How to Grow Women's Pro-Cycling

[oldroadman]

If, as an experiment, women's raci g got the same coverage as men for a year, and then the TV audience was measured to see if the money spent was warranted by viewing figures, would that make resal happy? Because in the end at a professional level, what matters is numbers. All the other stuff about prize money and whatever is a second tier matter.
It's a bit sad when someone manages to have a go at people they probably don't even know at BC. But let's not let solid facts get in the way of a lively discussion, eh?

 

[Flying_Monkey]

It's a bit sad when someone manages to have a go at people they probably don't even know at BC. But let's not let solid facts get in the way of a lively discussion, eh?

I think you'll find that resal has quite a lot of experience in cycle racing in the UK. Just because someone has a different point of view of certain things or people from you does not mean they 'don't know' those things or people.

And no, viewing figures are not the be-all and end-all - if that was the case, female tennis players would actually get paid more than men, women's tennis being more popular. It is not a free market - and nor should it be - It is a rigged market. We can either arrange it to favour more just and equitable social goals or we can arrange it to favour the status quo. Whatever your experience and your knowledge of the (male) sport, your attitude seems to indicate that you aren't much interested in the former.

 

[black'n'yellow]

Now where near enough to mount 200 strong fields and three week stage races.

Number of women's entries received for Welsh National Circuit Race Champs 2011 = 2 - not even enough for a full podium, let alone an interesting race. The category wasn't even run for this year's champs at Builth Wells. If it carries on like that, there won't be any women racing in a few years...

Fellas - either you are not listening, or you are not getting it. The problems in Women's cycling are the ones that smokin joe outlined on page 1 and I outlined on page 2. The 'top down' approach is not sustainable for those reasons...

 

[resal]

If, as an experiment, women's raci g got the same coverage as men for a year, and then the TV audience was measured to see if the money spent was warranted by viewing figures, would that make resal happy? Because in the end at a professional level, what matters is numbers. All the other stuff about prize money and whatever is a second tier matter.
It's a bit sad when someone manages to have a go at people they probably don't even know at BC. But let's not let solid facts get in the way of a lively discussion, eh?

A scenario is proposed that has no connection with reality and a conclusion assumed. That does not make "solid fact". plcs are required to have policies on corporate governance - fact. I am not aware of any that promote discrimination by race, colour of skin or gender. All, that I am aware of, promote precisely the opposite. However, a good number, but certainly not all, allow their marketing agencies to hoodwink them into programs supporting sports, that in their design are discriminatory. Some plcs recognise this and walk away or change the terms of reference of their involvement.

"Bottom up" has been tried for over 30 years now. If you followed women's road cycling you would understand that in the last 8 years it has been in serious decline. The market is rigged and as flying monkey puts it so well, not with any sense of anything approaching a morally sustainable viewpoint but one that entrenches an attitude that has required legislation to remove it from many aspects of human activity, in many societies around the World, e.g. employment legislation - you cannot discriminate in terms of payment, by gender. That was a rigged market and at the time, just as many cave men were saying that women just were not worth as much as the equivalent male because of "x", "y" or "z".

Oldroadman, I am not going to change your mind just as I am not going to be able to help you understand how contradictory your statement above is and how you will appear to others who do not share your prejudices.

 

[oldroadman]

Well that's me told then. I know nothing, after all these years in the sport and working with various teams (including women), nothing learned. I accept I am a prejudiced old bloke just working away in a sport he loves, doing what I can to make it better for us all, irrespective of gender, race, colour, inclinination. Experience indicates that a steady evolution approach gets things accepted, whereas revolution may seem OK until the counter-revolution comes. Better just carry on quietly and ignore the insults, eh?

 

[thom]

Wiggle join sponsorship of women's cycling : Wiggle - Honda.
Sounds like the deal is good for the athletes in terms of wages.
Given Brad's involvement, the Wiggo Wiggle - Honda (try saying that quickly) tie up is destined for great things (at least alliteratively).

They'll be riding Colnago bikes, slate grey with Orange highlights (hairdresser bike?). No doubt soon there will be replicas available through the online site. Quite interesting to see if Colnagos, like Pinarellos become much more common place on UK roads, like the BMW vs Merc rivalry.

Can't help thinking this is a great idea for a tie-up. Wiggle customers are knowing cyclists with funds. Merchandising is going to be dead easy to make available and you can't help think Wiggle's clientele will like the idea of assisting funding those nice GB women cyclists.

 

[black'n'yellow]

The team is great news, but the only downside is that Wiggle has now dumped all of its other sponsored riders, leaving a lot of promising talent (male and female) without support for next year.

 

[oldroadman]

The team is great news, but the only downside is that Wiggle has now dumped all of its other sponsored riders, leaving a lot of promising talent (male and female) without support for next year.

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction...only so much money to go round and operating at a high level is not cheap. How many riders did Wiggle actually properly employ (as opposed to dishing out kit and bikes plus a bit of travel), because they didn't seem to have huge impact in press coverage?

 

[snailracer]

Professional sport is a double-edged sword. While it can sometimes promote participation at the grass-roots level, it also distorts sport into entertainment, no better than watching pop videos or soap operas on TV. Sitting on my @rse watching a bike race/footie match, buying overpriced replica team kit or Wiggo's wheels/Beckham's boots - how does that benefit me, really? It mainly benefits those who make money from the sales, while making me poorer and fatter.

Nobody cries discrimination that so few men (AFAIK) watch "Desperate Housewives", or buy the products "placed" on "Sex and the City" or what designer clothes the stars wear to the Oscars. Pro sport, to non-sporty people (men and women) is no different from any other entertainment they buy into. It may simply be that women choose to spend their leisure money on different things.

This thread presupposes that women would spend their leisure money on pro-cycling, if only we "sold" it to them better. That might be true, but then we are simply discussing sales tactics, to which the ethics of fairness and discrimination are superfluous.

 

[resal]

Professional sport is a double-edged sword. ..........
This thread presupposes that women would spend their leisure money on pro-cycling, if only we "sold" it to them better. That might be true, but then we are simply discussing sales tactics, to which the ethics of fairness and discrimination are superfluous.

If only.

It is not about selling anything to anybody because the market is so rigged nobody gets to see the product. It won't evolve in a billion years. It can't. It gets no oxygen or water. In shop terms it is still in the brown box it came in out the back. Nobody is going to buy it because it is not on the shelf. At the Olympics, when it was available to be viewed by mass viewership, that mass viewership did not give a fig what sex the competitors were. People just saw boys and girls trying equally hard and doing heroic deeds.

That is why the "fariness" has to be put in at the point where the unfairness is generated and that is right at the start. You want to sponsor a team - here it is - male and female. Then the sponsors would quickly start squealing if the money they spent on the XX chromosome athletes did not get the coverage that their investment in the XY chromosome athletes garnered. Market forces would then come into play.

 

[oldroadman]

Partially agree there, without exposure a product does not sell - simple.
Look at the example quoted, the Olympics, and the audience settled to watch GB competitors in many sports, regardless of gender. The Olympic RR for men disappointed many, but the women's race in nasty conitions was a classic. At Putney bridge, where I was standing in the wet, the crowd was still there when the camion balai canme through with a little group about 20 minutes down, still cheering them - great.
That said, the Olympics were a "special effect" in that people did watch an awful lot of sport, so it's hard to get a true measure of whether a major women's race would get the audience. Mind, if most races were as brutal and fierce as the Olymopic one, the word would soon go around, the the audience numbers would start showing, and in would come the sponsors and organisers.
The idea of compelling teams to have men and women sections has an interesting issue - looking at BC site's annual report I think women are about 15-16% of the members, and about 40% have a race licence.
So, there may be a problem actually finding riders of a sufficient quality to justify any domestic sponsor paying wages - the last thing women's racing needs is a situation where a few class riders dominate and the rest simply trail in via small groups, that is not the spectacle that is needed. Which domestically can be the problem, either that or a very negative and steady paced ecvent with a sprint finish.
Resal may have a view on the last point, I am not convinced that simply compelling sponsors and organisers will have the effect expected, rather it might discourage them from investing in the first place, which helps nobody of either gender, or the sport in general.

 

[Zofo]

Isn't the problem that we're not really bothered much by female sports? It's not as if this is a cycling problem - we don't care about women's football either. If that sport isn't going anywhere, then what chance does cycling have?

Let's face it most men - who after all are the main target audience for sports viewing, aren't remotely interested in women's sport apart from maybe tennis and beach volleyball.

 

[resal]

Let's face it most men - who after all are the main target audience for sports viewing, aren't remotely interested in women's sport apart from maybe tennis and beach volleyball.

This was the unthinking commentator's (believe me I am being as kind as I can) trump card to any argument stating that women's sports had an audience, before this summer. Sadly the mega viewing figures showed that the public did not care about the genitalia attached to the athletes. They viewed it for what it was - the drama of boys and girls turning themselves inside out, in an attempt to win. We watched it all.

What that did exposed was the misogyny of the sporting press and the fallacy of that argument. The censorship they exercise, playing out their own prejudices, then masquerades as the "preferred" option. And if we doubt that the press are like that - just look at the Lance debacle. Too many of them have been too damned lazy and spineless to report on what every single one of them knew was happening. Not the sharpest tools in the box and add to that - without principle. It was just too darned easy to keep their snouts in the gravy train. Look at the screaming now going on about Ligget, Sherwin and Watson. Look at the writings of Fotheringham and Gallagher. Gallagher folded under pressure from Sky over his Yates story. Pathetic. I nearly spewed when I read the peace here http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/blog/535201/how-armstrong-tried-to-bully-us.html from Robert Garbutt trying to pose as "we were not in the Lance camp". I had taken Cycling Weekly all my life and one of the things that made me give up was Lance appearing on every dam* cover and pages of "Lance blows his nose", inside.

Does Garbutt really think we have such short memories ? I don't need to assert that this collective pack are a spineless bunch, they have proved it with how they have behaved over the past 14 years and the 180° spin they are attempting to foist on us now.

By all means spout their mantras - "There is no audience for women's sport". But all that does is place you firmly in a camp with a bunch of people who found it easier to sit around and cheer on Lance and bought his yellow wrist bands. It did not make sense years ago and it certainly looks ridiculous now.

 

[resal]

I did not come here to respond as I did above but I happened to be reading some motoring history. Post WW 2 on the rally scene there were a pile of female rally drivers, winning the Alpine Rally and things. Ann Wisdom, Pat Moss, Mary Handley Page. So why hasn't motor sport evolved so that Formula 1 now see equal representation? Since the motive power for the vehicles is not human generated, surely it becomes an equal playing field ? Is it that cars are complicated things and dumb women have trouble with fitting their handbags in and stuff ? Girlies just can't drive - I have seen it loads of times in the car park at Tescos - believe me, they only look in the mirror to check their make up ?

Trash the physiology arguments, this mirrors exactly what is at play in cycling. It is a male dominated sport that rigs the market to make sure women don't progress. In half a century since the female rally drivers were making an impact they have been shoved back. Nothing evolves anywhere whilst there is a rigged market. And only one thing is doing the shoving.

It certainly is not a nice concept. We know that in a racial sense it is so disgusting it would get the perpetrators locked up in jail. Face it - it is going on in our sport.

"No - cycling is good an healthy only nice people ride bikes !"

Yeah that is why the World's greatest sporting fraud took place on a bike aided and abetted by all those "nice" fans.

 

[Marshmallow_Fluff]

someone's a bit bitter lately..