Reading FC Womens World

[windermereROYAL]

Would i be right in saying the keeper Earps played or Reading too?

[blythspartan]

Would i be right in saying the keeper Earps played or Reading too?

Yes she did. I think she left Reading to join a side in Germany.

[Nameless]

What a quality performance from Fran Kirby today. I prefer watching the England women to the men. Fingers crossed for Sunday.

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

[Norfolk Royal]

What a quality performance from Fran Kirby today. I prefer watching the England women to the men. Fingers crossed for Sunday.

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

[Nameless]

What a quality performance from Fran Kirby today. I prefer watching the England women to the men. Fingers crossed for Sunday.

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agreed
I was referring to the actual on the pitch game rather than anything else.
One thing that does slightly grate is the people who go on about there being no dissent, no diving, no cynical fouls in the women’s game. There clearly are all those things.

[Norfolk Royal]

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agreed
I was referring to the actual on the pitch game rather than anything else.
One thing that does slightly grate is the people who go on about there being no dissent, no diving, no cynical fouls in the women’s game. There clearly are all those things.

Yes there are, and hope it doesn't creep in more, but increased financial rewards will probably make that happen unfortunately.

It doesn't help when the referee fails to book the Swedish player in the first half for a clear professional foul, then books her later for another. That would have been a two yellows sending off in the men's game and rightly so. Had she been booked for the first foul then the second professional foul would in all likelihood never have happened as she would have known she would be sent off.

What you don't see is the squaring up and posturing, mass shoving, headbutts etc that you see in the Premiership.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

What a quality performance from Fran Kirby today. I prefer watching the England women to the men. Fingers crossed for Sunday.

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

[Norfolk Royal]

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

I've heard that argument put but don't agree with it, think it would detract from the game.

The real answer to the goalkeeper issue, for intance, is for the goalkeepers to be better. They don't seem to have improved at the same rate as the outfield players.

This is partly due to size, which is where the argument on making the goal smaller comes in.

But surely the solution to that is for the goalkeepers to improve, in agility, aggression, and for them to be bigger and taller, negating the need for smaller goals.

There are plenty of six-foot plus, (minimum for the men's game now) women athletes playing in netball and basketball for instance. Increased rewards could see those athletes moving across to football, possibly to the detriment of the other sports. It's about increased participation really.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

I've heard that argument put but don't agree with it, think it would detract from the game.

The real answer to the goalkeeper issue, for intance, is for the goalkeepers to be better. They don't seem to have improved at the same rate as the outfield players.

This is partly due to size, which is where the argument on making the goal smaller comes in.

But surely the solution to that is for the goalkeepers to improve, in agility, aggression, and for them to be bigger and taller, negating the need for smaller goals.

There are plenty of six-foot plus, (minimum for the men's game now) women athletes playing in netball and basketball for instance. Increased rewards could see those athletes moving across to football, possibly to the detriment of the other sports. It's about increased participation really.

Yeah that's true as well, it was more a short-term suggestion for a general improvement in the game, however I agree that the increase in participation and general improvement in the women's game shouldn't be micromanaged.

My brother is starting a new job which is heavily involved in promoting girls/women's football, so hopefully I'll get an insight into where the game needs to be improved still.

[Franchise FC]

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

I've heard that argument put but don't agree with it, think it would detract from the game.

The real answer to the goalkeeper issue, for intance, is for the goalkeepers to be better. They don't seem to have improved at the same rate as the outfield players.

This is partly due to size, which is where the argument on making the goal smaller comes in.

But surely the solution to that is for the goalkeepers to improve, in agility, aggression, and for them to be bigger and taller, negating the need for smaller goals.

There are plenty of six-foot plus, (minimum for the men's game now) women athletes playing in netball and basketball for instance. Increased rewards could see those athletes moving across to football, possibly to the detriment of the other sports. It's about increased participation really.

Steve Death was no giant but I don’t recall the goals being resized for him. Didn’t seem to stop him being very good

[Norfolk Royal]

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

I've heard that argument put but don't agree with it, think it would detract from the game.

The real answer to the goalkeeper issue, for intance, is for the goalkeepers to be better. They don't seem to have improved at the same rate as the outfield players.

This is partly due to size, which is where the argument on making the goal smaller comes in.

But surely the solution to that is for the goalkeepers to improve, in agility, aggression, and for them to be bigger and taller, negating the need for smaller goals.

There are plenty of six-foot plus, (minimum for the men's game now) women athletes playing in netball and basketball for instance. Increased rewards could see those athletes moving across to football, possibly to the detriment of the other sports. It's about increased participation really.

Steve Death was no giant but I don’t recall the goals being resized for him. Didn’t seem to stop him being very good

Yes, but that was more down to his amazing agility though which isn't shared by any of the women's team goalkeepers I've seen. That's what I mean about the standard improving being the answer really.

[blythspartan]

What a quality performance from Fran Kirby today. I prefer watching the England women to the men. Fingers crossed for Sunday.

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

I wasn’t really comparing tbh. I just enjoy watching the England women play more than I do the men. I feel that the women are more down to earth but that’s just my perception. Tbf the current England mens team seem okay but prior to that I thought that most of them were just overpaid jumped up little shits but again that’s just my opinion. I don’t love football as much as I used to.

[RoyalBlue]

I don’t think comparing the women and men works, however there are times when I think the women look better than the men, some of the awareness of space and speed of passing is brilliant. Other times it seems hopelessly naive. It’s been enjoyable to watch and players like Beth Mead should deservedly be recognised as genuine stars of the game

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

If you value your health & well being, don't ever float that suggestion with female footballers, particularly goalkeepers! And, BTW, the Swedish keeper was beaten by poor positioning and a great finish, not lack of height. She also happens to be a shade over 5 foot 10 inches, so not exactly short. Steve Death was just 5 foot 7 inches (the same height as Mary Earps who yesterday made a great save at full stretch just under her bar) and I can't recall anyone ever suggesting the goal needed to be smaller for him!.

[RoyalBlue]

Would i be right in saying the keeper Earps played or Reading too?

Yes she did. I think she left Reading to join a side in Germany.

Wolfsburg, but only played for their first team on 4 occasions.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

If you value your health & well being, don't ever float that suggestion with female footballers, particularly goalkeepers! And, BTW, the Swedish keeper was beaten by poor positioning and a great finish, not lack of height. She also happens to be a shade over 5 foot 10 inches, so not exactly short. Steve Death was just 5 foot 7 inches (the same height as Mary Earps who yesterday made a great save at full stretch just under her bar) and I can't recall anyone ever suggesting the goal needed to be smaller for him!.

My point was more in the principle, rather than specific examples that will always contradict the "norm". The average goalkeeper height in the WSL is 5ft 8", compared to about 6ft 3" in the men's Premier League (depending on what source you use and when). Encouraging involvement will help rectify that, but it may be better for the game to be played differently for different people.

For example, you don't play a 7-a-side game on a 11-a-side pitch and vice versa, it's adapted to it's environment. Particularly when you're wanting to encourage people to watch the game as well, more eye-catching, aesthetically pleasing moments would drive that, for me personally anyway. It's all subjective though, for example, it can be spun on the other end of the coin and say that smaller goalkeepers in bigger goals would potentially lead to more goals being scored, thus more entertaining games etc. It depends on how something "looks" to you.

[muirinho]

I think comparing the women's game to the men's works on some levels, particularly with regard to the money involved and general administration of the two games.

However, comparing the quality of the players doesn't work and is pointless. What people should be appreciating is the vast improvement in standard and the qualities of the individual athlete when judged against their peers.

So Fran Kirby is the most skilful player on the pitch, Millie Bright is a beast of a player, Russo has got all the tricks, etc, etc.

Agree in terms of improvement and vast rise of the women's game, some of the things I was watching from our women yesterday was actually really good on a technical level.

However, there are some things that I watched that were also really poor. I know every goalkeeper, man or woman, is prone to an error, but it's the "look" of an error. For example, Fran Kirby's goal when the Swedish keeper just wasn't tall enough, when stretching, to save the ball and it just looked so poor.

If there is one other improvement I'd make to the women's game, it would be making the pitches slightly smaller and the net's slightly smaller as well.

If you value your health & well being, don't ever float that suggestion with female footballers, particularly goalkeepers! And, BTW, the Swedish keeper was beaten by poor positioning and a great finish, not lack of height. She also happens to be a shade over 5 foot 10 inches, so not exactly short. Steve Death was just 5 foot 7 inches (the same height as Mary Earps who yesterday made a great save at full stretch just under her bar) and I can't recall anyone ever suggesting the goal needed to be smaller for him!.

Camogie is the girls form of hurling in Ireland. Originally, when it was first codified, camogie was played on a shorter pitch as it was thought that girls wouldn't be strong or fit enough for the full size pitch. They eventually had to change it to the full-size pitch as basically every puck-out by the goalie was landing practically at the other goal-mouth. And the midfield was constantly being bypassed entirely. Because the girls and women who play are getting fitter and stronger every year.

Waste of time fiddling with the pitch and goal size for football in my opinion - as the game develops you'll only end up having to change them again.

Accept that it's a slightly different game - more "technical" and less "physical". More fluid maybe as well.

[Royals and Racers]

WSL TV fixtures announced for the beginning of the season and the Royals match at Man Utd at Leigh Sports village is now on SKY on Saturday September 17th at 12 Noon- 1st team are at Wigan that day under 10 miles away KO 3pm !

[morganb]

WSL TV fixtures announced for the beginning of the season and the Royals match at Man Utd at Leigh Sports village is now on SKY on Saturday September 17th at 12 Noon- 1st team are at Wigan that day under 10 miles away KO 3pm !

With the stripey arms in mind, they could share a coach up and back

[Royals and Racers]

Royals have 2 pre season friendlies over the next 2 Sunday`s- open to the public ( although you wouldn`t know from the Reading website/social media)
Sunday August 7th Bristol City away at the Robins high performance centre KO 2pm
Sunday August 14th Birmingham City away at St Andrews KO 2pm

[Jackson Corner]

Record season ticket sales for our womens team. 12 so far. I am kidding of course but if there is not an improved interest now then we may as well give up. The £10 parking is a A real turn off as there is no bus service to games.
I would like to see local girls teams given free tickets.