BBC Sport writers Anna Thompson and Aimee Lewis recently published an article bemoaning the huge gulf in the amount of prize money men and women receive in sport.
In this article, the British Minister for Sport, Helen Grant MP, declared that [sports must engage] “in the battle for gender balance and fairness.” This came after BBC Sport’s study which showed that in 30% of sports men are paid more than women.
Grant said in an interview with BBC Sport:
“There is a gap, it needs to be closed but it’s not going to happen overnight. We do know that women’s sport is very exciting, we know it can draw really big audiences but we need more media coverage and more commercial investment,”
“It’s not just about the bottom line and profits and the return on investment which I believe they will get, it’s also taking part in the battle for gender balance and fairness in the 21st century.”
The amount of money a sport generates is down to profits, investment and how many people watch it. The more a sport is watched, the more money is made through tickets sold and TV and commercial revenue, and the more likely it is for investors to pump money into the sport. This is the same in any form of entertainment: if nobody watched or turned up to Glastonbury Festival or the Proms next summer, how much money would the organisers make? Mrs Grant seems to be stepping dangerously close to the belief that a group of evil men in suits sit around deciding exactly what athletes are paid, not paying any attention at all to how much money their sports are generating.
It is not about “the battle for gender balance,” it is about encouraging more women to play sport, encouraging more people to watch women’s sport and for women’s sport to “draw really big audiences.”
There is no question that most women’s sports are either already, or have the potential to be, every bit as entertaining as their men’s equivalents. In fact, many of the larger sports, such as tennis, athletics and track cycling, see both genders draw in similar viewing figures: this is reflected in the fact that men and women receive equal prize money. In fact, in tennis there is currently a debate amongst the professionals as to whether women should be paid as much as men, considering they play fewer sets, but that is for another time. This proves conclusively that when the women’s version of a sport is watched as much as the men’s, both are paid equally.
Anna Thompson and Aimee Lewis really begin to throw their toys out of their respective prams when it comes to football. The German men were paid £21million more for winning the 2014 World Cup than the Japanese women were for winning the female equivalent in 2011. This is no mystery: the men’s World Cup Final is the most watched event in sport; how many of you reading this even knew that Japan won the women’s World Cup three years ago? Male footballers’ names are plastered across billboards, TV screens and magazines. In Britain, the vast majority of people know who the likes of David Beckham, Wayne Rooney and Steven Gerrard are; only dedicated football fans are familiar with such greats as Rachel Yankey, Kelly Smith and Alex Scott.
Without a doubt, women’s football is very entertaining. Though it has not been a professional sport for long—another reason why it will take time for women to receive the same prize money as men—the technical brilliance on display whether in England, the USA, Canada, Brazil or anywhere else is easily as good as the men’s. Few female players have quite the physical prowess of the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo, Gareth Bale and—excuse my Arsenal bias—Alexis Sanchez, for the same reason that the women’s shot put world record will never equal that of the men’s, and perhaps that is one reason why women’s football doesn’t quite have the appeal of the hard-and-fast Barclays Premier League. However, there is no question that more people should be watching women’s football than currently do: only 15,000 people turned up to the women’s FA Cup Final, compared to the 90,000 at Wembley to see Arsenal win their first trophy in nine years (I apologise again).
Efforts are being made to change this. The FA’s Director of Women’s Football, Kelly Simmons, told BBC Sport:
“The men’s game is a huge multi-million pound industry so when you compare it to the women’s game, which until three or four years ago was played by amateurs, the gulf is enormous.
“We are investing £12m in women’s football this year but we want to direct that investment where we think it will have the biggest impact and at the moment we do not think that is in prize funds.”
Simmons has hit the nail on the head. Instead of throwing money at glamorous prize funds, it would be a much better idea to put the money into getting more women playing football and increasing the audience for women’s football.
There are some women’s sports which still need developing, such as cricket. Due to the fact that the bowlers are slower and the batsmen are less powerful than in the men’s game, the sport needs to be played on a slightly smaller scale: pitches need to be smaller to increase the number of boundaries scored and, as a result, the scoring rate which, inevitably, is what brings viewers in. If you think that this is patronising towards women I’ll point you in the direction of sports such as the hurdles, where women only run 100m, compared to the men’s 110m, and have to jump over smaller hurdles; the javelin, where the men throw a heavier spear; and golf, where women play on shorter courses to compensate for the fact that they cannot hit the ball as far as men. It’s not a case of making life for the dear little girls easier, it’s a simple case of logic.
Women’s sport, in general, is not as popular as men’s. This needs to change, as both are equally entertaining. Over time, more people will begin to watch various women’s sports as more and more interesting reports emerge. Efforts need to be made to give women’s sport more media coverage, as investors will not back events they fear will not get exposure. Times are changing and more women are being given the exposure they deserve. Hopefully, in time, more sports will see both genders being watched and paid equally.
As stated earlier, prize money is not a fixed value decided according to how sexist or non-sexist officials are. It is decided by how much money a sport generates. Instead of angrily stating that men are paid more than women without offering a solution, go for the Kelly Simmons approach and make an effort to change things.
Thank you for reading. Please take a moment to follow me on Twitter @LastWordOnHugo. Support LWOS by following us on Twitter – @LastWordOnSport – and “liking” our Facebook page.
For the latest in sports injury news, check out our friends at Sports Injury Alert.
Have you tuned into Last Word On Sports Radio? LWOS is pleased to bring you 24/7 sports radio to your PC, laptop, tablet or smartphone. What are you waiting for? GO!
