In the lawsuit, filed in United States District Court in Los Angeles, the 28 players accused the federation of engaging in “institutionalized gender discrimination.” The issues, the athletes said, affected not only their paychecks but also where they played and how often, how they trained, the medical treatment and coaching they received, and even how they traveled to matches.

One of the biggest differences in compensation is the multimillion-dollar bonuses the teams receive for participating in the World Cup, but those bonuses — a pool of $400 million for 32 men’s teams versus $30 million for 24 women’s teams — are determined by FIFA, world soccer’s governing body, not U.S. Soccer.

enter link description here

To suggest that women don't work just as hard at their sport is quite stupid.

Who ever suggest that?? you bring up statement that is simply bizarre and not true.

crappy pay that means they won't get even slightly rewarded for their sacrifices and effort?

Are you kidding??? Football in general has the highest earn in the history of human kind, they play a sport and earn the sum in a week that some family work for a life time.

Now if woman football strike for getting paid to deserve their effort, that's a different story, they bring in the gender card, they want to earn as man football. That's what we are discussing about and bring in all economic models....

I support to make Women football as success as they can be, but fact are fact. I, my circle and most of my friends, we have a few days a week that we even have time to sit down infront of the TV and relax and watch football, now there is a Barca vs Juventus, then there is a Women Barca vs. Juventus... I will watch the man game, it's simply my preference in all aspects. That means there will be more revenue, more TV ads money etc...

Sigh

What makes people want to become professional footballers? crappy pay that means they won't get even slightly rewarded for their sacrifices and effort?

Um, not quite. They get rewarded in accordance with what they earn and bring in. As many people here have noted, the payment in question is reliant upon attracting viewing figures and revenue. If there is crappy interest level, then the pay will be crappy as a result. I mean, how much do you think male players in the MLS get paid? A source I found says the average is $350k a year. That's what the average PL player makes in a month. You COULD tell the MLS to simply pay as much as the PL clubs do, but they can't, because the interest level in the US is not high enough to support those earnings through revenue.

And that's the male players. Imagine the problem being compounded for women's football.

If you want more numbers playing the game so that there are more girls playing then more women playing, there needs to be incentive

But I don't think you understand. For women in the US, football is already THE game, and THE sport. Every high school and college in the country has a women's football team now. It's been pushed to the Moon for the exact reasons you've been describing. The problem is: hardly anyone wants to watch it, even in the US.

The issue at hand is not whether or not women should be encouraged to get into football, because they already are. The issue is whether or not women's football is as much of a draw as men's football, and the simple answer is No. If you want to increase interest and viewing figures, the only gap to close is not the wage gap, but the ability gap, and if you can't, then it's time to stop whining about it.

in the end of the day, your opinion will remain the same if you don't actually want the women's game to succeed.

What exactly is the obligation any of us are under to want that? I mean, I have nothing against women's football, but I am not in favour of subsidizing it with the man's game just to try and force people to watch it. You seem more concerned with the optics of wanting the women to succeed, but you don't really detail what success actually means. Does it mean becoming the number one sport for women in places like the US, UK and Australia? That already happened. Does it mean becoming as popular as the men's game? In that case it's an issue of quality, and as everyone has noted, women aren't as good as men at football. Basically, the success you're talking about requires the women to become as good as the men, and that's the hold up.

I'm quite sure that women have to go through other challenges that male footballers don't have to, mainly such as balancing playing professionally with their full time because they can't live off the pay that they make from their footballing career.

You're describing every single male player who doesn't play in the top leagues, too. Again, the high revenues which enable higher payment in the top echelons of male football are due to the extremely high standards that game has reached. Until women's football improves to be better than lower-league male football, it frankly doesn't warrant being paid any better.

That's not a challenge that 'women' face due to the fact that they are women. It's something female football players face because they're not as good as the top male players.

to suggest that that is a problem with sexism as opposed to the American system of allocating funds means you are misdirecting your vitriol.

Sorry, but No. There is no problem with the allocation of funds in the US football system. To suggest that that there is, and to propose that men be charged to help out the ladies, is in fact sexism. Men are not responsible for this problem, either in terms of causing it or being morally obligated to fix it.

you guys are really jumping to assumptions here. I never said that I think they should be earning the same as men, I never said that they are even close to the same level as men in terms of quality. Like I ALREADY said in a previous post; "the women's game is about 30 years behind the men's game" (and a lot of the reason why the women's game is so far behind is because for a very long time they weren't even allowed to play. Imagine that, you complain about the women's game not being high quality when who knows, it could've had a much bigger following and been self-sustaining at this point in time if they never got fucking banned.

Your arguments are all very ME ME ME aimed and very NOW NOW NOW-centric (your arguments relate to the fact that they aren't anywhere near as good NOW, you make the point that men shouldn't have to lose ANY money at all in order to invest in a bigger, stronger and more financially resilient women football). If you can't see that investing in the game now is not for right now, is not in regards to the current situation you don't at all see the big picture, let me ask you, what does success in women's football mean for you?

You ask why should the women get more money because their level of quality isn't up to par with the men's. Well I ask you: HOW can women develop their game to higher levels when only an extremely few are actually able to make it their number one priority because the rest have to work second jobs to actually live? An extremely large quantity of men get the benefit even at lower levels of being able to live off football and focus 100% on competing with other men who do likewise and so the competition raises the overall game. The women game is shit because most can't even dedicate themselves to it like we do.

It will take time

Who wants to watch women's football? Well who wants to watch Serie C2 in Italy (men's)? You think everyone watches just the big games. Real supporters go to those games, real supporters who love and invest their time and energy go to the smaller games and women's football matches. Especially when now in the US there is a lot of women now playing the game more, they can also be more involved. I think you guys think that the women's game is a drain. It's actually got really big untapped potential as a market. That's what's happening already.

I'm not saying that women should be earning huge figures, but definitely in comparison to the men they earn fuck all we can all agree I hope. If I was a young girl aspiring to be a professional footballer, why would I commit myself to it when I can do other things and make way more money? Some will anyways but you need talent - a lot of talented individuals to make your sport stronger and when you lose talent, you lose growth, just like in every industry out there.

@Tuan_jinn
That is in reference to marcus who said

Who ever suggest that?? you bring up statement that is simply bizarre and not true. <
Real sexism is taking money from hard working males

@Greatone Gonna be honest, while I still don't completely agree with you, I gotta confess you make some good point.

I agree with it!

People join football because they love football. If player makes money his priority than he/she is in the wrong sport. Ofcourse, later as they become established professionals they also want higher rewards but early stage, I personally think only poverty stricken players see football as ticket out of the poverty.

Yet, we are talking about western female players who live in comfort that want more money.

You are making points but you are missing entire picture.
How did Australian football and MLs developed?

No one wanted to watch them. I once met the guy who played youth World Cup and he quit!! He decided to pursue investment banking career. Yet, I also met guys in USA who stuck through even though their pay is complete pile of garbage.

That is how mls was build. With people who were willing to get paid Jack sht even nothing and eveb out of their pocket so only game grows in USA and attracts more sponsors.

That is how woman should do mate. Woman want it quick way and through marketing and feminist campaigns way convince audience that they MUST watch female football. Quality of female football has gone but still not enough for me to tune in only if it is World Cup.

lmao, I don't think you read much of what I said at all but whatever. People play football because they are passionate. But that only goes so far because the more people that ARE ABLE TO dedicate all their time to playing football make the game better. You can't do that even by "living comfortably" what do you even mean by that? Are you seriously suggesting that all Americans live comfortably in USA just by virtue of being in the US? Do you think that poverty doesn't exist in USA? There is most definitely something called the working poor. Just because they aren't starving and obviously dying of poverty doesn't mean they get the opportunity to completely dedicate themselves to becoming the best in a sport like football where - in the US especially - it has become harder to achieve success without some investment from parents.

Do you believe that because something was done previously in a particular way, that that means that that is the best way to do it and should never change? Should we never improve? Imagine if Cryuff had that mentality. "football is perfect for everyone and can never be improved. Your reasoning is: I suffered, thus everyone else should suffer. Generally speaking the A-leauge and MLS grew very differently. MLS was pumped full of cash as more people realised the economic potential that had been previously untapped. The A-league is a piece of shit that didn't have money pumped in it, apart from the initial rebranding. It remains a pathetic example to Australians and doesn't achieve its goal of converting fans and kids from other sports, or even fans of different leagues.

This is a question of philosophy, no one actually wants to play in A-league because all the surrounding leagues in Asia pay way more. That means there is a constant talent drain and only the shittest (and can't find other teams) and the "marquee signings" (the ones who get paid all the money) want to play here. It's the same with women's football, if people don't see people getting more money - still, once again, I'm not suggesting that they get a huge amount - their investment in time and effort will not be able to paid off and like you said yourself, it will be completely reliant on the immense sacrifices of those that play for passion (which is rarer and rarer these days)