And here was I thinking we could have an intelligent debate about the problems in the women's game without club eye patches on. Ha, I should have know better!
Sure, players are mobile and move for lots of reasons. Bex, Hannah, Tahlia and Sophie all moved because Waimak couldn't offer top flight football and coaching and quality team and facilities environment just yet; but I think they will be the last Waimak players to head south.
Now, onto the bigger issue.
Ronaldoknow reckons its up to other clubs to lift their game to Cashmere/Coastal level. That’s OK in the long run - I’m sure Waimak, Selwyn, FC numbers will wash through and the Board people I know at those clubs all value the female side of the game as much as the men. However, I really cannot see any other Chch club pushing on. This situation is completely unacceptable for the current top players who need better competition than what is currently on offer in order to progress. They will make their big decisions accordingly in the next year or two.
Prickly thinks the problem with the womens game is getting 80 athletes with the engine of Annalie. I disagree, but lets go with the point of his argument - that fitter players means less blow-out scores, as per the MPL. Even if that is the case, it doesn’t necessarily make for a quality league.
And for those that don’t think this is a numbers game, read on.
The 7 Chch MPL teams (lets say 150 fit players of varying ability) represent about 2% of the 500 odd teams in the male football pyramid from U10 to MPL (excluding over 35s/45s), which doesn’t take into account all the 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 year olds. Obviously, the MPL as a % of the playing base is a much lower figure when taking into account all the young boys in the full football pyramid, probably closer to 1% than 2%.
Compare that to the women’s game. The 6 Chch WPL teams (let’s call it 100 players) = approx 10% of the 76 teams from WPL to U10s (and this figure would be higher if I had excluded the Sunday teams - many of whom are actually masters teams - including the delightfully monikered Ferrymead Bays Oil Paintings).
Given there is also a much smaller % of girls than boys in the 4-9 year old age group, I’d hazard a guess and say the male side of the game is choosing from about 10 times the amount of players than the women. Yet the men are not performing 10 times as well as the women at national/representative level, so the women are doing very well in comparison - with a much smaller base.
The only logical incentive for our best female players to remain in Chch is to ensure quality competition across the entire top league. Each and every club and Mainland need to do 2 things: 1) put resources into getting more girls playing and 2) create the environments to keep them playing.
It’s the top 1% that create a good league, the women simply don’t have the numbers to create a good league. At present it is the top 10% playing WPL, and that’s simply not good enough. We need to boost the numbers playing.
And here was I thinking we could have an intelligent debate about the problems in the women's game without club eye patches on. Ha, I should have know better!
Sure, players are mobile and move for lots of reasons. Bex, Hannah, Tahlia and Sophie all moved because Waimak couldn't offer top flight football and coaching and quality team and facilities environment just yet; but I think they will be the last Waimak players to head south.
Now, onto the bigger issue.
Ronaldoknow reckons its up to other clubs to lift their game to Cashmere/Coastal level. That’s OK in the long run - I’m sure Waimak, Selwyn, FC numbers will wash through and the Board people I know at those clubs all value the female side of the game as much as the men. However, I really cannot see any other Chch club pushing on though. This situation is completely unacceptable for the current top players who need better competition that what is currently offer in order to progress. They will make their decisions accordingly in the next year or two.
Prickly thinks the problem with the womens game is getting 80 athletes with the engine of Annalie. I disagree, but lets go with the point of his argument - that fitter players means less blow-out scores, as per the MPL. Even if that is the case, it doesn’t necessarily make for a quality league.
And for those that don’t think this is a numbers game, read on.
The 7 Chch MPL teams (lets say 150 fit players of varying ability) represent about 2% of the 500 odd teams in the male football pyramid from U10 to MPL (excluding over 35s/45s), which doesn’t take into account all the 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 year olds. Obviously, the MPL as a % of the playing base is a much lower figure when taking into account all the young boys in the full football pyramid, probably closer to 1% than 2%.
Compare that to the women’s game. The 6 Chch WPL teams (let’s call it 100 players) = approx 10% of the 76 teams from WPL to U10s (and this figure would be higher if I had excluded the Sunday teams - many of whom are actually masters teams - including the delightfully monikered Ferrymead Bays Oil Paintings).
Given there is also a much smaller % of girls than boys in the 4-9 year old age group, I’d hazard a guess and say the male side of the game is choosing from about 10 times the amount of players than the women. Yet the men are not performing 10 times as well as the women at national/representative level, so the women are doing very well in comparison - with a much smaller base.
The only logical incentive for our best female players to remain in Chch is to ensure quality competition across the entire top league. Each and every club and Mainland need to do 2 things: 1) put resources into getting more girls playing and 2) creating the environments to keep them playing.
It’s the top 1% that create a good league, the women simply don’t have the numbers to create a good league. At present it is the top 10% playing WPL, and that’s simply not good enough. We need to boost the numbers playing.