18 August 2023

Forget the scoreboard, the Matildas waltzed home the real winners

| Sally Hopman
Join the conversation
17
Female football players

The Matildas: You have to love these brave, tenacious goal-orientated women. Their outfits, not so much. Photo: File.

You have to feel for those Matildas. In the scheme of things, losing the semis play-off, in front of rather a lot of people, is probably the least of their worries.

First, the name. Would they have lost had they been called, I don’t know, maybe after a queen of the jungle rather than a swag carried by an itinerant yob through the middle of the Australian bush?

Well, at least that’s what Banjo Paterson reckoned back in the 1890s when he wrote that catchy little number. Waltzing about somewhere in the middle of nowhere, preparing to confront, no less, a jumbuck in his tuckerbag. Sounds painful.

It was hard enough for those fabulous, tough, determined women to carry the nation’s hopes on what you would have to describe as some pretty impressive sets of shoulders. Wearing those vomit-yellow shiny shirts can’t have made it easy. Yep, green and yellow/gold are the colours but why not, for special occasions – like when more than 11 million people are watching you – opt for pink. Look what it did for Barbie.

READ ALSO To the women who cleared the path and the Matildas who bridged the divide

But the colour just adds to their box of woes. Yes, they may be just material woes, literally because most of their issues hem from the cloth, but they’re important.

OK, let’s start from the bottom. Those socks. They could only have looked worse had the girls opted to wear them with sandals rather than those sparkly shoes. Then the shorts. My dear, what sort of confused items of trouserware were they? Too short for some, too long for others – they should have just legged it. A nice twirly frock, even a yellow one, would have been preferable. (Waltzing Matildas … get it?)

But what you had to feel the most sorry-ness for was Sam Kerr’s calf. There was so much bull surrounding it. Would it make it to the semis? Would it like a drink of milk? What could be the udder reason it refused to behave? These questions and so many more will be answered in the next instalment of … What A Load of Cow Manure.

I can’t understand why The Calf didn’t have its own Instagram page/barn. It could not have been more scrutinised had it been before the chief cattle judge at the Sydney Royal, for, duh, Best In Show.

I almost get The Hair. Why they all scraped it back so far off their noggins that it looked like it was going to escape altogether.

What I didn’t get was why camerapeople were allowed to get so close to the girls, usually at the most inopportune moments when they had forgetten the words to the national anthem. Did you see how close some of those cameras came in? I thought they were going to start squishing pimples. Really pore form.

READ ALSO What will be the legacy of the Matildas’ success for women’s sport in Canberra?

Despite dealing with all this – and the slight issue of missing out on a rather large fancy Cup – these women, were, simply The Best – sorry, was that a code violation?

People who had never seen women’s football before are now fans. A nation united. Merch ruled – and when Sam Kerr took off her jersey to give it to that little girl, didn’t you just want to adopt her? (Sam not the kid.)

When the announcer bellowed that Sam had given away her jersey, I feared for a moment it might have been her calf, but, thankfully no.

Now that’s the sort of thing that wins you Best in Show.

Join the conversation

17
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

This is worse than your piece mocking the clothing choices of regional women.

Why is $200mil of taxpayers money spent on something that doesn’t generate its own revenue? Does anyone pay to watch AFLW? Why not sponsor the women’s chess club of Australia or something else irrelevant?

@Sam Oak
It’s a shame the facts don’t support your negativity, Sam

According to this 9News article (https://www.9news.com.au/national/fifa-womens-world-cup-matildas-create-7-billion-boost/64a76441-124c-480e-8b65-bcb84119290c) from 12-Aug, the WWC had generated a A$7.6bn economic boost for retail and travel industries across Australia.

I would have thought you would see that as a good return on investment.

Rubbish how is this calculated? Why did Victoria renege on hosting the Commonwealth games if these sporting events bring in so much tourism spend? Are women not represented in Comm games events – where is the public outcry and funding for them?

@Sam Oak
Read the article, Sam “Airwallex global accountants tracked sales and revenue for the retail and travel sectors after tickets went on sale for the World Cup to monitor spending.”

I look forward to your facts based financial analysis of the WWC to prove the figures from Airwallex are wrong.

As for the Commonwealth Games? They are an anachronism, a hangover from the once glorious British Empire, and probably not popular enough to attract enough support to generate sufficient return to justify the investment.

Oh Sam, if you can’t see the difference between the World Cup and the Commonwealth games, in either importance or value for money (including ROI), I’m sorry for you. Your red herring does your argument no good, as it’s very poor logic with a complete lack of analysis.

JS, still doesn’t makes sense if the investment was after the fact. Unless we host the WC every 4 years it won’t be anytime soon that we see and return on investment. If this doesn’t inspire young girls to get into sport how come $200mil does?

@Sam Oak
I hope you understand what you are talking about as I have no idea. How is the investment “after the fact”? The tax payer “investment” was to stage the WWC.

The article to which I referred you states that the 5 states which hosted games have received (not will receive) an injection of funds totalling $7.6bn – which is a pretty good return for the $200m you quoted came from taxpayers.

What in heaven’s name does hosting the WC every 4 years have to do with it?

As for young girls getting into sport? Well that comes from the exposure the WWC received on FTA and pay TV and the media in general.

I don’t understand the point of this article.

Please send it to the recycle bin.

@goggles13
Hopefully, another poster can shed some light on the point of this article and enlighten us both.

@goggles13 & JustSaying
I think the only point is that this writer has nothing of value to say, so resorts to clothing, hair and a load of crap. She probably has no understanding of the game or the fact that athletes’ main concerns are playing the game, not how they look in their uniforms. I wonder if she comments on women in the military or the police in the same way. This writer needs to stick to topics within her field of knowledge, whatever that is.

@psycho
Absolutely agree

Ok, ta very much.

Don’t call us, we’ll call you…

What a terrible article! Nothing about the sport and these athletes’ wonderful skills, instead a focus on their clothes and their name. This has to be the most sexist article on the Matildas that I’ve seen and it’s written by a woman. Pathetic.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.