laurence
Veteran
This is quite heart-warming
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/fan-funded-womens-team-nearly-a-reality
i've pledged my £100 for this.
This is quite heart-warming
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/fan-funded-womens-team-nearly-a-reality
and there is the rub.
in nearly every sport, and FM has rightly pointed at one of the few exceptions, if you picked the top 5, 10, 50 or 100 performers in the world for a dream team regardless of gender how many of them would be women? Then there is a question to ask about how inevitable this is given nearly all the sports are designed by men for men and women just take them up.
Take women's soccer, or rugby union. Knowing that on average elite women players generally don't have the strength and power and speed of their male peers why are they expected to perform on a pitch the same size as their male counterparts? The playing field is literally wrong. Why do the women themselves cavil at the idea of a slightly smaller pitch in both sports? The result of mismatch of pitch and players renders watching the women's elite games as something like non-league soccer or community rugby and isn't a great advert for elite women's sport.
So with cycling. If you made event 'open' and say had a field of 100 men and 100 women how many of the women are going to get top 20 places let alone podium finishes. Sure there's plenty of gurls who can kick my butt on and off road on a bike but then I'm not the sort of person they are racing against.
Men are the main consumers of sport as spectators, sports generally have been designed for men by men and women are therefore at a double disadvantage.
Yeah definitely and the UCI could if they wanted create a disincentive for races not to do so by reducing the status of races that don't do so. What is more important ? A fair equitable sport or that MSR is a bastion of alpha males ?Vos calls for women's versions of the one-days classics. Too right. There might well be arguments around the GTs, but I can't see any good reason why there shouldn't be women's versions of most big one-day races. With good co-ordination, they could be held on the same weekend or even the day; disruption would not be much greater than with just the men's race, and it would mean even bigger crowds and greater economic benefits.
True but what's more important ? An equitable sport or a sportive ?Consecutive days on a weekend might be problematic given that most classics now run a sportif the day before.
Consecutive days on a weekend might be problematic given that most classics now run a sportif the day before.
True but what's more important ? An equitable sport or a sportive ?
point takenIt wasn't really a comment on desirability, more of a comment on appetite from race organisers. FM suggested running a women's event alongside the men's would be relatively straight-forward and would generate bigger crowds and revenue. I'm not so sure given that it would likely involve loss of sportive-related income. Doesn't mean to say that it isn't the right thing to do.
It wasn't really a comment on desirability, more of a comment on appetite from race organisers. FM suggested running a women's event alongside the men's would be relatively straight-forward and would generate bigger crowds and revenue. I'm not so sure given that it would likely involve loss of sportive-related income. Doesn't mean to say that it isn't the right thing to do.