Trump Twitter freaking out over USWNT soccer player briefly dropping the flag during WC celebrations

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,664
22,373
I watched the Fox News video. One of the players was holding the flag and dropped it to the ground to join in a dance celebration with a couple other players. Another player behind her quickly picked up the flag when she noticed so no one would unintentionally step on it.

https://fxn.ws/2L91ybc

Now I’m not suggesting people should throw the flag on the ground. But I see no evidence in this video that it was intentionally dropped to the ground so players could stomp on it. Yes she probably could have been more careful but I see no disrespect intended by anyone. Yet pro-Trump Twitter is outraged, smearing the whole team (over one player who isn’t a Trump fan) saying they wished the team would lose or they would go play for a country they liked. Man how nice if would be if both sides got over being outraged 24/7. Sigh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theapplehead

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,536
Texas
I watched the Fox News video. One of the players was holding the flag and dropped it to the ground to join in a dance celebration with a couple other players. Another player behind her quickly picked up the flag when she noticed so no one would unintentionally step on it.

https://fxn.ws/2L91ybc

Now I’m not suggesting people should throw the flag on the ground. But I see no evidence in this video that it was intentionally dropped to the ground so players could stomp on it. Yes she probably could have been more careful but I see no disrespect intended by anyone. Yet pro-Trump Twitter is outraged, smearing the whole team (over one player who isn’t a Trump fan) saying they wished the team would lose or they would go play for a country they liked. Man how nice if would be if both sides got over being outraged 24/7. Sigh.
I was looking at The_Donald and it seems that most agree that it was an accident. Actually many users are even complaining about the usage of the verb "stump [on the flag]" as it does not depict what happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rogifan

Rogifan

macrumors Core
Original poster
Nov 14, 2011
20,664
22,373
I was looking at The_Donald and it seems that most agree that it was an accident. Actually many users are even complaining about the usage of the verb "stump [on the flag]" as it does not depict what happened.
That says something if even Trump reddit says it wasn’t intentional.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayMysterio

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
667
12,105
Rock Ridge, California
I peruse PRSI for the 24/7 outrage. Who needs twitter?
You still miss out on some of the funniest outrage. Twitter has been a hilarious repository of jokes & clapback over a number of things that never comes up here.

If it's outrage that doesn't favor a particular side, you can't expect that side to post about it here.

Example: No real discussion of the Women's soccer team's quest for equal pay, and the lengths 45 has gone to avoid the discussion. That's been a large discussion on Twitter since the Women won. I for one am waiting impatiently for the mass explosions of tears when the team goes to visit AOC instead of the White House. Despite the fact that 45 hinted that if the Women won, he may invite them to White House, which has everyone asking him about that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duffman9000

Apple OC

macrumors 68040
Oct 14, 2010
3,579
2,056
Hogtown
The men’s WC team brought in 5+Billion... the women’s team under 150 million.

That is why the pay cannot be the same... same logic applies with the NBA vs WNBA.

That’s Sports
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,536
Texas
The men’s WC team brought in 5+Billion... the women’s team under 150 million.

That is why the pay cannot be the same... same logic applies with the NBA vs WNBA.

That’s Sports
I am more concerned about the Women's Soccer World Cup as a sporting event if I have to be honest.

If you look at the Men's Soccer World Cup, there have been 32 editions (from 1930), and a total of 8 teams won.
Brazil won 5 times (16%), Germany won 4 (12.5%), Italy won 4 (12.5%) (oh yea!), Argentina won 2 (6.25%), France won 2 (6.25%), Uruguay won 2 (6.25%), England and Spain both won once.

If you look at the Women's Soccer World Cup, there have been 8 editions (from 1991), and a total of 4 teams won.
The scary thing is that the US won FOUR (50%) out of 8 and Germany won TWO (25%) out of 8. There is basically no competition, which is even truer if you look at the fact that the US was a runner up once and third three times. In 28 years the US place 3rd place or more every single time.
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
667
12,105
Rock Ridge, California
The men’s WC team brought in 5+Billion... the women’s team under 150 million.

That is why the pay cannot be the same... same logic applies with the NBA vs WNBA.

That’s Sports
Sorry. I was just using an example of what's been trending for the last few days, and what doesn't appear here.

The men’s WC team brought in 5+Billion... the women’s team under 150 million.

That is why the pay cannot be the same... same logic applies with the NBA vs WNBA.

That’s Sports
I'd love some sourcing of that, so I can do further research.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,536
Texas
I'd love some sourcing of that, so I can do further research.
I tried to (as you know I try to get to sources), but it's virtually impossible to get to a good, decent number.
In tickets, USWNT sells more than USMNT, however in international TV revenue USMNT wins. In national TV revenue USWNT wins. As from FIFA inbound revenue USMNT wins because the men's world cup generates a gazillion more dollars per event. As for advertisement, it depends on the year.
There is also another tricky thing as soccer revenue is combined in a big cauldron; my understanding is that the USMNT makes more $$$ but less in % to revenue (About 9%), while USWMNT makes less $$$ but more in % to revenue (about 13%, of which 3% is paid for by the USMNT).
It's just a big mess.
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
667
12,105
Rock Ridge, California
I tried to (as you know I try to get to sources), but it's virtually impossible to get to a good, decent number.
In tickets, USWNT sells more than USMNT, however in international TV revenue USMNT wins. In national TV revenue USWNT wins. As from FIFA inbound revenue USMNT wins because the men's world cup generates a gazillion more dollars per event. As for advertisement, it depends on the year.
There is also another tricky thing as soccer revenue is combined in a big cauldron; my understanding is that the USMNT makes more $$$ but less in % to revenue (About 9%), while USWMNT makes less $$$ but more in % to revenue (about 13%, of which 3% is paid for by the USMNT).
It's just a big mess.
Yeah the only thing I could find similar to what was claimed, was Twitter post with someone claiming the same thing, but with no proof.

I did find an article claiming the women now in fact generate more sales.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/us-womens-soccer-games-now-generate-more-revenue-than-mens.html
U.S. women’s soccer games have generated more revenue than U.S. men’s games over the past three years.

That’s according to audited financial statements from the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) obtained by The Wall Street Journal. In 2016, women’s games generated $1.9 million more in revenue than men’s games. From 2016 to 2018, women’s games generated approximately $50.8 million in revenue, compared with $49.9 million for men’s games.

The Journal report notes that the “ability of the women’s team to generate gate revenues that equals or exceeds the men’s team is an important battleground,” and central to an ongoing lawsuit filed against the USSF by 28 members of the U.S. women’s national soccer team in March.
I think any hair splitting and attempts to asterisk the discussion are a bit off, since Women's soccer has been riding high since 1999 and the iconic sliding across the field in a sports bra imagery. US Soccer has pretty much dismissed Women's soccer for so long, it got used to it, and now it's coming bite them in the ass very publicly
 

stylinexpat

macrumors 68000
Mar 6, 2009
1,588
2,464
Trump obviously is not well liked around the world like his predecessor Bush and did not have too many fans there

 

LIVEFRMNYC

macrumors 604
Oct 27, 2009
7,433
8,607
The men’s WC team brought in 5+Billion... the women’s team under 150 million.

That is why the pay cannot be the same... same logic applies with the NBA vs WNBA.

That’s Sports
Well the WNBA season basically starts after the NBA season, which is idiotic IMO. Games are rarely on broadcast or main cable stations.

I think the WNBA season should be during the NBA season. Along with the playoffs and finals. Imagine the boost in ratings, tickets sales, and merch, if a WNBA playoff game is scheduled right before a NBA playoff game, or even WNBA playoff games scheduled on the days between NBA playoff/finals games.
 

Apple OC

macrumors 68040
Oct 14, 2010
3,579
2,056
Hogtown
from the Forbes article below...

The men still pull the World Cup money wagon. The men's World Cup in Russia generated over $6 billion in revenue, with the participating teams sharing $400 million, less than 7% of revenue. Meanwhile, the Women's World Cup is expected to earn $131 million for the full four-year cycle 2019-22 and dole out $30 million to the participating teams.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2019/03/07/world-cup-soccer-pay-disparity-between-men-and-women-is-justified/#3c8501746da4

As I mentioned... similar to the NBA, women basketball players will never make the same money as the men in the NBA.

Baseball and Hockey too... women will never reach the pay scale of MLB or the NHL while playing those sports.

The Tennis Majors however, is actually where Men and Women have drawn closer in prize money... and I believe it is because the entertainment factor is closer.
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
667
12,105
Rock Ridge, California
from the Forbes article below...

The men still pull the World Cup money wagon. The men's World Cup in Russia generated over $6 billion in revenue, with the participating teams sharing $400 million, less than 7% of revenue. Meanwhile, the Women's World Cup is expected to earn $131 million for the full four-year cycle 2019-22 and dole out $30 million to the participating teams.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2019/03/07/world-cup-soccer-pay-disparity-between-men-and-women-is-justified/#3c8501746da4

As I mentioned... similar to the NBA, women basketball players will never make the same money as the men in the NBA.

Baseball and Hockey too... women will never reach the pay scale of MLB or the NHL while playing those sports.

The Tennis Majors however, is actually where Men and Women have drawn closer in prize money... and I believe it is because the entertainment factor is closer.
So if I follow the logic of the author's piece, the reason the men are paid more, is NOT based on performance. But because of basically... participation. The men are paid more, because they are men, and the Men's world cup is the biggest event. Not for anything the men actually do, which is literally NOT winning.

Which is kind of what the women are arguing in the equal pay argument, based on their performances.

Also the WNBA can't equate to the women's soccer team, so that equivalence doesn't fly.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,536
Texas
So if I follow the logic of the author's piece, the reason the men are paid more, is NOT based on performance. But because of basically... participation. The men are paid more, because they are men, and the Men's world cup is the biggest event. Not for anything the men actually do, which is literally NOT winning.

Which is kind of what the women are arguing in the equal pay argument, based on their performances.

Also the WNBA can't equate to the women's soccer team, so that equivalence doesn't fly.
If we had to base it on performance relative to the league’s strength, the men should be sent to work in a coal mine at $10/hr after the 2018 fiasco.
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
667
12,105
Rock Ridge, California
If we had to base it on performance relative to the league’s strength, the men should be sent to work in a coal mine at $10/hr after the 2018 fiasco.
Exactly, the men can barely get a participation award for the league they play in. But because they are literally male, they get to play there, and make more money. Because that league is literally bigger and more popular it generates more money, so that's the reason they get paid more. Literally the reason for getting paid more, is because they are male.

How does that sound?

While the women consistently perform in their league, but it's smaller, is almost disregarded by FIFA and US Soccer, so the league pulls less.

The deflecting argument is that the women get paid more in their smaller loot pool, so that's okay.

Ignoring that the women do generate increase ticket sales, views, their merchandise outsells, and is now being used to prop up men's merchandise sales.

Anyone wanting to carry on that argument, good luck to you, history will not look back fondly on that argument either. I know that's one argument I ain't having with my partner or her kid.

I'll just keep rocking the supporting shirt, and enjoy the peace. :)
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,536
Texas
Exactly, the men can barely get a participation award for the league the play in. Because that league is literally bigger and more popular it generates more money, so that's the reason they get paid more.

While the women consistently perform in their league, but it's smaller, is almost disregarded by FIFA and US Soccer, so the league pulls less.

The deflecting argument is that the women get paid more in their smaller loot pool, so that's okay.

Ignoring that the women do generate increase ticket sales, views, their merchandise outsells, and is now being used to prop up men's merchandise sales.

Anyone wanting to carry on that argument, good luck to you, history will not look back fondly on that argument either.
Yeah but you have to realize that the men have to play in the most competitive league without any history behind them. The US has always been at the forefront of women’s soccer, while Europeans lag by thousands of miles (no one gives a crap about women’s soccer in Europe, let’s face it). The US was very smart and thanks to great collegiate programs, the women’s soccer program was able to seize over a new opportunity (first championship was in 1991).
By contrast, Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America basically spent all their sport related money and attention on soccer. I mean, my team (AC Milan) was created in 1899. Juventus in 1897. The league, Serie A was created in 1898, 121 years ago. The premiere’s league is of 1888 (although the league changed in the 1990’s), the Spanish Liga is 90 years old. South American soccer is also 100 years old. By contrast, in the US virtually no male cared about soccer until the 1990 and 1994 world cups. The first game of Major League Soccer (a derivate from an awful league) was played in 1996 and it started becoming decent in 2005 or so. The money spent on MLS is nothing compared to MLB of NFL, let alone foreign leagues like the Serie A. More than that, European teams don’t really care much for American players so it’s very difficult for Americans to gain experience in better leagues. It’s a Miracle what the men did in just a few years.
 

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
667
12,105
Rock Ridge, California
Yeah but you have to realize that the men have to play in the most competitive league without any history behind them. The US has always been at the forefront of women’s soccer, while Europeans lag by thousands of miles (no one gives a crap about women’s soccer in Europe, let’s face it). The US was very smart and thanks to great collegiate programs, the women’s soccer program was able to seize over a new opportunity (first championship was in 1991).
By contrast, Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America basically spent all their sport related money and attention on soccer. I mean, my team (AC Milan) was created in 1899. Juventus in 1897. The league, Serie A was created in 1898, 121 years ago. The premiere’s league is of 1888 (although the league changed in the 1990’s), the Spanish Liga is 90 years old. South American soccer is also 100 years old. By contrast, in the US virtually no male cared about soccer until the 1990 and 1994 world cups. The first game of Major League Soccer (a derivate from an awful league) was played in 1996 and it started becoming decent in 2005 or so. The money spent on MLS is nothing compared to MLB of NFL, let alone foreign leagues like the Serie A. More than that, European teams don’t really care much for American players so it’s very difficult for Americans to gain experience in better leagues. It’s a Miracle what the men did in just a few years.
You use that same logic when discussing how your favorite sports team lost again?

It's a handy asterisk to mention, you mean to say other countries didn't commit to their women's teams? That you are in fact making a ringing endorsement for Title IX?

So men have the benefit of NOT doing well in a league, because they can't, but can get better pay because they are in that very same league with a built in excuse for their performance?

While the Women they are performing well, and well... they should be grateful for what they get paid? Even if it is less, in intentionally crappier conditions, because US Soccer doesn't want spend money on them, and isn't concerned with the injuries caused by those conditions?

Yeah, that sounds fair.
 

yaxomoxay

macrumors 68040
Mar 3, 2010
3,611
24,536
Texas
You use that same logic when discussing how your favorite sports team lost again?

It's a handy asterisk to mention, you mean to say other countries didn't commit to their women's teams? That you are in fact making a ringing endorsement for Title IX?

So men have the benefit of NOT doing well in a league, because they can't, but can get better pay because they are in that very same league with a built in excuse for their performance?

While the Women they are performing well, and well... they should be grateful for what they get paid? Even if it is less, in intentionally crappier conditions, because US Soccer doesn't want spend money on them, and isn't concerned with the injuries caused by those conditions?

Yeah, that sounds fair.
No. What I am saying is that looking only at the results doesn’t make any sense as the context is different (I mean, the women’s world champions lose badly with Under 16 local boys teams....).
The men are playing in a much competitive scenario which generates more money globally, and people around the globe follow more. As for the women, they win in a much less competitive league, that is not that followed, and that generates less money on aggregate. Where do you think that money should go?

Who should get more money, an Olympian runner that ends up being fourth or fifth every time maybe racing Usain Bolt or a professional runner that wins an important but relatively minor and new competition that generates less money and is followed by a limited audience? The money would certainly go towards the Olympian.
 
Last edited:

JayMysterio

macrumors 6502a
Apr 24, 2010
667
12,105
Rock Ridge, California
No. What I am saying is that looking only at the results doesn’t make any sense as the context is different (I mean, the women’s world champions lose badly with Under 16 local boys teams....).
The men are playing in a much competitive scenario which generates more money globally, and people around the globe follow more. As for the women, they win in a much less competitive league, that is not that followed, and that generates less money on aggregate. Where do you think that money should go?

Who should get more money, an Olympian runner that ends up being fourth or fifth every time maybe racing Usain Bolt or a professional runner that wins an important but relatively minor and new competition that generates less money and is followed by a limited audience? The money would certainly go towards the Olympian.
Yeah I saw that aside in the Forbes article, but what was the team that lost to the kids? It was pointed out that the team wasn't going all out, because it was an informal game. It's a testimony to the level of the academy they played, but not quite the knock on the women's team as some imagine.

What's interesting as how this is looked at in a vacuum. Do you imagine that US Soccer only enjoys SOME of the good will, high lights, attention, and recruitment tool that the US Women bring? Or do they want all of it, while the US Men's team isn't looked at so highly, while the US Men's team hopes to improve?

So to use your example... If you are the runner who somehow makes the Olympics but only places fourth or fifth. Now another runner who does run in different competitions, but does bring in the attention, the eyeballs, the merchandising, the high regard for running in the U.S. programs. Do you think that second runner is really alright with making less, despite the fact that his contribution to the popularity of running ( mind you we are overlooking the problem with this equivalence because it ignores the reasons why the runner wins in one area, but doesn't compete on the olympic level. as opposed to comparing male runners in the olympics Vs female runners in the olympics ), in the United States is seemingly overlooked because of the runner who can't win?

Didn't you NOT want to have this debate, after all this time? ;)