Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Binky

Gender Equality: FIFA: "Fair Play" = "Fair Pay?" VAR

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Lofty said:

Article: July 8th, 2019.

There is a pay gap in soccer, no doubt. But to the dismay of social justice warriors, they have incorrectly identified the victim of the skewed pay. It is in fact men who are not earning their fair share, comparatively.

...

In yesterday’s World Cup, participating teams received over 22 per cent of the revenue, whereas men only received seven per cent of the revenue in last year’s World Cup in Russia. Women are actually earning over three times more than men.

Because the Men’s World Cup made north of six billion dollars, that seven per cent equates to 400 million dollars for the teams.

The Women’s World Cup only earnedaround 130 million dollars, so the 22 per cent is only 30 million dollars.

Not only has the wrong victim of skewed pay been identified, but the wrong motive as well. The gap has nothing to do with “institutionalized gender discrimination” and everything to do with fewer people wanting to watch women’s soccer.

https://humanevents.com/2019/07/08/there-should-be-equal-pay-for-the-world-cup-that-means-paying-men-more/?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fduckduckgo.com%2F

All of this is just too over simplified.  It is entirely possible that the lower % on the mens side is attributable to reasons. Increased security, no stadium has ever been built for a women's world cup.... ect...  

What I don't get is why to some degree the story isn't... this.  A women's sporting event that started in 1991 in just six iterations made $130 million dollars.  That is amazing.   Why are we not, at least in passing, talking about the rate of change?  The increased TV numbers, the increased quality of play, the increased revenue, the increase in the number of programs.... in every measurable statistic you have a meteoric upward trend.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, admin said:

All of this is just too over simplified.  It is entirely possible that the lower % on the mens side is attributable to reasons. Increased security, no stadium has ever been built for a women's world cup.... ect...  

What I don't get is why to some degree the story isn't... this.  A women's sporting event that started in 1991 in just six iterations made $130 million dollars.  That is amazing.   Why are we not, at least in passing, talking about the rate of change?  The increased TV numbers, the increased quality of play, the increased revenue, the increase in the number of programs.... in every measurable statistic you have a meteoric upward trend.

It is the host country, not FIFA, that pays for infrastructure improvements:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/the-business-of-the-world-cup--who-makes-money-and-how-much.html

Your other point is a very good one. You will have to ask your question to the USWNT, who seem to be the ones making this WWC about pay and the last one about artificial playing surfaces. There is so much to celebrate but instead they choose to whine. Pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Lofty said:

It is the host country, not FIFA, that pays for infrastructure improvements:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/the-business-of-the-world-cup--who-makes-money-and-how-much.html

Your other point is a very good one. You will have to ask your question to the USWNT, who seem to be the ones making this WWC about pay and the last one about artificial playing surfaces. There is so much to celebrate but instead they choose to whine. Pathetic.

Yes, I get the bulk of it is the host country, but I seem to recall something wrt grants, studies ect.. for such things. It may not be the bulk of it... but it isn't zero iirc.  Some portion of those expenses must be passed on by the host up and down the food chain but I have no idea how it works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, admin said:

Yes, I get the bulk of it is the host country, but I seem to recall something wrt grants, studies ect.. for such things. It may not be the bulk of it... but it isn't zero iirc.  Some portion of those expenses must be passed on by the host up and down the food chain but I have no idea how it works. 

If those additional expenses are small potatoes relative to $6 billion then they don't change much.

Edited by Lofty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, admin said:

Someone somewhere must have by now written something not steeped in activism and advocacy.

It was explained to me that the two programs are paid differently.   That difference could in the end result in some men getting paid more, and many of the men being paid nothing.  That is they are paid per game, only if they step on the field.  This probably made some sense in that the men at that level all have high paying jobs to fall back on and do not rely on the money from the national team program for income.  Twist your ankle, and you don't get paid.

The women on the other hand were paid a salary.   This almost certainly made sense at one point to build the program.  A large player pool that could focus on development.  Twist your ankle and you can still recover and come back because you have a guaranteed income. 

When asked about this Rapinoe(not sure it was Rapinoe, might have been Morgan) on TV said they will not give up the guaranteed income.  In other words she wants the same money as the top paid men without the risk. 

No article I can find parses out money from FIFA, USSF.   Are USSF appearance fees being conflated with FIFA prize money? How are payments structured as per above?  Are they taking the salary and dividing over the number of games vs the FIFA prize money from a WC quarter final for the men?  All of this matters, and none of it is being made clear.  Looking for a max/min from a standpoint of activism vs honestly getting to the root of the problem.

The key take away in this is that it wasn't set up to be evil. Things were set up for a reason, and it is perfectly reasonable to reevaluate it and negotiate for more money.   My problem with all of this is the manner in which it is being done. It is utterly toxic and divisive in a manner that doesn't seem warranted. 

This is a good take. The part of the puzzle that is unclear to me is payments made by the national association. Again, I think total payments should be related to revenue generated as with any business, but without hard numbers it is impossible to know whether the women have a case there.

As a point of interest, the male England players donate all of their World Cup earnings to charity and have done for quite some time:

https://metro.co.uk/2018/07/13/england-players-donate-world-cup-wages-charity-money-goes-7711172/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, and just like in real life, the rich pay more taxes than the poor. It's absolutely so unfair to the rich!

(Hint. Substitute "women" for "poor," and "men" for "rich.")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/11/2019 at 4:19 AM, Binky said:

Ah yes, and just like in real life, the rich pay more taxes than the poor. It's absolutely so unfair to the rich!

(Hint. Substitute "women" for "poor," and "men" for "rich.")

Were you dropped on your head as a small child?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 7/6/2019 at 10:53 AM, Binky said:

Does FIFA's "Fair Play" = "Fair Pay?"

Gender equality is not only a fundamental human right, but a necessary foundation for a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world.

Total attendance for the matches played at Russia 2018 was 3,031,768.

Average attendance per game played at Russia 2018 was 47,371.

Total prize money paid out by FIFA at Russia 2018 was 350 million euro

World champions (France); 32.1 million euro

Runners up (Croatia): 23.6 million euro

Although the final attendance numbers for France 2019 will not be known until after this weekend's final two matches, we do already know how much the prize money that FIFA will pay out to each of the participating nations, which are as follows:

World Champions: 3.5 million euro

2nd place: 2.3 million euro

3rd place: 1.7 million euro

4th place: 1.4 million euro

Quarter finalists: 1.3 million euro

9th place to 16th place: 1 million euro

17th place to 24th place: 750,000 euro

Total prize money: 26.5 million euro (approximately).

While the women competed for 26.5 million euro, the men played for 350 million euro, or more than 13 times as much!!!

I ask again: Does FIFA's "Fair Play" = "Fair Pay?"

vladimir putin laughing GIF

The men's game makes more money (sponsorship, TV, ticket sales) so the prize money is better. How old are you?

Edited by Macksam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2019 at 4:59 PM, Binky said:

I think the most fair yard-stick to use in determining the equality of the prize money between the Women's World Cup Final and the Men's World Cup Final, would involve:

1) Using only data directly related to actual World Cup Final tournaments.

2) Because of the difference in the number of participating nations, and the number of matches played at Women's and Men's World Cup tournaments, to use only average numbers, instead of total numbers, for both attendance numbers and gate receipt numbers.

3) Auditing all FIFA revenue streams from all sources, i.e. ticket sales, merchandising, broadcast rights, advertising, etc.

To conduct such an undertaking would of course require the expertise of one of the largest international accounting firm. Therefore, for now, let's keep the discussion simple and focus only on the actual average attendance per match figures of both the Women's World Cup Final and the Men's World Cup Final.

Admin mentioned that tickets for the Women's World Cup Final games in France went for $9. Like what does that figure represent? Is it possible to buy a good seat for tomorrow's World Cup Final between the United States and the Netherlands for $9? If that's the case, tickets have sure come down in price since the 2015 World Cup Final in Vancouver. I know, because I attended that match. In order to be eligible to buy a ticket to the Final (the U.S.A. versus Japan), which cost a whole lot more than $9, I had to first purchase a FIFA package, which included one double-header of group matches, one round of 16 match, and one quarter final match (Canada - England). Again, for each of these tickets FIFA charged me way more than $9 a ticket. So again, maybe it is possible that you and the Voyageurs get a special rate from FIFA, but that's not my experience. BTW I will scan an image of my 2015 World Cup Final ticket and attach it to this thread if you do the same with your $9 ticket from France 2019. As a matter of fact, I could so with tickets going back as far as Italia 1990.

Anyhow, I digress. Returning to actual facts... Speaking of Canada 2015, let's look at a few FIFA figures for that tournament:

https://www.fifa.com/womensworldcup/news/key-figures-from-the-fifa-women-s-world-cup-canada-2015tm-2661648

Attendance Stats
Total attendance: 1,353,506
Average attendance: 26,029
Biggest attendance: 54,027 for the Canada vs. England quarter-final in Vancouver
Seven matches had over 50,000 spectators in attendance
Canada 2015 set a new total attendance record for a FIFA competition other than the FIFA World Cup

Thus far, I don't see Men's World Cup average attendance figures being 13 times greater than Women's World Cup average attendance figures. So on this one particular point I definitely have have to say NO - FIFA's "Fair Play" does not equal "Fair Pay."

sesame street nodding GIF

No, I think the revenues can be matched rather easily to which tournament they belong to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Macksam said:

vladimir putin laughing GIF

The men's game makes more money (sponsorship, TV, ticket sales) so the prize money is better. How old are you?

Obviously not as old as antiquated as your good ol' boys attitude is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Binky said:

Obviously not as old as antiquated as your good ol' boys attitude is.

 

No, it’s just logic and sound reasoning, try using it sometime. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Macksam said:

No, it’s just logic and sound reasoning, try using it sometime. 

I dare you to look your mother, wife and daughter straight in their eyes and tell them that men deserve more money than women for doing the same job because men are worth it and women aren't. Somehow, you just strike me as the kinda of guy who doesn't have the balls to do that!

Anyhow, I'm done communicating with you, but please feel feel to keep on embarrassing yourself in a public forum!

Edited by Binky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Binky said:

I dare you to look your mother, wife and daughter straight in their eyes and tell them that men deserve more money than women for doing the same job because men are worth it and women aren't. Somehow, you just strike me as the kinda of guy who doesn't have the balls to do that!

Anyhow, I'm done communicating with you, but please feel feel to keep on embarrassing yourself in a public forum!

Should we be paying U21 players as much as senior team players?  The U21 players are the top players in their respective group and they work just as hard as the senior team players.  Not paying them just as much as the senior team simply because they are younger is age discrimination.  Or do we pay the senior team players more because they are the ones that put butts in the seats and eyes on the TV screen?

Should Sergio Busquets be paid just as much Messi?  Both are arguably one of the best at their respective positions.  Both have worked hard to get where they are.  Both play for the same team in the same league.  Or do we pay Messi more because we value goal scorers over central mids, and Messi puts more butts in the seats and eyes on the TV screen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Binky said:

I dare you to look your mother, wife and daughter straight in their eyes and tell them that men deserve more money than women for doing the same job because men are worth it and women aren't. Somehow, you just strike me as the kinda of guy who doesn't have the balls to do that!

Anyhow, I'm done communicating with you, but please feel feel to keep on embarrassing yourself in a public forum!

200.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, AvroArrow said:

Should we be paying U21 players as much as senior team players?  The U21 players are the top players in their respective group and they work just as hard as the senior team players.  Not paying them just as much as the senior team simply because they are younger is age discrimination.  Or do we pay the senior team players more because they are the ones that put butts in the seats and eyes on the TV screen?

Should Sergio Busquets be paid just as much Messi?  Both are arguably one of the best at their respective positions.  Both have worked hard to get where they are.  Both play for the same team in the same league.  Or do we pay Messi more because we value goal scorers over central mids, and Messi puts more butts in the seats and eyes on the TV screen?

Considering Binky's reply was devoid of logic, and his/her responses are coming across as more cartoonish, she/he is probably trolling. A for effort Binky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Macksam said:

Considering Binky's reply was devoid of logic, and his/her responses are coming across as more cartoonish, she/he is probably trolling. A for effort Binky.

Robert (aka Binky) has been trolling for years. Why would this day be any different? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...