Rangers Women

[delparlane 6,010]

Unlucky but they can hold their heads high and know that despite the scoreline they weren’t outclassed on the night.

[Inigo 33,345]

On 19/08/2022 at 07:40, lau03143 said:

These are players that until a year or two ago were paying to play. You're also talking about women who systematically haven't had training from early ages to the same level as lads, and even at the top level have coaches who wouldn;t be coaching women's football if they were good enough for the men's game. So there's clearly going to be a massive difference in levels of quality between the men's and women's games.

Why were they paying to play? 

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

9 minutes ago, Inigo said:

Why were they paying to play? 

Because the club barely cared until a few years ago. The team were also kind of outside the structure of Rangers. They were effectively a separate football club/team altogether who were just allowed to use the Rangers name and played in Rangers kit.

At one point the training gear they were using was hand-me-down youth kit from previous seasons.

 

[The Dude 20,027]

14 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Because the club barely cared until a few years ago. The team were also kind of outside the structure of Rangers. They were effectively a separate football club/team altogether who were just allowed to use the Rangers name and played in Rangers kit.

At one point the training gear they were using was hand-me-down youth kit from previous seasons.

 

Didn't we basically take over another side and give them kit and a little bit of cash each year to call themselves Rangers before bringing them properly inhouse in 2018/19 or so?

[Madina 4,268]

The women were terrible pre 2018/19 Always on the end of hammerings by Glasgow City and/or celtic.  I went to see them play at Benburb and they were dire. The players played for the love of the game though, players like Lisa Swanson who is a big blue nose. She certainly wasnt making much if anything at all, as she came up from Ayrshire to train/play. Compare those days to now and it's absolutely night and day 

[Inigo 33,345]

25 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Because the club barely cared until a few years ago. The team were also kind of outside the structure of Rangers. They were effectively a separate football club/team altogether who were just allowed to use the Rangers name and played in Rangers kit.

At one point the training gear they were using was hand-me-down youth kit from previous seasons.

 

So they were like a Sunday league club having to pay small amounts to rent pitches, wash their gear and so forth?

[esquire8 45,331]

Not a slant against the womens team but we invested how much into the team to turn professional etc to win a league that's prize money is generated from a sponsorship with our own chairman? At a time where the club were hemorrhaging money? Any figures around this?

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

32 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Didn't we basically take over another side and give them kit and a little bit of cash each year to call themselves Rangers before bringing them properly inhouse in 2018/19 or so?

Yeah we took over a team from Paisley I think in either 2007/08 or 2008/09. 

Celtic did the same, took over Arsenal North.

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

47 minutes ago, Madina said:

The women were terrible pre 2018/19 Always on the end of hammerings by Glasgow City and/or celtic.  I went to see them play at Benburb and they were dire. The players played for the love of the game though, players like Lisa Swanson who is a big blue nose. She certainly wasnt making much if anything at all, as she came up from Ayrshire to train/play. Compare those days to now and it's absolutely night and day 

We had some really good players though that we lost due to the set up being poor compared to other clubs like Glasgow City. Lisa Swanson was absolutely good enough to go elsewhere (and she had a spell overseas) but she stayed out of loyalty to Rangers and in the end all she got from it was the club treating her really poorly.

Players like Abbi Grant, Lana Cleland, Erin Cuthbert, Nic Doc, and Kathy Hill were all at the club around the same time 10-11 years from first team to age group teams. If the club itself had had some foresight back then we would have been 4 or 5 years ahead of where we are now. I don't even think admin was an excuse tbh.

 

 

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

1 hour ago, esquire8 said:

Not a slant against the womens team but we invested how much into the team to turn professional etc to win a league that's prize money is generated from a sponsorship with our own chairman? At a time where the club were hemorrhaging money? Any figures around this?

Don't think Park's renewed the sponsorship for this season.

Budget is said to be 7 figures. There's a huge amount of potential in the women's game. In the next ten years it's entirely possible the WSL TV deal is better than the SPFL one. I've said this before but its more realistic an opportunity for us to get involved in that than the men into the Premier League and hopefully one we are pursuing.

[The Dude 20,027]

12 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Don't think Park's renewed the sponsorship for this season.

Budget is said to be 7 figures. There's a huge amount of potential in the women's game. In the next ten years it's entirely possible the WSL TV deal is better than the SPFL one. I've said this before but its more realistic an opportunity for us to get involved in that than the men into the Premier League and hopefully one we are pursuing.

No chance he would have with the women's league now under the SPFL umbrella.

[ElBufalo20 8,167]

23 hours ago, esquire8 said:

Not a slant against the womens team but we invested how much into the team to turn professional etc to win a league that's prize money is generated from a sponsorship with our own chairman? At a time where the club were hemorrhaging money? Any figures around this?

Cos obviously the club was forced into a woman’s team.

Theres Glasgow city who were doing a good job.I genuinely think woman’s teams should be  community clubs that are grown organically rather than forced to be side by side with mens teams.

 

[magic8ball 27,904]

20 minutes ago, ElBufalo20 said:

Cos obviously the club was forced into a woman’s team.

Theres Glasgow city who were doing a good job.I genuinely think woman’s teams should be  community clubs that are grown organically rather than forced to be side by side with mens teams.

 

Just wait till the equal pay argument pops up .

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

40 minutes ago, ElBufalo20 said:

Cos obviously the club was forced into a woman’s team.

Theres Glasgow city who were doing a good job.I genuinely think woman’s teams should be  community clubs that are grown organically rather than forced to be side by side with mens teams.

 

Utter pish.

[ElBufalo20 8,167]

20 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Utter pish.

No it’s not. So if Rangers were the only club not to have a woman’s team there would be no issue questions asked? It’s what happened to Man Utd now they throw money at it and are one of the best out of nowhere.

 

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

3 minutes ago, ElBufalo20 said:

No it’s not. So if Rangers were the only club not to have a woman’s team there would be no issue questions asked? It’s what happened to Man Utd now they throw money at it and are one of the best out of nowhere.

 

It is, you are making things up. No one forced the club to have a women's side. We have had an affiliated side since 2008. It's not a new thing. 

Man Utd may have been criticised for disbanding their women's side and not having one - but the decision to disband then reinstate the team a few years ago were clearly business decisions. If they didn't think there was any growth potential there they wouldn't have done it - they have the most commercially focused owners in world football. And again, no one forced them to. It's not a requirement.

[Inigo 33,345]

On 22/09/2022 at 11:27, ElBufalo20 said:

Cos obviously the club was forced into a woman’s team.

Theres Glasgow city who were doing a good job.I genuinely think woman’s teams should be  community clubs that are grown organically rather than forced to be side by side with mens teams.

 

What does 'community clubs that are grown organically' mean? Just not started and supported by a football club? A women's football club started by Rangers has as much legitimacy as any other women's football club. 

[ElBufalo20 8,167]

1 hour ago, Inigo said:

What does 'community clubs that are grown organically' mean? Just not started and supported by a football club? A women's football club started by Rangers has as much legitimacy as any other women's football club. 

The same way the majority of mens teams started. 
Glasgow city for example fairly self explanatory.

 

[Inigo 33,345]

Just now, ElBufalo20 said:

The same way the majority of mens teams started. 
Glasgow city for example fairly self explanatory.

 

So basically you feel they don't deserve financial backing and should earn the right from impoverished beginnings? Pay for things themselves, attract crowds themselves, have to do everything themselves? For whatever reason, you don't think it's fair that they're given a helping hand to accelerate their development?

[ElBufalo20 8,167]

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

So basically you feel they don't deserve financial backing and should earn the right from impoverished beginnings? Pay for things themselves, attract crowds themselves, have to do everything themselves? For whatever reason, you don't think it's fair that they're given a helping hand to accelerate their development?

I do but my example would be Rangers have a nationwide fan base so you have a fan from Aberdeen who travels to Ibrox every other weekend to attend games.

He’s got a daughter who wants to watch womens football but realistically that person isn’t going to travel to watch that as well every week so in turn isn’t going to give money to watch Aberdeen ladies at pittodrie or buy merchandise whereas if it was an Aberdeen city community club for example then the dad is going to take his daughter to their games and invest.

Also I’m sure Hibs ladies were in Europe a few years ago when the men were in the championship so why should they be associated with a poor mens team in terms off having the same strips etc. Why should the ladies miss out on money by not getting better kit deal if they are in uefa competition and are getting more exposure.

[Inigo 33,345]

1 minute ago, ElBufalo20 said:

I do but my example would be Rangers have a nationwide fan base so you have a fan from Aberdeen who travels to Ibrox every other weekend to attend games.

He’s got a daughter who wants to watch womens football but realistically that person isn’t going to travel to watch that as well every week so in turn isn’t going to give money to watch Aberdeen ladies at pittodrie or buy merchandise whereas if it was an Aberdeen city community club for example then the dad is going to take his daughter to their games and invest.

Also I’m sure Hibs ladies were in Europe a few years ago when the men were in the championship so why should they be associated with a poor mens team in terms off having the same strips etc. Why should the ladies miss out on money by not getting better kit deal if they are in uefa competition and are getting more exposure.

They should be associated because it gives them huge financial backing. Also gives them a better starting point for developing a fanbase. As we're seeing with Rangers fans going to see Rangers Ladies.

I'm sure there will be local teams in Aberdeen. Doesn't mean Rangers shouldn't help the community in Glasgow by developing a team that allows girls to watch a team they can dream of playing for same way we did.

Also, personally think women have had so many disadvantages over the 150 years football's been progressing that it's only fair that the balance is redressed ever so slightly by giving them a jump start.

 

[Madina 4,268]

First time I've been to a womens game this season. Same problem as the men, loads of possession, loads of chances and yet only leading 1-0 at HT

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

Motherwell defended very well today. Thought 4-0 was harsh on them, especially the second goal. They look a well organised side.

[Madina 4,268]

55 minutes ago, McEwan's Lager said:

Motherwell defended very well today. Thought 4-0 was harsh on them, especially the second goal. They look a well organised side.

Yip they defended really well. Jenna Fife barely had a save to make though and we finally took our chances in the 2nd half. Missed the lead up to the 4th goal as I was looking elsewhere 😂 just saw it going in and the GK nowhere near it. Take it that it was a howler from them?

[McEwan's Lager 32,080]

16 minutes ago, Madina said:

Yip they defended really well. Jenna Fife barely had a save to make though and we finally took our chances in the 2nd half. Missed the lead up to the 4th goal as I was looking elsewhere 😂 just saw it going in and the GK nowhere near it. Take it that it was a howler from them?

I'd need to see it back as I was chatting to the guy next to me at the time when the initial ball was played.

I think what happened is someone played the free kick (didn't see if it was the defender or the keeper) but the other one may have thought they were just playing it back to them to then take it properly. Everyone was standing around confused and suddenly McCoy just took the ball, went round the keeper and passed it in  

Would need to see the second back too to judge whether their player played at the ball to keep Howat onside. I thought she did and that it was a goal under the rules, but must admit I hate that rule.