In London, theatergoers flocked to “Dear England,” a hit play that chronicles the drama and struggles of the national men’s soccer team in its long quest for another World Cup title, now in its 57th year. already and increasing. In Sydney on Sunday, England’s women’s team may finally get the job done.
England will face Spain in the Women’s World Cup final, a first for either team. Although they are closely matched, England’s impressive march through the tournament has fueled hopes that the “homecoming of football,” in the ever-optimistic words of “The Three Lions,” will not official song of the boy band.
That the Lionesses, not the Lions, could take it home is a twist that beguiles and confuses people in a country where the men’s team’s painful history — a litany of failed chances, broken promises and knockouts that defeat (especially in Germany and particularly after the sanctions) – was deeply etched in the national psyche.
“It’s hard to deny that this is really a big moment for the women’s game here,” said John Williams, a sports sociologist at the University of Leicester in England. “But it doesn’t take the monkey off men’s backs. If anything, it makes it look less horrible and more culpable, if women do the work.
In a country that claims to be the game’s spiritual home, a win is a win — and men and women, young and old, root for the Lionesses. “As far as England goes, I don’t care who brings the football home,” said Brad Jones, 25, a consultant from Bristol who was riding the underground in London on Friday.
But the sordid history of the men’s team, in a country that also views soccer as an important expression of male fraternity, has prompted criticism that women do not receive the same treatment as their brothers.
The government has ruled out declaring a bank holiday — British parlance for a national day off — if England wins. Critics say officials will do that without thinking about whether the men’s team will claim another World Cup. Neither Prime Minister Rishi Sunak nor Prince William, president of the Football Association, plan to travel to Australia to watch the game.
Queen Elizabeth II attended the World Cup final in 1966, the last and only time England won (beating West Germany, 4-2, after extra time, on home turf). He presented the trophy to the England captain, Bobby Moore. Spain plans to send Queen Letizia and her 16-year-old daughter, Infanta Sofia, to the final in Sydney.
“When the Spanish team looks into the stands on Sunday morning, they will see their queen,” columnist AN Wilson wrote a rebuke in The Daily Mail, a British tabloid. “When our brave Lionesses cast their eyes to see a British grandee,” he said, “they will be forgiven for not recognizing anyone.”
Even pubs may not be able to serve pints before kickoff, which is at 11 am in Britain, due to restrictions on serving alcohol on Sunday mornings. The government rejected a theatrical call by the opposition Liberal Democrats to restore Parliament to pass legislation easing the rules. But a senior minister, Michael Gove, has written to local councils to urge them to allow pubs to open an hour earlier than normal.
Fans, Mr Gove said, should “get together and have a drink before kick-off for this special occasion,” adding, “the whole country is ready to get behind the Lionesses this Sunday in what England’s biggest game since 1966.”
Strictly speaking, Mr. Gove about the importance of the game. But the truth is more nuanced. The women had already won the European title last year, bringing the first major soccer cup back to England since 1966.
For the boys, losses, not victories, defined the team’s narrative. In December, England were dismissed by France in a World Cup quarterfinal in Qatar. In July 2021, in the European final, it lost to Italy in a penalty shootout to the shock and despair of the 67,000 crowd at Wembley Stadium.
That heartbreak was captured in “Dear England,” as well as another horrendous missed penalty kick, by Gareth Southgate, an England player who is now the team’s coach, in the semifinal against Germany in 1996. The lingering shadow of defeats is part of the lore of English football, balanced against the energetic, diverse, and politically aware team assembled by Mr. Southgate.
England’s male players have forced Britain to confront serious issues, kneeling before games to protest racial injustice, for example. After three young Black players missed penalty kicks in the 2021 loss, they were subjected to racist slurs.
The women’s team is less racially diverse than the men’s team, with only two Black players on the current roster. Professor Williams, the sports sociologist, said the representation reflected the development of women’s soccer in England as a suburban, middle-class sport, like in the United States. But unlike the American women’s team – or, for that matter, the men in England – the Lionesses have generally stayed out of politics.
“None of the team are known for being politically outspoken,” Professor Williams said. “They don’t have the dimension that Megan Rapinoe brought to the USA team,” he added, referring to the star American winger who campaigns for gay and lesbian rights and is maligned by some on the political right, like some England men. the players were criticized by right-wing figures in Britain for their political statements.
Most of England’s women are known for their tight unity and relentless drive on the field. Their no-nonsense Dutch coach Sarina Wiegman, is a former player who has led his home country’s team to a World Cup final, where it lost to the United States. He has no qualms about running points against weaker opponents.
However, just by being women in a globally male-dominated sport, England’s players are part of a longer social story. The country’s Football Association banned women from professional soccer in 1921, in part because of fear that the women’s game became very popular during the suspension of men’s games due to World War I.
Victory in the World Cup in 1966 rekindled interest in women’s soccer, but the Football Association took responsibility for the women’s game again only in the 1990s. Its profile has grown rapidly in recent years as Premier League teams, particularly Arsenal, Chelsea and Manchester City, have fielded elite women’s teams.
Another historic club, Manchester United, wants to consult its female players – four of whom are members of the national team – in deciding whether to reinstate a star forward, Mason Greenwood, after allegations of attempted rape and attack against him was dropped in February.
For some sports commentators, the attempt to show gender sensitivity ended up being an ill-timed distraction for players preparing for the World Cup final.
For all the advances in women’s soccer — whether increased television coverage or improved quality of play — one difference stands out: Men are paid more than women. Even England’s best players — the likes of the captain, Millie Bright; striker Alessia Russo; or Lauren James, one of the tournament’s breakout stars — earned a fraction of their male counterparts.
Women’s games also tend to draw more families with children than men’s matches, Professor Williams said, and the atmosphere can seem less tribal, aggressive and alcoholic.
“You have some male fans saying, ‘That’s enough. The quality of women’s football is better,'” he said. “But there’s clearly a rump of male supporters who say it’s a huge waste of time. They say, ‘Watching football is how we get away from girls.'”
Passing through London’s Victoria Station on Friday, Lyndsey Jefford, 45, a primary school principal, said: “I’m really proud to see how well the women have done, although it still annoys me when people turn their backs on me. women’s football by saying men play a different game.”
Declan Bird, 24, who works in digital marketing, agreed that it didn’t matter whether England’s men or women won the World Cup. And she pointed out a useful potential benefit of women’s success.
“Hopefully,” he said, “this inspires the boys’ team.”
Natasha Frost contributed reporting.
