When Katie McCabe’s team made history last week and qualified for their first major tournament, it was a watershed moment. No two ways about it.
We may as well get used to the 7.30am starts because on Saturday morning in Auckland, Ireland will come out of Pot 3 and into a sobering “Group of Death”.
When Ireland’s opponents at next year’s World Cup are revealed – we could get England and Brazil! – it will feel very real.
Not to worry, this is the unattainable dream come to life. This past week I found myself thinking of all the young girls at home watching the Scotland game and seeing Irish women take this giant leap.
Copa 71: ‘These women were gaslit. Imagine playing a sport at the highest level and then being told, that didn’t exist’
Amber Barrett: ‘I say nothing when I don’t know the full truth ... The social media people should have done the same’
Sports Review 2023: Magical moment as Katie McCabe creates history
Katie McCabe interview: ‘It’s important to have characters, you don’t want a team of robots’
It could be Sweden, again, with Olympic champions Canada!
Young female footballers saw players at Hampden Park that they can relate to, from communities like their own, tearing down invisible barricades. I’ve thought about it a lot, and the difference it will make.
It could be the USA and the Netherlands!
Last week took me back to those childhood memories, watching Jack Charlton’s Republic of Ireland qualify and play at Euro ‘88 and Italia ‘90. I remember wishing I had been born a boy.
Because those types of opportunities were only for the boys. Football had a ceiling for girls. Until now.
In Ireland, when I was growing up, the game effectively ended at 12-years-old. I still played because I couldn’t get rid of the deep-seated love I had for football and I was called a “tomboy” in school. It wasn’t particularly offensive at the time, I never got upset by it, but it made me feel different to other girls.
[ Malachy Clerkin: Generations of girls will be in the Ireland team’s debtOpens in new window ]
[ The Irish Times view on women’s soccer: breaking the barrierOpens in new window ]
That leaves an imprint on your teenage years. So many women of my generation had a similar experience. It made me think about how liking football as a girl aligned you and classified you towards masculinity and away from femininity.
A “tomboy,” not a real girl.
According to the Oxford dictionary this means, “a girl who enjoys rough, noisy activities traditionally associated with boys”. The Cambridge dictionary says, “a girl who acts and dresses like a boy, liking noisy, physical activities.” Dictionary.com defines it as, “an energetic, sometimes boisterous girl whose behaviour and pursuits, especially in games and sports, are considered more typical of boys than girls.”
A “boisterous girl,” it actually says that.
At least the urban dictionary is different, “a tomboy refers to a female whose behaviour is free from the restriction of unwritten societal gender rules. She doesn’t think she is boyish or girlish, she is being herself”.
Oxford, Cambridge and Wikipedia, please take note.
I look at what’s fantastic about the women’s game at the highest level, it’s so tactical and technical. Game intelligence and the ability to execute those decisions accurately are vital to survive at the top.
[ Ireland will be keen to avoid Pot 4 dangers Portugal in upcoming World Cup drawOpens in new window ]
I’m not sure how often you’d hear stuff along the lines of, `Go through him early. Give him a rattle. Take him out of the game,’ in the pre-match chat.
The women’s Euros in England this summer were on TV, and largely devoid of theatrical diving or getting in the referee’s face to “help” them to make decisions.
The atmosphere in Tallaght Stadium for the women’s national team games is brilliant, and it’s different to the atmosphere at men’s games. That appeals to many who show up. The time the players get to spend with fans for photos, a little chat and an autograph is special. It’s part of the women’s game and is a strong part of the identity of the Super League in England.
During my time at Chelsea, it was something I really noticed after every game and while there remained an advantage to the home team, it wasn’t toxic or abusive.
I heard somewhere, a while back, that the atmosphere in Tallaght was too nice for an important women’s game. Does it have to be abusive and intimidating to be a good atmosphere?
I think McCabe and Co have already answered that question.
The whole country was watching last week, willing this Vera Pauw-managed side to hold on after Amber Barrett’s cool finish. As a result, the whole country will be hugely invested in next summer’s World Cup as the Girls in Green venture down under.
I’d take France and China!
As the women’s game develops, and the upward curve is going to be steep, my hope is that it’s unique identity endures, and as it becomes more lucrative for coaches and personnel from the men’s game that it doesn’t turn into a “tomboy” version of itself.
Because young girls watching last week will never see Katie McCabe or Denise O’Sullivan or Amber Barrett or Lily Agg or Courtney Brosnan as tomboys. They see them as women playing football, being strong in the challenge, athletic, technical, clever, determined, passionate and most of all ambitious.
The women’s game can have its own identity, it can be for everyone and we can learn from the imperfections of the men’s game instead of aspiring to be like the boys.
It has been a momentous year for women’s football and you get the feeling that the next 12 months are going to shape a future that will hopefully embrace and maximise the potential that now exists.
I do hope that the women’s game learns from the mistakes the men’s game has made and chooses its own identity as opposed to trying to replicate an established sport. We really don’t need to do that.
Actually, New Zealand and South Korea will do just fine.
Set the alarm for Saturday.
