WWC Day Six - We need to talk about history and prize money
Philippines are the moment, what you need to know about World Cup prize money, and Barbenheimer
The fairytale narrative of this Women’s World Cup continued into Day Six as debutants Philippines pulled off an unbelievable win over New Zealand.
It was a pretty scrappy game that lacked a lot of quality but the Philippines’ will and determination got them over the line in the most incredible fashion. Goalkeeper Olivia McDaniel pulled off an amazing save late on to secure the win but it was Sarina Bolden who was the goal hero. Bolden, McDaniel and most of the Philippines squad are Filipino-Americans and most of them have played at college level and some play professionally.
The ultimate diaspora squad that the Philippines have built is thanks to the work of an American volunteer liaison who went on a recruitment drive, realising there was so much untapped potential across the US soccer landscape.
Henry Bushnell detailed the Philippines unique journey to this World Cup in a great piece that I included at the bottom of a previous newsletter but it’s definitely worth a read.
The Philippines’ win has only added to the feeling that this World Cup is going to be an all time classic when it comes to upsets and smaller nations punching their weight.
The Philippines emotional win got me thinking again about the legacy and sustainable impact of this tournament. What will it be for the smaller nations, beyond a once in the lifeline trip, how can they build development for their careers and actually earn a living.
As mentioned in the bumper preview issue, prize money has increased considerably for this World Cup.
The Philippines squad will be entitled to $30,000 each as part of Fifa’s new prize money plans for this Women’s World Cup.
Before the tournament Fifa announced a new distribution model for the tournament which would guarantee players certain sums of money depending where their team finished, as opposed to previous editions where a single lump sum was handed to a national federation.
The total prize pot has increased by 300% to $150 million and players on the winning team will claim $270,000 each.
The total breakdown:
Group stage: $30,000
Round of 16: $60,000
Quarterfinal: $90,000
Fourth place: $165,000
Third place: $180,000
Second place: $195,000
Winners: $270,000
Now, in theory this new model should put prize money directly in the hands of players for the very first time, but in practice, and as Fifa President Gianni Infantino confirmed before the tournament, the federations will still be used as a third-party distributor.
What we know from the history of football is that federations can’t be trusted to pay their athletes properly and pass on the bonuses they’re entitled to.
It’s also caused an issue between federations and squads as some, including England’s FA, have said there won’t be additional bonuses up for grabs and the Fifa prize money is all they’ll be entitled to.
Some of the big leaders have already been applying pressure on Fifa and Infantino. Lise Klaveness, president of the Norwegian Football Federation, said in a recent interview with Forbes: “In the letter from Fifa when the prize money was announced, it was a condition that the prize money had to go to the players and it will also be subject to audit.
“There is room for doubt. It was a legal condition in the worded statement. That still stands. For the Philippines or countries where the women's side is not professional, this is huge. Perhaps it would have been more useful to spend it on the grassroots. Fifa used its symbolic position here. If you now start to renege on this, a good promise that will help the women’s game will turn negative for Fifa and [become] a credibility issue”.
She’s right, it should not be difficult to ensure that players receive the money. We’ll have to wait and see whether we can trust football’s governing body.
Barbenheimer? I hardly knew her! *No spoilers
On Sunday night, I went for the Barbie and Oppenheimer double bill and I have to say it was absolutely worth it. I have to confess I had got completely caught up in the social media hysteria surrounding the two movies. I genuinely believe this dual release, thanks to the memes and marketing, was a cultural moment.
It turns out tons of other people have also been wrapped up in that feeling too. Every single screening of Barbie and Oppenheimer was sold out at Finsbury Park Picturehouse on Sunday, they even sold out of salt popcorn. There were people dressed up and everyone was hyped.
In both screenings the audiences were locked in, I didn’t see anyone get their phones out or check their Apple watches, it was full attention, and it’s been a while since I went to the theatre or movies and didn’t see the flash of a device.
I don’t want to give any spoilers as I’m sure lots of people are planning to go and watch the movies, but I’ll tell you that I loved both films.
Barbie was so fresh, original, slick, funny and smart. It was 1hr 40 minutes and flew by, almost too quickly. Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling were absolutely perfect in the leads but the ensemble cast really stole the show. There’s some crazy cameos, and I’m not even talking about the ones you think. Let me know if you spot Chris Taylor from Love Island.
I think there were moments where the film could have been padded out a little bit more, especially in the main sentimental story arc, but apart from that I think it was a near perfect film. I left the cinema so excited and ready to take on the world, and Oppenheimer.
Oppenheimer is not a short film, it’s 2 hours 49 minutes and part of me was dreading that late night post Barbie, but it didn’t drag at all. It was extremely quick paced and a audio/visual experience taking you deep into the heart of nuclear warfare. It explores and considers the morality of chemical weapons and the legacy of the war and what it did to those that created the weapons and also the hundreds of thousands that died as a result.
The film timeline changed so quickly you need to be on guard so that you don’t get lost in the plot, but I think there is enough explanation and character set up, as well as Cillian Murphy ageing, to keep you across the time period. There also some great cameos, including Josh Peck, aka Josh from Nickelodeon’s Drake and Josh.
The main lowlight for me was the Casey Afleck cameo. I didn’t realise he had been making a return to film since settling two sexual harassment lawsuits out of court a few years ago and sadly regardless of 'Me Too’, Hollywood has a very short memory. Even so, there are plenty of actors that could have played that role.
Anyway, go and see these movies. They’re really fun.
Some things to read….
Alexandra Popp and the ET goal celebration
Jamaica and Haiti show gap is closing at this World Cup of the unexpected
Until tomorrow!