Japan Today

U.S. soccer stars tell story of fight for equal pay in new film 'LFG'


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2021.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

Months later, they won a fourth World Cup for the United States as fans chanted "equal pay" during the 2-0 final triumph against the Netherlands.

I'm all for equal pay. Anyone doing the same job at the same level producing the same results should get the same pay. And because I believe that, I believe these women do not deserve equal pay.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

I saw a documentary years ago about women's soccer in the US. Mia Hamm was a media favorite and superstar at the time. But, it was her who insisted that ALL the advertising revenue and payments were shared equally between the team. This must have cost her millions. Her team mates never left the changing room until Mia had finished the never ending round of interviews and photos. Huge respect to her.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I’m sure it’s going to be a ratings sleeper.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

"The highest TV rating for soccer in the USA ..."

Which is just above curling and with watching paint dry ahead of it.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

This is very simple. Football (Soccer for others) players get paid not only for what they can do on the field, but outside of it. In other words, what sponsors to the player has, how many merchandising can he/she sell, etc.

Women they just cannot deliver outside the field, as simple as that. Is that fair? Ask the consumers. The problem is not of FIFA or the clubs or sponsor, the problem is that regular people like most of us, just do not care about women matches and their merchandise. How many people buy t-shirts from a mid-tier English team like Wolverhampton for example, compare to a top tier club in women football? The fact that people don't even know who are the top tier clubs in women football vs everyone know who is Real Madrid or Manchester United, tells you all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There was an article on this some time ago (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/)

Apparently it's not as simple as they make it out to be.



It’s tough to make a straightforward comparison of the earnings for men and women players, because the two teams have different collective-bargaining agreements that outline different pay structures.

A contract player on the women’s team makes a base salary and can earn performance-based bonuses. (Players without a contract have a different pay schedule.)

On the men’s team, players earn only bonuses.

The teams play different numbers of games each year and earn different bonuses depending on the game type, their opponents’ FIFA rank and the game’s outcome. On top of that, both teams can earn additional bonuses for winning specific tournaments. And certain events, such as the World Cup, have a separate bonus structure entirely.

“The male players are paid when they play, but not when they sit,” McCann said. “USMNT players must thus be on the roster to be pay eligible. USWNT players, in contrast, are guaranteed pay.”

The lawsuit from the women’s team sketched out the following scenario: If both teams played 20 friendlies in a year, a top-tier women’s national team player would earn $164,320 less, or “38% of the compensation of a similarly situated MNT player.” That was true under the previous collective-bargaining agreement that ended in December 2016.

The Fact Checker obtained the new agreement, which took effect in April 2017. Using the same 20-game scenario, we calculated the player on the women’s team would earn $28,333 less, or about 89 percent of the compensation of a similarly situated men’s team player. If both teams lost all 20 games, the players would make the same amount. That’s because the men earn a $5,000 bonus when they lose and the women have a $100,000 base salary.


World Cup earnings

Then there’s the World Cup — which has a different bonus structure entirely.


Total prize money for the Women’s World Cup in 2019 is $30 million — the champions will walk away with about $4 million. For contrast, in the 2018 Men’s World Cup, the champions won $38 million from a total pool of about $400 million. In other words, the champions from the men’s world cup were awarded more than the total prize money in the women’s tournament. So there’s no question that there’s a huge gap in earning potential here.

How does this play out for the teams? According to their collective-bargaining agreements, the men’s team earns $3,000 more for a loss in a World Cup qualifying game than the women earn for a win. And that is just the beginning of the differences. In their legal response, USSF attributes the gap to the total prize money that FIFA provides.

The article talks about more points but those are rather important in my opinion. As far as I remember the men also receive a smaller cut of the revenue than the women (because of their poorer performances) but since the revenue generated by both tournaments is quite different, the men actually get more.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mr KiplingJune 22  06:33 pm JST

The highest TV rating for soccer in the USA is the 2015 WOMEN'S World Cup Final!

That was more that than the NBA finals and Stanley cup that year.

How do any of the women's soccer league's regular season games compare to the rating so any 1 of the 82 or so regular season NHL or NBA games that year?

Who was in the NBA finals that year? Lakers? Warriors? How about Stanley Cup? Canucks? Blackhawks?

Quick---name one women's professional soccer team in the US!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I’m sure it’s going to be a ratings sleeper.

The highest TV rating for soccer in the USA is the 2015 WOMEN'S World Cup Final!

That was more that than the NBA finals and Stanley cup that year.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

This article does not mention that lawyers for US Women have already filed with US Court of Appeals to throw out the lower court decision, so the case for equal pay goes on. US Soccer did finally agree to provide similar accommodations, transport, etc. last December, settling that part of the lawsuit.

They do not argue that men get greater pay in their pro leagues, just when they all put on US Team uniforms, they should be paid equally. Watching US Women beat China or Japan in a championship match is far more exciting than watching US Men beat Costa Rica or Antigua in a lame regional qualifying match. Especially since the US Men don’t always qualify for World competitions as it is.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )


Yes, it is on a worldwide basis. But not in the USA where women's soccer gets better ratings than men's soccer. Mind, that's not that difficult. Men's soccer just doesn't attract much of an audience.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

US Men, who have rarely even got out of their Group matches in World and Olympic competitions, get better accommodations, transport, and amenities, besides far higher pay. Yet they have produced NOTHING on the world stage except embarrassment.

The US Women have won championship after championship at the World level for decades, bringing fame and income to US Soccer. The women initially asked for higher pay and incentives, but were rebuffed every time by US Soccer cronies.

Good for them that the old white men who ran US Soccer were overruled by American courts & US public opinion!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )


-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites