John Doyle is the Globe's TV critic, and the author of The World is a Ball: The Joy, Madness and Meaning of Soccer
It's a vital battle. It's about gender equality and payment in a lucrative sport.
But talk about not getting it. Talk about condescension. And condescension aimed at strong, accomplished, world-champion female athletes.
On Thursday, five members of the U.S. women's soccer team filed a federal complaint against the U.S. Soccer Federation to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging wage discrimination. The complaint uses the Federation's own figures to show that they were paid much less than men's players, while generating more revenue.
In response the Federation's first statement said, "While we've not seen this complaint and can't comment on the specifics of it, we're disappointed about this action. We've been a world leader in women's soccer and are proud of the commitment we've made to building the women's game in the United States over the past 30 years."
The word "disappointed" is one of those trigger words that, rightly, enrages women. It diminishes them and diminishes the complaint. It's a word used to speak down to children and, worse, in the context that the Federation is saying it's disappointed because, well, we've done so much for you. If one of the players kicked a ball hard and fast in response, nobody would blame them.
Thing is, the U.S. Soccer Federation clearly hasn't actually done what it should to compensate the World Cup-winning women's team. Men's soccer generates more money than the women's game, with TV rights revenues and paid attendance at matches. Women's soccer isn't a world-wide phenomenon. That's a fact. But when the amount of money that the U.S. Soccer Federation has garnered from both the men's and women's national teams is examined, it turns out the women's team brings in more money.
Still, when the U.S women's team plays a "friendly" international game in preparation for a tournament, against one of the top ten teams in the world, the players get a fee of $1,350 apiece for a win. Players on the men's team, in a friendly against top-10 opposition, get as much as $17,625 for a win. The men get $12,500 for a win against teams outside the top 10, while women still get the same $1,350.
This is an important frame of reference here. The U.S. Soccer Federation's own projection figures for the financial year starting April 1, 2016, estimates that the women's team will turn in a $5-million profit while the men's team will generate a loss of $1-million. In the U.S., it's women's soccer that matters and produces champions, but the champions always get less compensation. The rage about this is real, and no wonder.
Search online and you can find a sizzle real of highlights from an upcoming documentary called Shadow Game, about women's soccer. In it, Billie Jean King, the woman who was the first superstar of women's tennis, offers blunt advice about women being compensated for playing soccer. "Money is a measuring stick that everyone understands," she says. "The money is important. It's a fixed measurement. They understand money."
When Ms. King talks about "they" she means everyone – the sports authorities, the audience, the players. And she is correct. The "they" extends well into the lucrative American entertainment industry.
Last year, Forbes magazine reported that actresses working in film earn about 40 per cent of what their male counterparts make, and the TV industry is not much better. Actress Gillian Anderson recently told an interviewer that when The X-Files show was launched in the 1990s, she received half the salary her male co-star David Duchovny did. It took her three seasons, with the show already a huge hit, to get parity. That was then and this is now.
But Ms. Anderson revealed that when this year's revival of The X-Files was being mounted, she was again offered half of what Mr. Duchovny would get. Eventually, after bargaining, she got equal pay with her co-star.
While actors can have long careers, sports stars have a limited period in which to earn their value as players. That's why this fight by the U.S. women's team for parity matters so much. Money is the measurement that truly matters. They fought against the use of artificial turf at the Women's World Cup in Canada last year – and lost. They played on second-rate surfaces. But they are first-rate players and deserve first-rate money, as the men get.
They won the World Cup and it's vital they win this equal-pay battle, too. The word "disappointment" won't cover it if they lose.