[Other Sport] 'Equal' pay at Wimbledon

[The_Viper]

Genuinely wonder what the OP is expecting people to say to this. Yes, per minute played the women get paid more. Obviously you aren’t suggesting that everyone is paid according to the time spent on an endeavour, because that wouldn’t be right either.

On average, men are born with a significant physical advantage to women. Maybe you think this gives them the right to be paid more. But in practically every job in every industry women are paid significantly less than men, solely because of their gender. This is entirely inappropriate and makes no sense whatsoever - it’s counter-productive to the general advancement of the human race. Anything that can be done to address this balance should be done. If there are some aberrations that mean women get paid technically more than men, then so be it. A tiny price to pay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58arQIr882w&list=PLytTJqkSQqtr2se5wbDlvFhUt0K4ewRt8&index=2&t=0s

 

[Mr H]

So the ladies final today took less than an hour and the men’s final today nearly five hours. Whilst I know it will never happen, the only way to really settle the dispute, is to hold separate Wimbledon’s for men and women and pay them according to ticket sales, TV audiences and TV revenue. I have my suspicion which sex would earn the most!

Interesting thought.
First week of Wimbledon - Women only. Second week - Men only.
Separate Ticket sales and TV revenues for each week.
Prize monies based on total revenues for each separate week.
(Put Mixed Doubles wherever)

 

[Beach Seagull]

I’m willing to donate the balance to a brainless charity. PM me your bank details and I can sort this out.

You have no arguement just insults!!!! It's funny!! You and 'the large one' both exactly the same, cant stand being taken on so resort to insults. 'Socialist' eh?? But spend a fortune on 1901 membership and whinge about the food!!

 

[DumLum]

Not a great follower of tennis, but I see the men's and women's get the same prize money to be 'equal'. But the men play more games to win the tournament so that means the women are paid more? How can that be 'equal'. Surely the prize money distribution should be based on ££ per game? Also the men's game is a bigger draw I guarantee a tout will get more for a men's final ticket than he will for a women's final ticket.

Women fill all the seats so deserve the same money.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

You have no arguement just insults!!!! It's funny!! You and 'the large one' both exactly the same, cant stand being taken on so resort to insults. 'Socialist' eh?? But spend a fortune on 1901 membership and whinge about the food!!

Insult? I think you’re being unfair. It was more a comedic put-down playing on the words you used in your post.

Anyway, you were right about one thing...it is indeed holiday time and I now need to sort my suitcase out. Have a nice Sunday.

 

[The Optimist]

Well so be it. The women earn more per game that ain't right. If was other way round would be all sorts of rug munchers demanding 'equality' and threatening 'boycotts' of wimbledon.

I’m confused by this statement. You seem quite upset at the fact that women are getting paid the same to do less but if it was the other way round it’s like you’d be angry at anyone who was upset about it. So basically you’re upset at an injustice against men but also upset about women (and for some reason especially gay women) who complain about injustices against women.

 

[hart's shirt]

Women's Final - 56 minutes
6-2, 6-2

Men's Final - 4 hours 57 minutes
7-6 (7-5), 1-6, 7-6 (7-4), 4-6, 13-12 (7-3)

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I’m confused by this statement. You seem quite upset at the fact that women are getting paid the same to do less but if it was the other way round it’s like you’d be angry at anyone who was upset about it. So basically you’re upset at an injustice against men but also upset about women (and for some reason especially gay women) who complain about injustices against women.

In summary, he’s an idiot.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

In summary, he’s an idiot.

Why is it if you don't agree with people they are the idiots and you so obviously are the voice for the people? Is calling names the best you can come up with? Isn't it just a little childish?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Why is it if you don't agree with people they are the idiots and you so obviously are the voice for the people? Is calling names the best you can come up with? Isn't it just a little childish?

It’s nothing to do with disagreeing. Look at the arguments he is using (I’m assuming he’s a male). Look at the language he is using. Look at how he’s confusing and contradicting himself. His approach is a very strange way to behave if he wants a serious debate. And his approach is a very strange way to behave if he wants people to take him seriously and not think he’s a moron.

And when he was initially ignored he came back and made a load of snide comments about left wingers. Then he got called an idiot.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

It’s nothing to do with disagreeing. Look at the arguments he is using (I’m assuming he’s a male). Look at the language he is using. Look at how he’s confusing and contradicting himself. His approach is a very strange way to behave if he wants a serious debate. And his approach is a very strange way to behave if he wants people to take him seriously and not think he’s a moron.

Make no assumptions I have no idea who he is, but to counter an argument with 'idiot' doesn't make an argument. It makes you look stupid.

 

[Nigella's Cream Pie]

Closing credits on BBC's programme concluded with Halep showing off her trophy rather than Djokovic showing his. Sign of the times!

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I'm really not sure how there's such a lack of understanding on this. The prize money is for reaching a particular round / winning NOT on time played. Very much like the FA Cup. Matches last different times, some have replays and others extra time yet teams still get the same prize money of reaching a particular round regardless of how long they played to get there.

As for those complaining about the insults being posted towards the OP - 'birds' and 'rug munchers' - says it all really !

 

[Gritt23]

So the ladies final today took less than an hour and the men’s final today nearly five hours. Whilst I know it will never happen, the only way to really settle the dispute, is to hold separate Wimbledon’s for men and women and pay them according to ticket sales, TV audiences and TV revenue. I have my suspicion which sex would earn the most!

Or you just look at the situation objectively and can see that the appeal of the mens game is significantly greater than the womens and distribute prize money accordingly. I wonder what price ticket exchanges had for mens final vs womens final yesterday, and that was despite clashing with the GP and Cricket World Cup Final. I bet it was significantly higher for the mens.

Even if it was split according to the sets that are played, so the pot is split 5/8ths to the Mens game, and 3/8ths to the Womens, that would seem logical.

Instead the game appears to have buckled under the threat of being called sexist, but as an entertainment, there really is no competition..

 

[surlyseagull]

Who cares? Our gender has been so favoured in history and even now, if woman get payed more prize money per minutes played good for them. In so many other lines of work men get payed more. Why do people have to strike a fuss every time woman get favoured ever so slightly.

Because it goes against everything that is regarded as equal...its quite simple really .
History ,why punish a generation for something they played no part in .

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Make no assumptions I have no idea who he is, but to counter an argument with 'idiot' doesn't make an argument. It makes you look stupid.

I was not engaging with his topic let alone countering it. I was simply calling an idiot and idiot. Thats not being stupid, that’s just stating the obvious.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Make no assumptions I have no idea who he is.

Well, you have made an assumption.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

 

[W.C.]

I’m willing to donate the balance to a brainless charity. PM me your bank details and I can sort this out.

Ace!

 

[lost in london]

Not a great follower of tennis, but I see the men's and women's get the same prize money to be 'equal'. But the men play more games to win the tournament so that means the women are paid more? How can that be 'equal'. Surely the prize money distribution should be based on ££ per game? Also the men's game is a bigger draw I guarantee a tout will get more for a men's final ticket than he will for a women's final ticket.

Why do you care?

I don't think male tennis players care, they're not being prejudiced. I don't think sponsors or administrators care, they're still making money (Wimbledon spending £75m on a new roof shows they're not short of a few bob). Spectators don't care, they're just going to Wimbledon to watch tennis.

I think you only care because you can't bear to see 'birds' / 'rug munchers' being rewarded and the pendulum being marginally nudged back in their direction.

On your logic of games played being the only metric, a male player who won every set 6-0 on his way to the final showing his utter dominance should be paid less than a female player who battled through tie breaks in every single set on her way to winning. Surely that can't be right?