I am a huge USA soccer fan and I have always admired Bruce Arena but his latest quotes are flatly unacceptable. In today's New York Times he says about Hamm and Akers making Pele's best 100 list:" the list is simply a political statement that women play soccer-they are certainly not among the top 100 living players in the world.They are not among the top 100 living players in the US". According to this logic women can never be the top 100 in any sport.It is interesting because I was a competitive tennis player, and I think virtually ALL male tennis players consider Navratilova and Graf to be among the best who have ever played, even though they could never beat any of the top 100 men. Bruce chooses to take the meaning of "best" in the narrowest possible way, in a way that divides male and female. In fact, it is not clear that the best older generations of soccer players ( or many other sports) could make the list under Bruce's definition- the game is much faster now. I love Bruce but I have to give him a loud boo for this. This is not just politically incorrect, it is disrespectful to Akers and Hamm, who are fantastic players.
How many excuses for women playing sports need to be made? Are they the "best" players to ever play the sport? No. Perhaps they are the best women, but they don't even come under the top 5,000 best soccer players of all time. It was simply politically correct for Pele to list these women on the list to avoid any flack for not having done it. I applaud Bruce Arena for still showing he has cajones. Were Graf and Navratilova great tennis players? Sure, but that's an entirely different kind of sport, based completely on individualism. But ultimately, they were the greatest female tennis players and had no chance against any of the top 200 men. The list was the 100 best footballers of all time, not the best female footballers of all time. The women want independence. Let them learn how to be tough then in all respects.
Mia Hamm has been candid in stating that she would not last 5 minutes in the MLS. If she can say that why can't Coach Arena? If she can't even warm the bench in the MLS that would not even put her in the top 1000, or 50,000, players in the world. You can't compare U14s to pros, and you can't really compare women to men because of the physical differences between men and women. That is why they have women's teams and men's teams. Segregation allows women to have their own teams and be judged against their peers. Mia is an outstanding player compared to other women soccer players.
Lighten up Bruce. If you were picking teams, Hamm and Akers would not be among the top 100 players picked. That's all Arena is saying. Now, if others look at "best" differently and factor out gender differences in putting them on some type of imaginary level playing field, that is fine with me. I do think that Arena and all of us ought to ignore best players lists as they are just a waste of time.
I betcha 50% of Americans think that Hamm and Akers are legitimately among the best 120 players of any gender. OK, if not 50%, at least a large minority. The same people who take it for granted that the USWNT team can beat Bruce's gang. Given that fact and given that Arena is a crabby sort anyway, I'm not surprised by his comment. And I won't criticize him for it, either.
well, according to this logic then, Wilt Chamberlain, Bob Cousy and Bill Russel are not among the best basketball players of all time. Context matters.They definitely would get dominated by bigger faster guys now. And Roger Bannister and Arnold Palmer would also not rate.
Speaking of tennis, didn't McEnroe say that Venus Williams couldn't beat the #100 ranked males player? Do you really think Mia Hamm is the best American soccer player? Greatest, perhaps, but certainly not the best.
While it was certainly less than diplomatic of him, I don't see this as being outrageous. It was a politically correct gesture on FIFA's part, what's wrong with Bruce saying so? I don't think it takes anything away from Mia and Akers being the world's best female players to acknowledge that they don't really belong on a list of the world's 100 top players in a subjective sense. There are lots of other players that don't belong on that list either. Arena was just being honest as usual (maybe a little too honest, but what he said isn't wildly inaccurate).
totally true, Williams could not beat any top pro period. I played some mixed doubles and my partner was the # 2 ranked girl in the US. She never took one set from me, ever, in 4 years we worked out together. And I would say she was a better tennis player than me.
It's difficult compare players from different generations, because the older players didn't have access to the nutrition and sports technology that we have today. Bruce is saying that they're not among the best 100 today, so they're not among the best ever. I think there should be different categories for men and women. Then we can get on with life.
I guess it comes down to what you mean by best- but again, if you define best as who would win head to head outside of context, then you have to be prepared to say that Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Bob Cousy, et al, were not among the best 100 living basketbell playars ( well, Wilt is dead). Because they would have trouble even getting a shot off now. When I think of best, I think it is within a reasonable context- as I think Pele did. I would definitely consider Navratiliova to be one of the top 5 tennis players of all time, as I would rate Graf. I am less sure about Hamm, but to me, Akers was also one of the best soccer players of all time.
No effin' way. People know that the best women's basketball players can't compete in the NBA, so why in hell would they not know that the best women's soccer players can't compete with men?
Well, maybe I exaggerate. But basketball is not the right comparison, since people in the U.S. know basketball and take it seriously. Or maybe I don't exaggerate. What the hell, one third of Americans believe in telepathy (Gallup & Newport '91). So maybe all these same people believe that Mia Hamm is better than Landon Donovan. People will believe strange things. At any rate, I've had it asked of me more than once, "Is it true that the women's team can beat the men?" They tend to give me slightly funny looks when I tell them the score would be 15-0, maybe more. By the way, Pele insulted women a lot more than did Arena. Bruce just said that if you are to have an absolute list, no woman cracks the top 100 players. Pele said, if you take everything into context so that women also receive a shot at the list, men rate 98 spots and women rate 2 spots. So which approach is more demeaning to women?
we probably have 2 diferent ways that honest people can interpret "best". One is in context ( with gender, generation,etc). And one is in a head to head fight , right now. Most "best" lists I have seen in other sports usually take context into account, but let's admit that it is ambiguous. Having said that, Bruce chose one meaning and used it to disparage Akers and Hamm. He could very well have said " of course if you mean head to head, any good male player is better than any female player. But within the broader context, they are great players".
If I were Bruce, I would not complain (to a reporter) about Hamm and Akers being named top 100. I don't see the point in discrediting Hamm and Akers (justifiably or not). It is not going to make people think any higher of our male players. I would show a little more class (or be more politically correct) by praising these two female players and say that I hope some of our male players would become top 100 some time soon.
well said.Pele is not an idiot.He knows that Hamm and Akers are not "better" in a head to head with male players.I think for Bruce not to get the context shows a serious lack of class and judgement.It is not lack of political correctness, it is being a moron.
Says you. All three would have little trouble competing in today's NBS, particularly if they learned how to ignore the rules the way today's players get to. Chamberlain in particular was one of the biggest athletic freaks of all time. For a guy that big, the range and diversity of his athletic talents were astounding. Plus context is important, but I think being the greatest players in the world at one time is a different context of being the greatest female player at one time.
I disagree strongly re: Wilt. The guy was a world class quarter miler, could slam on a 12-foot basket, and could with a running start take 4 steps and slam a basketball. They changed the freakin' rules of the game because Wilt was taking his free throws by running up to the line, jumping, and slamming home his free throws! I'm not saying Shaq couldn't push him around a bit inside, but Shaq didn't have the sweet fadeaway Wilt had (ironically, Wilt was TOO good at certain parts of his game, which made him ignore developing other aspects such as passing and free throws). Cousy I doubt would start anywhere in the NBA today. Back on topic, I don't think this is as much a bow to Political Correctness as a subtle poke at the USA in men's soccer.
The list makes no sense, unless you interpret it as the 100 most influential and inspirational living players. Look at it in those terms some of the selections make a lot more sense. That said, Bruce should have kept his mouthe shut on this one. Their was no point to comment, and if he did he would have done better to point out Bo, who clearly is not one of the top defenders in the world, and isnt particularly great for MLS, than to pick out the only 2 women on the list.
Wilt's shooting range was about 1 foot. But at 7'1", he had nobody to challnge him physically.Let's face it, every single team has someone 7 feet- and a lot quicker than Wilt.I don't mean to demean him- as I said earlier, you have to view all of these people in context to be fair.
Stick with the first part of your post. Completely drop saying that Akers and Hamm are good players. They are not good players in the context of all the soccer players in the world.
Funny, I find your calling Bruce a moron for making a statement which is obviously correct in the context within which he said it to be equally moronic. And we even know how you are prefacing your remarks.
This is a touchy damn subject, and I've been caught in it before. Let me say that I'm old fashioned in the fact that I respect women and still hold doors open for them at every chance. And I would never go as far to say anything disrespectful of the womens game as it is a completely separate entity from the mans game. I think Pele was just being a gentlemen and an ambassador for the sport and him giving credit where credit is due on the womens side. These two women have been great ambassadors for womens soccer and soccer in general in the states. And they are great players in their genre. So take it for what its worth and walk away from this argument. Hell no one can agree on the best 10 men ever so it's not worth it.
If women belong on the list why are there only two? Shouldn't there be fifty? As for Bruce, he should have kept his mouth shut on this one. Pele seems like a decent enough guy, but NASA's not going to be beating down his door anytime soon.