A combination of watching Downton Abbey and live sport this weekend has got me thinking. Whilst the inequality divide seems to be shrinking in many aspects of modern life, Why is this not the case in sport?
As previously mentioned, 2 of my favourite sports are cycling and cricket.
In cycling, the elite male riders can earn upwards of 2 million Euros a year, and there is a minimum wage in place for base level pros of £30,000. There are then of course win bonuses, endorsements, sponsorship etc which can top up the earnings pot each year. And there are more races to earn winnings or at least race fees from - from January right through to October, races varying from 1 day to 3 weeks, with the majority of the Pro Tour level (cycling has different levels of events, such as Pro Tour and Pro Continental - a bit like football leagues) receiving live coverage on some channels, or at least highlights. In fact, as I write this, the Paris-Tours race is live on Eurosport with highlights scheduled for later.
With the boom in the sport recently following the Olympics the public's demand for cycling has grown fantastically. But this is one of the anomalies for me. For most people who watched Olympic cycling, there is no differential in their mind between men's and women's - names like Laura Trott, Lizzie Armitstead and Vicky Pendleton are mentioned as frequently as Sir Chris Hoy, Bradley Wiggins and Ed Clancy, yet when it comes to the professional side of the sport this doesn't continue.
Significant issues are arising within women's cycling, many caused by the economic climate, but races are being cancelled at an alarming rate and teams are going under on an annual basis - Lizzie Armitstead, one of Britain's and world cycling's best riders has had to change teams three years in a row because teams have folded. When HTC Columbia folded last year it was major news within world cycling and the most disappointing aspect for me was that it also saw the end of their women's team. Because, unlike many Pro Tour teams, they had set up a women's team which also formed part of the structure of the organisation. Yet not many others have. Granted, Garmin have before, as have Orica GreenEdge when they formed last year, but there is not many other "dual" teams. This to me is an incredible shame, imbalance and a massive missed opportunity.
Recent reports suggest Dave Brailsford is considering setting up a new women's Team Sky to help nurture British talent whilst also bringing some of their ways of running a team to the women's game, but I have to ask myself, why didn't they do this three years ago as part of the formation of Team Sky? I'm not interested in the 'logistical difficulties' blah blah blah, as if they had wanted to, they could have. This is another area I feel the UCI is slacking on. I think the UCI should require all new team set ups to have a women's AND men's team to increase the competition and quality of the field in women's cycling.
Then there is the issue of the races. Whilst I believe women's racing can be as exciting if not more so - the women's Olympic road race was full of aggression, attacking riding and non stop action, compared to the men's where too many teams were on the defensive from the word go - there is no reflection of this in terms of races and coverage.
I would love to see women's versions of all men's major races take part throughout the year too. This would need time to develop year on year, but they should have regular grand tours like the men's Vuelta, Giro and Tour - yes they have versions but on many occasions these have been cancelled due to lack of funding. They should have the Spring classics, the season opener Tour Down Under and the season finales in Europe again. Why not simply run a women's version of each event a day later or earlier? For so many of the Spring classics for example that take place on Sundays, women's events could take place on Saturdays. The men could support the women and vice versa. The women's route could be slightly shorter than the men's. This would also encourage "dual" teams as it would mean they could have all their riders in one place, and could run on less back room staff. I think it would appeal to sponsors as its part of the package and they get more exposure for very little extra.
Speaking of money, that is another issue. The top women make a standard wage by comparison. Many women domestiques (the term for riders who's role is to help the team and team leader) will earn less than 10,000 Euros a year! And then there is the running of a team - teams like Omega Pharma Lotto, Orica GreenEdge and Team Sky all operate with annual budgets of around 5 million Euros, female riders reckon a women's team could be run for 10% of this!
If this type of model seems impossible, just look at women's cricket. The finals of the Twenty 20 World Cup are on today. The women's final between England and Australia took place before the final of the men's between Sri Lanka and West Indies. Incidentally, the England women's team are the best in the world - but how much do we hear of it? They have won numerous Ashes tournaments, but did they cover it in the media like the Men's team? Women's cricket is growing massively and they have found having their games before men's matches - in some cases one of their internationals before a men's county match has meant they have bigger crowds, a better atmosphere, and more to play for. Surely this is what every sport deserves? If tennis can achieve equality in pay and level of competition, why can't other sports?
Sport has been male dominated for too long, like the world in general. Isn't it about time this changed? We have all taken much from the Olympics - I just hope more sports governing bodies take a look at their sport and ask themselves - "are we equal?"
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please let me know your views on my blogs, I appreciate all feedback. Please also leave your name, even if you don't want to register, it just helps me know who is giving me their opinion.