Emma Pooley says it's 'nuts' she gets more prize money from triathlon 'hobby' than pro cycling

Nice try, but seriously do you think I am going to pass that info to a complete stranger!

If you look through past editions of cycling weekly, you will recall Emma moaning in an article about not getting a power meter she was promised blah blah blah.

I'm lucky enough to know people, so thought i'd help out, but I wasted my time with an ungrateful individual, so sorry to burst the bubble.

I do know live in Perth, WA, where Emma spends a lot of her off season, she has family here, and I can promise you, the feeling here is of a whinging pom.

Unprofessional eh, that assumes I am in the profession...

farrell wrote:

I can't figure out which is more repugnant. Joe In Poole's post or the fact that there are eight other cavemorons that felt compelled to hit the 'like' button.

Give your heads a wobble.

It's always good to throw a little bait out there to get the 'PC Brigade' foaming at the mouth. They never disappoint.

To be honest I think it's "nuts" that Wayne Rooney gets paid more in a week for kicking a ball about than a top consultant surgeon gets paid in a year for saving people's lives. (NB: Did you watch "One Hour to Save Your Life" on the BBC recently? I'd honestly prefer to watch those guys doing their work than WR __ but maybe that's just me.)

I also think it's "nuts" that Anna Kournikova became the world's best paid sportswoman without ever actually winning a WTC singles event or climbing above 8th position in the rankings.

I think it's "nuts" that people pay thousands of pounds for shiny stones that they call "jewellery" that appear to have no practical purpose. Why don't they use the money to travel the world instead __ or buy a bike?

But that's how things are.

Joeinpoole wrote:

farrell wrote:

I can't figure out which is more repugnant. Joe In Poole's post or the fact that there are eight other cavemorons that felt compelled to hit the 'like' button.

Give your heads a wobble.

It's always good to throw a little bait out there to get the 'PC Brigade' foaming at the mouth. They never disappoint.

To be honest I think it's "nuts" that Wayne Rooney gets paid more in a week for kicking a ball about than a top consultant surgeon gets paid in a year for saving people's lives. (NB: Did you watch "One Hour to Save Your Life" on the BBC recently? I'd honestly prefer to watch those guys doing their work than WR __ but maybe that's just me.)

I also think it's "nuts" that Anna Kournikova became the world's best paid sportswoman without ever actually winning a WTC singles event or climbing above 8th position in the rankings.

I think it's "nuts" that people pay thousands of pounds for shiny stones that they call "jewellery" that appear to have no practical purpose. Why don't they use the money to travel the world instead __ or buy a bike?

But that's how things are.

I'm not a foamy PC brigadier, however, I am a woman and I do race bikes and found your previous comments a little disturbing - insofar as I hope those views aren't too widespread. I would hate to bring a child into a world where the opinion that women can only be successful if they sacrifice their dreams is normalised - to be frank, we've been putting up with that crap for long enough. I couldn't give a rats arse about the sometimes vehement line of victimisation of women which some people take, I'm not a feminist, but I do work in technology and have experienced and witnessed what can only be described as savage behaviour toward women and even those who don't fit the standard confines of hetero alpha-male.

While I agree, footballers pay is disgusting, and there are huge injustices in the world, that doesn't excuse sexism (which, when it boils down to it, is what the problem is) - it's not merely a fact of "how things are" - it's 2014 for crying out loud.

Where did I say that "women can only be successful if they sacrifice their dreams"? All I said was if you want money then go where the money is. That's not sexist, it's just practical. It applies equally to men, women and everything in between.

I do photography. There's not too much money in it and I literally earn half now what I did 10 years ago when I was in engineering. That's ok though because I enjoy what I do now much more than I did back then. I'm self-employed, work from home and it means that I can go for a bike ride or play golf whenever I feel like it.

There's no point in me complaining that photography should be better paid though (like engineering is say) because it is market forces that determine the 'worth' of an occupation. Same with sport.

Joeinpoole wrote:

Where did I say that "women can only be successful if they sacrifice their dreams"? All I said was if you want money then go where the money is. That's not sexist, it's just practical. It applies equally to men, women and everything in between.

I do photography. There's not too much money in it and I literally earn half now what I did 10 years ago when I was in engineering. That's ok though because I enjoy what I do now much more than I did back then. I'm self-employed, work from home and it means that I can go for a bike ride or play golf whenever I feel like it.

There's no point in me complaining that photography should be better paid though (like engineering is say) because it is market forces that determine the 'worth' of an occupation. Same with sport.

It's more the point that we're in a position where women still have to consider that, though. I don't mean you said that - but that's how it comes across, not necessarily just by you but in general. The sports still in a state where you have highly talented women being told by their peers, parents and management that "they'd best go to Uni as this isn't really a career choice" - it's shocking.

I did photography too and encountered exactly the same issues, it's a cutthroat world - but a male tog and a female tog will still get paid £50 for a quality print regardless of who took it.

It's not that we're complaining we don't get enough, money's money, we're trying to make ourselves heard in an environment where there is a clear gender imbalance - despite the fact that there *is* a demand for women's cycling.

Joeinpoole wrote:

There's no point in me complaining that photography should be better paid though (like engineering is say) because it is market forces that determine the 'worth' of an occupation. Same with sport.

Although here we're comparing "bike riding" with "bike riding", rather than different occupations.

jstreetley wrote:

Joeinpoole wrote:

There's no point in me complaining that photography should be better paid though (like engineering is say) because it is market forces that determine the 'worth' of an occupation. Same with sport.

Although here we're comparing "bike riding" with "bike riding", rather than different occupations.

Did you read the article? The 'compare and contrast' bit was the money Pooley won from gaining third place in her 'hobby ', a half ironman triathlon, compared to her winnings in her 'chosen profession' of bike racing.

Colin Peyresourde wrote:

You never heard men arguing about how much they were paid even back in the days it was doodly-squat....and that wasn't long ago.

So the riders strikes and protests in the 70s and 80s didn't happen? Plus there were far fewer "channels" for coverage (especially in English) so even if they were complaining there would be far less coverage.

Joeinpoole wrote:

It's not "nuts", it's simply the market.

Women's football for example will never take off whilst they insist on dressing like blokes and trying to talk like them too (whilst blowing snot from their noses when being interviewed) in a ridiculous bid to be taken seriously. If in tennis the women wore baggy men's clothing and also acted like blokes then their sport too would have considerably less appeal.

Putting aside the revolting sexism which implies folk only watch women's sport to look at women's bodies, and that women must behave in ways pleasing to others to be appealing...

...do you have a clue about the history of women's football/soccer? Its development as mass spectator sport in the ealry 20thC mirrored that of the men's game and it was once so popular the FA found it necessary to ban women from playing on the grounds of its affiliates in 1921, a ban that lasted 50 years, because they didn't like the competition.

It's the market? My backside, the market is rigged. By men.

Joeinpoole wrote:

Those sports are 'tv friendly' and the competitors actually look and dress like females

Have you looked at the male pro tours, quite a few of them have blokes wearing 'tights' and in days gone by wearing tights may well have been considered ever so slightly female so does that mean I should boycott watching them as they don't have standard issue lumberjack shirts or pinstripe suits?

Flying Scot wrote:

As a professional, enter the events that pay the best, also enter the lower paying ones that keep your profile up.

Tens of thousands would love to be able to select from these choices.

Bless.

Tens of thousands don't have 1/10th of her talent nor 1/1000th of her dedication.

madonepro wrote:

If you've ever met her, you'd add whingy too.

A few years ago, she had a whinge at the fact that she was still waiting for a Power Meter from J Vaughters, so I contacted Jon and put everything in place. Managed to get Emily to email me through a contact at British Cycling, and she whinged some more, even though all she had to do was email JV at the address he gave, and provide her address, and she'd have the PM, but no, whinge whinge whinge.

Who's Emily? Are you sure you're telling the truth?