you still have some, just not that much. Therefore you wouldn’t have ‘just skill’.
Original post by 12ksmith
I said ‘a lack of physicality’. Meaning you still have some, just not that much. Therefore you wouldn’t have ‘just skill’.


Keep dodging the point and focusing on irrelevant semantics, you know you are wrong.
Original post by Laissez‒faire
Keep dodging the point and focusing on irrelevant semantics, you know you are wrong.


How exactly am I wrong?
Original post by 12ksmith
How exactly am I wrong?


If you were correct it'd suggest female national football teams could complete with men's teams. They're not remotely on the same level.
Original post by Laissez‒faire
If you were correct it'd suggest female national football teams could complete with men's teams. They're not remotely on the same level.


Due to an undeveloped model of the women’s game (relative to the men’s).

Its possible for pro women footballers to reach the same fitness level as pro male footballers - In a sport like football where muscle mass isn’t overly important (compared to sports like rugby or weightlifting).

Skill will also reach equilibrium between the 2 genders as the women’s game develops (ie coaching improves etc.) so maybe one day your suggestion might happen.
Original post by 12ksmith
Due to an undeveloped model of the women’s game (relative to the men’s).

Its possible for pro women footballers to reach the same fitness level as pro male footballers - In a sport like football where muscle mass isn’t overly important (compared to sports like rugby or weightlifting).

Skill will also reach equilibrium between the 2 genders as the women’s game develops (ie coaching improves etc.) so maybe one day your suggestion might happen.


:rofl: keep living in your fantasy world

In reality:

Original post by Laissez‒faire
:rofl: keep living in your fantasy world

In reality:



The fact that you have just linked a post to a current event shows that you haven’t actually understood what I have said. Try reading it again.
Original post by 12ksmith
The fact that you have just linked a post to a current event shows that you haven’t actually understood what I have said. Try reading it again.


I understood perfectly well. Are you suggesting an under 15 year old local team has better coaches than the national team? If so you are free to keep believing your delusions if it helps you sleep better.
Original post by Laissez‒faire
I understood perfectly well. Are you suggesting an under 15 year old local team has better coaches than the national team? If so you are free to keep believing your delusions if it helps you sleep better.


I’m talking about funding and coaching in the women’s game as a whole. Compared to the equivalent in the men’s. Basically it all comes down to the number of years in development and funding. Both of which the women’s game is lacking behind the men’s - hence a women’s team getting smashed by an under 15 side.
Original post by Nerry


Get outta here with your hate speech.

A girl can have a penis one day and a vagina the next - it all depends on how she feels.
Original post by 12ksmith
I’m talking about funding and coaching in the women’s game as a whole. Compared to the equivalent in the men’s. Basically it all comes down to the number of years in development and funding. Both of which the women’s game is lacking behind the men’s - hence a women’s team getting smashed by an under 15 side.


Why would funding as a whole make them better individually? The women's team already had a better coach and better funding than the boys' team.
Original post by Laissez‒faire
You can't just join in someone else's game if they don't want you to :s-smilie:


If only dinner nannies enforced this **** there'd be a lot less wars going on.
Original post by Laissez‒faire
Why would funding as a whole make them better individually? The women's team already had a better coach and better funding than the boys' team.


Due to development of the individual players. Due to support. Due to it being on the tv each weekend. Due to everything. Due to society. You have to consider everything.

I get why you have the opinion that you have. But if I’m honest it’s really short sighted. I think you should try looking at this differently - mathematically even.
Original post by 12ksmith
Due to development of the individual players. Due to support. Due to it being on the tv each weekend. Due to everything. Due to society. You have to consider everything.

I get why you have the opinion that you have. But if I’m honest it’s really short sighted. I think you should try looking at this differently - mathematically even.


Women's team had professional coaches and were older so were much more developed. Everything else is just blaming it on everything other than the actual players, it's irrelevant. If "support" mattered it would mean the home team would always win.
Original post by Laissez‒faire
Women's team had professional coaches and were older so were much more developed. Everything else is just blaming it on everything other than the actual players, it's irrelevant. If "support" mattered it would mean the home team would always win.


I’m talking about development of the game as a whole - not just individuals or 1 team.

I’m blaming the environment which has created the team.

You are simply just inherited genetics & your environment. I’m blaming the environment so technically I am actually blaming the team as well.

You have misunderstood the meaning of ‘support’. Actually think about it.
Original post by awkwardshortguy
If only dinner nannies enforced this **** there'd be a lot less wars going on.


Ha, we'd just not ever pass to someone that we were forced to play with and they'd eventually leave.
Original post by 12ksmith
I’m talking about development of the game as a whole - not just individuals or 1 team.

I’m blaming the environment which has created the team.

You are simply just inherited genetics & your environment. I’m blaming the environment so technically I am actually blaming the team as well.

You have misunderstood the meaning of ‘support’. Actually think about it.


Why does development as a whole matter in this case?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you