U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Soccer
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-30-2020, 06:47 AM
 
236 posts, read 70,710 times
Reputation: 176

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dr.strangelove View Post
Wow, you really do not know anything about this. There is no market for a national team. It is what it is. There is only one team, they have 100 percent control over the team as a monopoly. Thereis no competitor that Alex Morgan can go to.

Lets use Hope Solo as an example. I actually despise her as a person and am glad that she is no longer playing. But, lets look at it from a market analysis. At the end of 2015 she was given every award for the best goalkeeper in the world. She was universally considered the best. No one who watched soccer could consider any other player anywhere near her in terms of keeper play. She also had some issues off the field with her phone being hacked and very personal pictures taken by her husband were put out in the public by criminals. None of this had to do with her soccer. Her husband and her got into a messy separation and there were domestic violence arrests with all charges eventually dropped against them both. then a few months after her last best keeper award, she made some comments about fear from teh Zika virus leading to the olympics, Finally, after an embarrassing loss, she was critical of the team that beat the US for their choice to play keep away once they secured the lead. Because of these things, the US chose to not do business with the best goalkeeper in the world. There is nothing she can do about it. She can't play for another country as she has no connection with any other under the FIFA rules. She simple is screwed and cannot play anywhere. There is no marketplace. Its a take it or leave it monopoly. If the national team says, we are going to give our male players x dollars, but also a team physician, access to training facilities, 8 coaches, never play on turf, provide all equipment, and then we tell the female players you get 4 coaches, have to play almost 2 times as many games per year, play on turf fields that college athletic associations have banned play on, and we will pay you half of x, you have to do it because I say so. You really just do not understand this do you.

But I actually love your example. I wish US Soccer would say to these women, we will pay you 50% of the revenue that you generate. That is about how the NFL dies it. The secret, the woman make far less than 50% of the revenue they generate. They argue its under 20% and the men get closer to 50%. A little lesson for you.

These women cannot ask for any amount they want. There is no one else that is legally allowed to pay them anything. They are US National Team Players. England cannot pay them, Holland cannot pay them, France cannot pay them. Your market analysis is a joke. I think you are under the misunderstanding that it is the women's professional league that argues it should be paid equally. It is not. A market based analysis requires that there actually be a market. there is none here. It is a monopoly.

The US Women are simply saying that because it is a single payer system, all the revenue should go into a pot and be divided equally, or at least the player share should be equal. At the Olympics each gold medal winner for the US (male or female, huge TV revenue producing gymnastics or not televised cross country women's skiing) get $37,500. During the regular season, athletes get what they get in their professional sports. The men's hockey players and basketball players earning far more in their sports than the swimmers, even Michael Phelps, do in theirs. The later is marketplace based income. No one in this debate is arguing for that because it simply is not applicable. But the $37,500 is the argument here since it awards only national team performance equally. US Soccer is forced to do it in the olympics, but not at any other point. That is all they ask, to be treated equally in a non-competitive market where they out-generate their income in revenue many times over.
She can say "No". If the US national team asks me to play for them for $100 a year right now guess what I can say no. The fact you fail to understand that is beyond comprehension. You say you ref. I do not ref. There is no competition for the specific leagues that decide on the reffing. That means they use one company so to speak and they set the pay for each game. If they want my services it costs $1000 a day. That's about what I make. They aren't willing to pay that so I don't ref.

You do not understand basic economic market principles if you don't get this.

The trash company that services my city has no competition. If you want to pick up trash in my city you accept what they pay or you negotiate or you say no. You know why the basketball players get more. Because they know if they don't pay Lebron what he wants he says no. The women are treated equally. Alex Morgan can say if you want my services it costs $5 million a year. If you aren't willing to pay that then I don't come play for you.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-30-2020, 12:47 PM
 
895 posts, read 881,364 times
Reputation: 1169
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRockwell View Post
She can say "No". If the US national team asks me to play for them for $100 a year right now guess what I can say no. The fact you fail to understand that is beyond comprehension. You say you ref. I do not ref. There is no competition for the specific leagues that decide on the reffing. That means they use one company so to speak and they set the pay for each game. If they want my services it costs $1000 a day. That's about what I make. They aren't willing to pay that so I don't ref.

You do not understand basic economic market principles if you don't get this.

The trash company that services my city has no competition. If you want to pick up trash in my city you accept what they pay or you negotiate or you say no. You know why the basketball players get more. Because they know if they don't pay Lebron what he wants he says no. The women are treated equally. Alex Morgan can say if you want my services it costs $5 million a year. If you aren't willing to pay that then I don't come play for you.
Sure, but before you were arguing the reason was that there was a free market that would set the rates. Now that you know you were completely wrong on that, you change arguments that she can say no. But then again, that is the whole point of a discrimination claim. If the was an argument that the US pays black men less than they play white men, there would be no defense because th eblack men can simply say no. This is also why your argument fails.

Of course she can no. But if the reason she is not being paid a certain amount is that she is female instead of male, well it is a very simple case for the US Women to win in court.

If the US national team asks me to play for them for $100 a year right now and the basis for you getting a lower amount that someone else if your religion, sex, skin color, well that yes, you can say no. But then you sue and guess what, you win your lawsuit. That fact that you base your defense of a sex discrimination claim is that the women can just say no is beyond comprehension, to say nothing of disgusting and revolting.

You also do not understand reffing. There is indeed tons of competition for the specific leagues that decide on the reffing. There are many different leagues competing for refs. The best of which require several different levels of professional licenses. Prior to that in the US are college and club level licenses. There is a huge marketplace for refs at even the highest level. Now international FIFA reffing is more difficult to qualify to do. But the marketplace requires no discrimination. There are men and women getting the same pay. FIFA has only in the past decade started to qualify women to ref the highest games, but they were there in Russia and were in France. As for the rest of your strange ref rant, thanks for supporting my position.

You clearly do not understand discrimination. When you are being discriminated against, you do not have the right to say no. No is already being decided for you. Putting it in its simplest terms, when US Soccer decided to offer the men one way to be paid and the women another, and when the women asked to have their pay equal men and they were told no, they no longer had the right to say no. The rate being offered was already unfair.

It would be more like everyone in your town was offered a garbage rate of $10 per pickup regardless of weight or type of refuse, and you were offered the same service for $500 per pickup because of your nationality. You can just say no and haul your own refuse somewhere to dispose of it. If you think this is just, ok for you. Again, you clearly either do not understand the facts of this matter, or you just think discrimination is ok. Either way, I am confident that no court in the country would agree with you.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2020, 02:30 PM
 
Location: Seattle
7,095 posts, read 1,684,286 times
Reputation: 6110
...and the wall of text blocks the goal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-30-2020, 02:41 PM
 
236 posts, read 70,710 times
Reputation: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr.strangelove View Post
Sure, but before you were arguing the reason was that there was a free market that would set the rates. Now that you know you were completely wrong on that, you change arguments that she can say no. But then again, that is the whole point of a discrimination claim. If the was an argument that the US pays black men less than they play white men, there would be no defense because th eblack men can simply say no. This is also why your argument fails.

Of course she can no. But if the reason she is not being paid a certain amount is that she is female instead of male, well it is a very simple case for the US Women to win in court.

If the US national team asks me to play for them for $100 a year right now and the basis for you getting a lower amount that someone else if your religion, sex, skin color, well that yes, you can say no. But then you sue and guess what, you win your lawsuit. That fact that you base your defense of a sex discrimination claim is that the women can just say no is beyond comprehension, to say nothing of disgusting and revolting.

You also do not understand reffing. There is indeed tons of competition for the specific leagues that decide on the reffing. There are many different leagues competing for refs. The best of which require several different levels of professional licenses. Prior to that in the US are college and club level licenses. There is a huge marketplace for refs at even the highest level. Now international FIFA reffing is more difficult to qualify to do. But the marketplace requires no discrimination. There are men and women getting the same pay. FIFA has only in the past decade started to qualify women to ref the highest games, but they were there in Russia and were in France. As for the rest of your strange ref rant, thanks for supporting my position.

You clearly do not understand discrimination. When you are being discriminated against, you do not have the right to say no. No is already being decided for you. Putting it in its simplest terms, when US Soccer decided to offer the men one way to be paid and the women another, and when the women asked to have their pay equal men and they were told no, they no longer had the right to say no. The rate being offered was already unfair.

It would be more like everyone in your town was offered a garbage rate of $10 per pickup regardless of weight or type of refuse, and you were offered the same service for $500 per pickup because of your nationality. You can just say no and haul your own refuse somewhere to dispose of it. If you think this is just, ok for you. Again, you clearly either do not understand the facts of this matter, or you just think discrimination is ok. Either way, I am confident that no court in the country would agree with you.
There is a free market to set the rate. They are free to negotiate whatever pay they want prior to joining. They negotiated poorly. That is on them. I understand far more than you seem to. They were not forced to join the team.

I also understand reffing. The fact that you are pigeon holed into your pay is your fault. If you want to ref in classic league you accept their pay or you say no.

it is apparent you don't know how to negotiate either.

FACT: They had the ability to negotiate their pay before joining.
FACT: They aren't happy with what they accepted after the fact

They weren't discriminated against.

Multiple people have proved your points multiple times invalid. I know we are all wrong and you are right. Sure pal.

Last edited by CHRockwell; 04-30-2020 at 02:56 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2020, 05:52 AM
 
895 posts, read 881,364 times
Reputation: 1169
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRockwell View Post
There is a free market to set the rate. They are free to negotiate whatever pay they want prior to joining. They negotiated poorly. That is on them. I understand far more than you seem to. They were not forced to join the team.

I also understand reffing. The fact that you are pigeon holed into your pay is your fault. If you want to ref in classic league you accept their pay or you say no.

it is apparent you don't know how to negotiate either.

FACT: They had the ability to negotiate their pay before joining.
FACT: They aren't happy with what they accepted after the fact

They weren't discriminated against.

Multiple people have proved your points multiple times invalid. I know we are all wrong and you are right. Sure pal.
You do not seem to understand what a free market is. A free market assumes there is competition. There is not. In a free market, rates are set by multiple sources. when there is one source, its gone. They are not free to negotiate whatever pay they want prior to joining. They asked to be treated equally and were told no. They sued because we have laws to preclude this behavior. Just because you like discrimination and feel it should be legal to tell someone accept less than someone else based on discriminatory facts does not make it a free market. Its the very opposite. Being forced to to something is not remotely a factor is a free market.

As a ref, I am not pigeon holed into my. You really know nothing. My club league, and every club league I know, researches the pay of refs by other clubs and we increase our pay to be sure we get the best refs.
Of course the other clubs do this too. The league that cannot afford the pay increases get the worst refs and the leagues that pay the most get the best refs. Its pretty basic market economy. We offer jobs at the top level to dozens of refs each year who say no and go elsewhere because they can make more money. That is the free market determining rates. That is not what happens here. In professional leagues, women's players can leave or stay. Arguably the best offensive player, Sam Kerr, left her team in American and went elsewhere for better money and working conditions. Hailey Mace did the same thing for a year, and is now back playign for a club and at a price she was happy with. Free market at work.

FACT: They DID NOT had the ability to negotiate their pay before joining. this is completely untrue. They were presented with a discriminatory offer, they asked for the offer to be non-discriminatory and soccer said, we have the right to discriminate. They disagree with that position, so they are in court. Thsi is how the system works in the united states.

FACT: They weren't happy with how they were treated so they have used the law, which they used immediately after the so called negotiation. This lawsuit is several steps into the fight. The law requires an administrative claim, which they won. So no, no one agrees with you except sexists. Good company to keep. I am glad you are proud of it. They were discriminated against.

Multiple people have argued that it should be acceptable to discriminate against women. Many liek you who seem to enjoy suppressing women and hurting them. You have proved your points multiple times, you think it should be okay to hurt women. Good for you. I will stand opposed to you every time you or anyone else says it.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2020, 07:16 AM
 
236 posts, read 70,710 times
Reputation: 176
You don't seem to understand it. They have the ability to go into the free market and play for someone else. They can also choose to take on different endeavors.

Definition of free market: an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses.

"Free markets are characterized by a spontaneous and decentralized order of arrangements through which individuals make economic decisions."

You need to read that last sentence.


There are other private women's soccer enterprises they can play for. Are you suggesting that the only women's team in the world these women can play for is the USWNT? No it is not.

Just as the NBA has competition. The men's olympic basketball team has competition in that any player can sign with a different team in an international league.

Learn what the free market is.

What you are saying is like someone saying Amazon is the only company that can sell Amazon Web Services so they have no competition thus they are not in a free market. Uh yeah they are because there are other web service companies.

You are pigeon holed as a ref per the league of whichever specific league you choose. Pick any league you ref in and they dictate your pay. You are of free will to negotiate, but most if not all do not. Unlike you (per your choice) I don't take jobs that dictate pay to me. My talents and knowledge are far too great to do that. I dictate terms. If they don't like it I walk. You have chosen to take jobs who dictate what you are worth. Certainly your right.

Make no mistake your league could never ever get me to ref because I know how to negotiate and they aren't willing to pay my hourly rate of a minimum of $200/hr.

You wrote -
"FACT: They DID NOT had the ability to negotiate their pay before joining. this is completely untrue. They were presented with a discriminatory offer, they asked for the offer to be non-discriminatory and soccer said, we have the right to discriminate. They disagree with that position, so they are in court. Thsi is how the system works in the united states. "

Show me what legal statute precludes them from going up to the national team and specifically saying "If you want my services it will cost you X". They 100% had this ability. You are flat out wrong if you don't think the this the case. Of course you left out the part where they accepted the offer....and happily at the time. Their acceptance was of their own free will which as shown the free market allows.

Suppressing women? LOL. I absolutely think every person (notice no gender) should negotiate and maximize their pay. If a supermodel that is a woman makes 100x more than her male counterpart I applaud it. That man has the ability to negotiate the same pay. If he can find someone to pay it good for him. If he can't he isn't being discriminated against. He simply can't negotiate as well and/or his services are not as valuable to the paying party.

I certainly 100% support the women to use the legal system however they choose.

Last edited by CHRockwell; 05-01-2020 at 07:31 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2020, 12:51 PM
 
895 posts, read 881,364 times
Reputation: 1169
You really just either cannot read, or choose to be ignorant. This is a very simple discussion. The players on the USWNT are suing because US laws applicable to their employment have been violated. A national team competes in FIFA competition with other national teams. There are no other leagues. If you have read this thread or anything about the dispute with US Soccer you would know that it has nothing to do with other private leagues available to any players. This is about a particular employer discriminating in a league it has the absolute monopoly on. You don't seem to understand it. They do not have the ability to go into the free market and play for someone else. Whether they can also choose to take on different endeavors does not resolve the fact that they are being discriminated against. That also is not a free market. As you say, the definition of free market: an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses. THIS IS NOT THAT. There is simply NO competition at all. The players on this team CANNOT play for any other national teams. This is not a free market.

I agree that free markets are characterized by a spontaneous and decentralized order of arrangements through which individuals make economic decisions. Decisions by definition mean there is more than one option and REQUIRES that choosing not to participate not be the only option. If you do not understand this, please educate yourself. You need to read that last sentence you referenced, not me.

There are NO other soccer enterprises where you can participate in international soccer. Yes, the "US women's national team" is the only team in the world these women can play international for. You simply cannot understand this simple fact. Its not difficult, but you keep saying that they can choose not to do this or can play in another league that is not involved in FIFA international play. Then it is not a free market. You admit all the facts that defeat your position that this is a free market. Thank you.

And as for refs, no. They do not dictate my pay. I am indeed free to negotiate. I make any choice based on my own factors. Reffing soccer makes up a negligible portion of my income. Its pocket change. I ref more u8 games than any other at this point as my own age and health limit me. Being a coach and a referee are not my jobs. they are a part of my hobby and my passion. When I do coach or ref for money, it is teaching and consulting. It is completely "free market" in that I decline offers from the two main ref and coaching associations far more than I accept them because I am just too old to travel as much as I did in my youth, and I honestly like to spend my weekends with my family. My career has been fortunate in that I can coach, ref and stay involved in one of the most successful youth soccer leagues in my region and two travel clubs. My talents and knowledge are far too great be forced do anything. Again, you no nothing Jon Snow, but act like you know everything. I bet everyone is glad when you "walk." I know I would be. And my hourly rate is many times more than $200 per hour. My organization charges our clients for kids out of college more than that. Good choices you made.

As for the legal statute precludes them from going up to the national team and specifically saying "If you want my services it will cost you X" its called collective bargaining. Its 28 USC 157. But even if they were not in a union, and were individuals, when a contract violates the law, you can accept it and later sue for reformation or in this case, additional compensation. I am sorry that you do not understand this. Its 1L contracts and basic employment law. People accept contracts all the time and later sue because they discover that there was a problem the contract. So of course they accepted the offer, and happily at the time, then discovered the breach by US Soccer and seek redress. I handle dozens of disputes like this per year. Their acceptance was of not of their own free will because US law requires good faith in contracting, when it is not present, or bad faith is present, there are several legal remedies which is exactly what is being pursued. Again, the law does not seem to be your strong point, and at $200 per hour, I would understand why.

So yo u think that person should negotiate and maximize their pay, but you think it is okay for the person that the negotiate with to act in bad faith. Of course that is your right, but no western country legal jurisprudence supports you. I feel good about my legal position and that yours is laughable.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2020, 06:15 PM
 
236 posts, read 70,710 times
Reputation: 176
https://www.espn.com/espnw/sports/st...espn:frontpage

Waiting for you to tell us you know more than a judge. I suppose you can find the judges position laughable as well.

The fact you think that because there are no other international choices means they don't operate in a free market is asinine.

We both know you don't come close to making $200 an hour.

Thanks for providing comedy for the readers here.

Let me give you a little legal lesson also. When you lose in a summary judgment motion it means your suit was so out there that it didn't even warrant being heard by a judge or jury. In other words your legal opinion like theirs has literally no merit at all.

Oh and BTW if they were not operating in a free market this would not have been ruled against them in summary judgement as that would be a triable fact. So pretty much every single thing you seem to think has been thrown out by a judge. This decision couldn't have come on a more opportunistic day.

All that contract and employment law you think you know.....Nope, wrong as decided by a judge.

The breach of contract? Not as decided by a judge.

You handle dozens of disputes like this? No you don't because a judge ruled that this wasn't even good enough to warrant a trial which means any legal opinion you have is irrelevant and incorrect per the judge who decided this case.

Last edited by CHRockwell; 05-01-2020 at 06:24 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2020, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Seattle
7,095 posts, read 1,684,286 times
Reputation: 6110
Seems like a pretty thorough dismemberment of the plaintiffs' case.

Quote:
The court left unsettled only the plaintiffs' Title VII claims regarding discrimination in charter flights and hotel accommodations and medical and training support.
The players plan to appeal.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2020, 05:35 AM
 
236 posts, read 70,710 times
Reputation: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by rjshae View Post
Seems like a pretty thorough dismemberment of the plaintiffs' case.



The players plan to appeal.
A complete dismemberment. You don't get summary judgements unless you are so far off base that it would be a waste of court time. Judges almost always like to give a plaintiff their day in court.

In this case the claims were so ridiculous that there was nothing to try.


So Strangelove who told all of us how much more legalese he knows and how many wrongs occurred simply was so wrong and off base.

Either way you have to admit it is pretty funny how my view was laughable to him and he was comfortable where his view was right before a judge decided his view was ridiculous.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Soccer
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:09 AM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top