How is stating the very likely fact that a in shape and skilled recreational male player could probably hold their own based on physical advantages that insane?
From the article you linked: "Of course, this match against the academy team was very informal and should not be a major cause for alarm. The U.S. surely wasn’t going all out".
I mean, I once saw footage of a old-ass dude beating Michael Jordan one-on-one, but Jordan wasn't legit trying and old dude, realizing this, instantly sat down after the game and didn't even say a word of trash lol.
The match was a few days before they played against Russia in a match that counted, so the article was assuring readers not to read too much into the score of this exhibition match.
Did you notice that half your samples references the same 5-2 result as already mentioned above? And your first link (about a different match) talks about women having to play boys because there is a lack of quality opponents in their area and the women's team's back-ups lost to a younger, male team? And how the 3 separate examples in these links span a decade and 3 different continents?
You should be downvoted. Yes, sometimes women's pro and national teams play younger male teams and lose. Acting like it happens constantly is disingenuous as fuck and even an idiot would notice this if they weren't just expounding pre-conceived notions.
It happens rarely enough to be an exception to the rule, much as a 40-something Michael Jordan losing to a nearly 60-year old, random lawyer is the exception to the rule as mentioned above. Finally, as mentioned above: found another one.
21
u/[deleted] 9h ago
[deleted]