Fran Kirby

[Platypuss]

Following England's excellent run chase in the cricket last night I switched over to watch the second half of England vs Colombia. The most refreshing thing about this match was the complete lack of simulation and/or disrespect of the officials. Heartening to see and I hope that is reflective of the women's game as a whole.

Plenty of imaginary yellow cards being flashed around in the first half, unfortunately.

First half was much better as a spectacle - but England played like a pub side once Carney went off

[Royal Rother]

I used to detest and despise Oliver Holt, however, first there was his apology to Stephen Hunt and now this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-3122972/Why-trying-belittle-women-s-game.html

I'm not a fan of Holt's either, but that's a surprisingly good piece. Good to see his references to lower league/non league football and women's tennis, they both came to my mind too when reading through this thread the other day.

To be honest I think that article is almost complete rubbish. It makes completely irrelevant comparisons and ignores the whole concept of 'elite' sport.
I do agree that the knee jerk reaction from many that women's football/sport generally is rubbish and inferior simply because it is women's sport is wrong and pretty stupid. And that comparing women's football to the men's game is rather pointless. Women's sport should not be considered a version of the men's game, it should be given respect as it's own sport and judged accordingly. Unfortunately with the football the whole presentation seems to invite us to judge it against the men's game, things like the England manager calling Kirby 'mini Messi' are daft. In fact what of Sampson says seems daft and it would be great if the mone's game found coaches who weren't men who weren't good enough to work in the men's game but had a connection and passion for developing a women's game with a style and identity of it's own. Like women's tennis is a distinctive game rather than just bad men's tennis, with a different approach.
But Holt seems to think any sport should be applauded just because participants are trying, rather than for the quality they produce. This is fine for kids, or social sportsmen but at the very elite level you should demand elite performances, top class skills, innovative tactics etc etc. Just huffing and puffing and having a context really isn't enough at the top. Look at the England one day cricket team. They have had contests for years and roundly been called rubbish. Now they have adopted an attacking approach and performed superbly people are praising them. Presumably Holt would think they have deserved praise prior to this because they were out there taking part. but sorry, at the top level that is not enough.
I've seen enough junior women's football to know there are some very good players out there. The game is still developing and aim would certainly say the coaching is a weakness as much as the playing. But what I have seen of the WC has not been a particularly good advert so far and it's as patronising to the women's game to ignore the generally low skill levels, the high number of errors, the fairly uninspiring tactics etc as it is unfair to ignore the good stuff.

you say it's almost complete rubbish then proceed to agree with almost the entirety of his article.

[sandman]

Following England's excellent run chase in the cricket last night I switched over to watch the second half of England vs Colombia. The most refreshing thing about this match was the complete lack of simulation and/or disrespect of the officials. Heartening to see and I hope that is reflective of the women's game as a whole.

Plenty of imaginary yellow cards being flashed around in the first half, unfortunately.

First half was much better as a spectacle - but England played like a pub side once Carney went off

Basically a pub side without the alcoholic who screams abuse at foreigners telling them to "f[u]ck off" back to where they "came from".

[Nameless]

To be honest I think that article is almost complete rubbish. It makes completely irrelevant comparisons and ignores the whole concept of 'elite' sport.
I do agree that the knee jerk reaction from many that women's football/sport generally is rubbish and inferior simply because it is women's sport is wrong and pretty stupid. And that comparing women's football to the men's game is rather pointless. Women's sport should not be considered a version of the men's game, it should be given respect as it's own sport and judged accordingly. Unfortunately with the football the whole presentation seems to invite us to judge it against the men's game, things like the England manager calling Kirby 'mini Messi' are daft. In fact what of Sampson says seems daft and it would be great if the mone's game found coaches who weren't men who weren't good enough to work in the men's game but had a connection and passion for developing a women's game with a style and identity of it's own. Like women's tennis is a distinctive game rather than just bad men's tennis, with a different approach.
But Holt seems to think any sport should be applauded just because participants are trying, rather than for the quality they produce. This is fine for kids, or social sportsmen but at the very elite level you should demand elite performances, top class skills, innovative tactics etc etc. Just huffing and puffing and having a context really isn't enough at the top. Look at the England one day cricket team. They have had contests for years and roundly been called rubbish. Now they have adopted an attacking approach and performed superbly people are praising them. Presumably Holt would think they have deserved praise prior to this because they were out there taking part. but sorry, at the top level that is not enough.
I've seen enough junior women's football to know there are some very good players out there. The game is still developing and aim would certainly say the coaching is a weakness as much as the playing. But what I have seen of the WC has not been a particularly good advert so far and it's as patronising to the women's game to ignore the generally low skill levels, the high number of errors, the fairly uninspiring tactics etc as it is unfair to ignore the good stuff.

you say it's almost complete rubbish then proceed to agree with almost the entirety of his article.

I don' think so.
He suggests you can't criticise sport, which is rubbish.
The women's WC hasn't been very good because the standard of play has been poor. That's not comparing it to the men's game, it's just not been of a very high standard. That it is a competition doesn't mean that is enough and it cannot be criticised, just as the men's WC can't be (and isn't) immune from criticism even though it is probably the highest level of the sport.

[Jackson Corner]

Watching that dross last night made me realise how good Kelly smith was. She was by far the best woman's england player I have seen. No one in a white shirt came close last night.

[Royal Rother]

First half England were very good.

Anyone who says otherwise has ridiculous expectations.

Actually no, they're probably just on a wind up.

2nd half we played the dangerous game of defending the lead, getting deeper and deeper with little ambition of scoring again ourselves; that was extremely disappointing but presumably manager's instructions.

[Extended-Phenotype]

To be honest I think that article is almost complete rubbish. It makes completely irrelevant comparisons and ignores the whole concept of 'elite' sport.
I do agree that the knee jerk reaction from many that women's football/sport generally is rubbish and inferior simply because it is women's sport is wrong and pretty stupid. And that comparing women's football to the men's game is rather pointless. Women's sport should not be considered a version of the men's game, it should be given respect as it's own sport and judged accordingly. Unfortunately with the football the whole presentation seems to invite us to judge it against the men's game, things like the England manager calling Kirby 'mini Messi' are daft. In fact what of Sampson says seems daft and it would be great if the mone's game found coaches who weren't men who weren't good enough to work in the men's game but had a connection and passion for developing a women's game with a style and identity of it's own. Like women's tennis is a distinctive game rather than just bad men's tennis, with a different approach.
But Holt seems to think any sport should be applauded just because participants are trying, rather than for the quality they produce. This is fine for kids, or social sportsmen but at the very elite level you should demand elite performances, top class skills, innovative tactics etc etc. Just huffing and puffing and having a context really isn't enough at the top. Look at the England one day cricket team. They have had contests for years and roundly been called rubbish. Now they have adopted an attacking approach and performed superbly people are praising them. Presumably Holt would think they have deserved praise prior to this because they were out there taking part. but sorry, at the top level that is not enough.
I've seen enough junior women's football to know there are some very good players out there. The game is still developing and aim would certainly say the coaching is a weakness as much as the playing. But what I have seen of the WC has not been a particularly good advert so far and it's as patronising to the women's game to ignore the generally low skill levels, the high number of errors, the fairly uninspiring tactics etc as it is unfair to ignore the good stuff.

you say it's almost complete rubbish then proceed to agree with almost the entirety of his article.

I don' think so.
He suggests you can't criticise sport, which is rubbish.
The women's WC hasn't been very good because the standard of play has been poor. That's not comparing it to the men's game, it's just not been of a very high standard. That it is a competition doesn't mean that is enough and it cannot be criticised, just as the men's WC can't be (and isn't) immune from criticism even though it is probably the highest level of the sport.

But the men's WC was criticised in comparison to the general quality of men's football. What are you drawing on as a comparison when assessing the standard of football at the women's WC?

[Royal Rother]

On her way to Chelsea apparently.

[RoyalBlue]

On her way to Chelsea apparently.

According to Chelsea.

Typical arrogant and unacceptable behaviour from Chelsea. They should not be making public announcements about signing another club's player before the deal is done (if indeed any deal is even being considered) and whilst the player concerned is still away at a major tournament with the national team.

[Sutekh]

On her way to Chelsea apparently.

According to Chelsea.

Typical arrogant and unacceptable behaviour from Chelsea. They should not be making public announcements about signing another club's player before the deal is done (if indeed any deal is even being considered) and whilst the player concerned is still away at a major tournament with the national team.

Be good if she told them to get stuffed...

[Mr Optimist]

She won't though will she if she is offered $$$$$ by Chel$ki. Women's game mirroring the blokes where Chelski will aim to buy their way to success.

[West Stand Man]

Well, the so called 'mini Messi' has been left out again. That's 3 games in succession that she hasn't been picked and, on the evidence of the games I saw she can't justify a place in the England team. Lots of potential but she isn't quite there yet, maybe a move to Chelsea will speed that development.

[Royal Rother]

Well I'd suggest the evidence you saw was misleading.

She was our best player in the 1st game she started, scored a cracking goal and showed huge potential - experience is an issue for sure but she was a valuable member of the squad who, like everyone else, played her part.

[glass half full]

Well, the so called 'mini Messi' has been left out again. That's 3 games in succession that she hasn't been picked and, on the evidence of the games I saw she can't justify a place in the England team. Lots of potential but she isn't quite there yet, maybe a move to Chelsea will speed that development.

She's carrying an injury!

[SCIAG]

She also suffered due to the tactics and selection policy. England were a long-ball, set piece side, and there's no room for Mini Messi at Stoke.

except Bojan

[KC Royal]

Not just Chelsea who want her...

5 Live reported this morning that Chelsea, Manchester City and Arsenal are all interested. Wasn't expecting her to go quite yet

[From Despair To Where?]

This is going to sound like a really naive question but how exactly do transfers work in the women's game?

Kirby's on a full time contract so does she carry a transfer value? Can the club slap an asking price on her and refuse to sell? Do we get compensation for her being under 24 or is it more or less free agency and the players can move at will with the club having little say?

[YateleyRoyal]

Beeb reporting she could go for a record fee - between 40 and 80k.

[Pepe the Horseman]

Surprised she's generated so much interest from one good game. Fair play. Guess the Mini Messi gimmick has done the job.

[tidus_mi2]

I know the women's game is on a much smaller scale than the men's game, in that case what does 40-80k get you financially? Obviously it seems like a pittance when compared to fees in men's football but how far does 40-80k go in the women's game?