well two actually but ones too sick for on here I'd get banned, Who would win if Aquaforce Rec and other teams of that standard went up against Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool And Man City ladies/women ?
Pros and cons for both, technically I think girls standards may be higher, but lads will have more pace and power, but I don't think you could say without watching them play each other could be massively one sided ether way or a competitive draw. The sex of the referee could play a big part too
I reckon any mens team that trains on a regular basis will beat a woman's side on pace/ power alone. The womens game has progressed and there are some very talented, athletic players, but I think an organised mens team would win.
Not sure whether you can equate women's cricket to the same degree as women's football but England's greatest ever female bowler Kath Brunt helped England win the Ashes and win the World Cup. She plays for Darton Cricket Club at club level. Based on that alone I reckon Aquaforce would probably trounce any ladies club side.
Good point. I'd expect the athletic difference between men and women to be much more obvious in football; whereas the skills required in cricket may enable a woman to be on a more level playing field with men.
Men. Easily. Strongbow put a bunch of pub amateurs against a professional Brazilian women's team, the blokes thrashed them. [video=youtube;WspeoRo9KTQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WspeoRo9KTQ[/video]
It's a huge difference in athletic ability in football for sure. To be honest I could pull a decent division 4 mens team out of the Calgary amateur league and they would beat the women's Canadian national team. As a huge supporter of the women's game that I am I wish I was wrong
I'll have a look at the schedule and may take a drive up to Edmonton if there's any big games or if England are playing up there.