Women versus men: the gender imbalance in football

At the beginning of June it was that time again. The ultimate gender comparison. man against woman. Or better: team against… yes, what actually? femininity? It may sound strange, but according to Duden it is a valid word for a “team consisting of female members”. Although most of us may need some time to get used to it.

But back to the gender comparison. Well, the team that played there recently was a team of ex-semi-professionals from English fifth-division club Wrexham. The woman is a selection of American football players, led by world champion and three-time Olympic champion Heather O’Reilly (38) and interspersed with other ex-internationals. The encounter was part of a tournament in the US state of North Carolina in which 32 teams from around the world competed for a prize pool of one million dollars. The result: Wrexham won 12–0 after two 20-minute games.

It was a very unequal battle

You only have to watch a few clips from the match to conclude: it was a very unequal fight. Just like the two other group matches against men’s teams, after which the American women left the tournament with three losses and a goal difference of 1:24 for the knockout phase. A result that is of course grist to the mill of those who have always known it: the best female football players are not yet fifth-rate compared to their male colleagues.

Could be. But what’s the point of this comparison? In every biology book you can read that women are in worse shape on average. Height, weight, muscle mass, lung and heart volume – men have a few percent more of everything competitive athletes need. Serena and Venus Williams had to admit that at the beginning of their careers, when they challenged a man in the tennis world rankings around 200 to a duel just for fun – and were mercilessly inferior. Or Lindsey Vonn, whose fervent desire to compete against men in the Ski World Cup never got beyond the stage of a PR joke.

Comparisons are counterproductive

Strictly speaking, such comparisons are counterproductive. Because they mainly serve to discredit women’s sports in relation to men’s sports. Or, at best, to smile softly. For example, in a World Cup for women, it is completely irrelevant that the matches have a few percent less speed or athleticism than the top level for men. In the end, it becomes exciting and entertaining as teams meet as equals and strive with all their passion for the greatest possible success.

And if it does come to a «battle of the sexes», the focus can really only be on fun. Like with the football players around O’Reilly, who could easily see their bankruptcies against the men. They are “super proud,” said O’Reilly, adding: “Hopefully we showed everyone that you just have to do your thing. Live, be brave, dare something.”

Clear evidence of the strong development of women’s football

Your colleagues from the current national team would probably like to mince words at this point. When the World Cup in Australia and New Zealand starts next Thursday, the record world champions around superstars Megan Rapinoe and Alex Morgan are the absolute top favorites. A defeat – even by significantly fewer than 12 goals conceded – would mean the end of the world for the American women, who have not been beaten since the 2020 Olympic final.

But the days when 90 percent of opponents were cannon fodder are over for women, too. The fact that there are no longer any “little ones” here and that the regular victories like 20 years ago are a thing of the past, are clear proof of the rapid development of women’s football. Much more than any comparison with the men.

You get the next “by the ball” in a week. Then the women on the field will show that they don’t have to hide behind the men.