36 thoughts on “Sexism in Sport and the rise of Equal Prize Money”

  1. I was also disheartened to see PSA players tweet that the women shouldn’t get equal prize money, and then claim that they aren’t being sexist. Yes, the men’s game is faster but there is a lot of value in the today’s women’s tour. The rise of these young Egyptians (in addition to other similarly skilled shotmakers from all over the world) has added a whole new demension of flare that is just as high-level as their male counterparts.

    Also, as a paying subscriber to PSA Squash Tv, I’ve been slightly more invested in the women’s tour as of late. I applaud Ramy, but his domination of the tour has made every event seem like an inevitable coronation for his victory. Of course, his rivals will eventually rise to the ocassion, but at the moment the women’s tour is a worthy alternative for me. So from my perspective, they’ve earned the right to equal prize money.

    1. @Squasher88 – you talk about Ramy’s domination being almost boring so you’ve moved to the WSA matches – so with this in mind, I’m assuming you’ve heard of Nicol David? Ramy hasn’t lost for over a year – yes. Nicol has lost two handfuls of matches over the last 7 years… if that is not ‘inevitable coronation to victory’ i don’t know what is.

  2. Paying equal prize money is a form of respect.

    Besides, are we even 100% sure the men’s draw drives tournament revenue? I was at the US Open last night and sitting on my right was a 5-ish-year old girl holding an autographed Nicol David photo. Her whole family left after the women’s matches finished, so should we reduce the men’s prize pool by a few bucks? Then again, the title sponsor, Delaware Investments, had their logo on the wall for both the men’s and women’s matches, so I suppose we could just call it even.

  3. Credit to SJ for this article. I found it to be a thoughtful and well written piece. I think the most important point she makes is that at the end of the day we are a small sport trying to compete in a competitive market place so why battle each other? While I respect everyone’s right to an opinion, the dangers of misusing social media have been well documented in recent times. Ill-judged comments which can be viewed by players, media and sponsors can undo the hard work of so many. We have a great sport, let’s celebrate that shall we.

  4. I suppose in your world view it should be mandated that the women basketball players in the WNBA make the same as the men in the NBA. Give me a break! No room for opinion where equality is concerned”? I’m terribly sorry, but here is another opinion for you, whether you choose to make room for it or not: Women squash players will deserve equal prize money to men when, and if, they attract equal dollars from the viewing public, just as participation in squash’s British Open will deserve equal money to participation in Wimbledon when, and IF, squash ever attracts dollars equal to those attracted by tennis. Of course, people will pay to watch top ranked women play. That is not the point. The point is that they will not pay as much as they will pay to watch top ranked men. People will pay to watch you play squash but they won’t pay to watch me. Am I to complain or should I just accept to fact that what you provide in the way of entertainment is far superior to what I am capable of providing, no matter how hard I train? The same goes for any product in the marketplace. Some athletes are more attractive than others and may, as a result, be able to get better endorsement deals? Should we merit equal endorsement money for all? It is less the position you take with regard to equal pay than the holier-than-thou attitude with which you, and others, express it that is troubling. We live in a era of political correctness, where the PC police characterize their opinions as “statements to humanity” and contrary opinions as outside the bounds of polite discussion. Excuse me while I go flagellate myself for failing to see the light.

  5. Let’s be realistic here. I’m all for equality BUT in this case it does not exactly match. If Nicol David wants to step on the court against Ramy Ashour, then sure go for it. But you can’t offer same prize money for athletes of different substance.
    In fact, sports have been divided on purpose. I cannot think of any sport or any Olympics where men and woman compete equally. Perhaps marathons? not sure. Poker perhaps.
    As far as squash is concerned, the level the men play is at a higher pace and they are more entertaining (to me!)

    1. Off the top of my head equestrian, doubles tennis/badminton, and there are Paralympic cycling events where men and women compete directly against each other (in the one I know of specifically a woman won that event).

    2. I expect boxing enthusiasts appreciate the spectacle of champion bantamweights in contest and have no expectation of a bantamweight getting in the ring against a heavyweight? Would you expect athletes from different weight classes to compete against each other in wrestling and weight lifting? Women in open squash are bantamweights, men in squash are heavyweights. I believe sports lovers want to witness great contests, great skills, exceptional athleticism and entertaining personalities and these things are offered in abundance by both men and women in international events in squash.

  6. As long as ladies play best of five they deserve equal reward! It is squash not tennis. They train hard and it’s tough at the top. No flunkeys with towels after every rally. They have same travel expenses and true squash fans enjoy watching both men and women.

  7. Hi Bill,
    Thank you for your comments.

    With regards to the WNBA and NBA, I don’t feel I know enough about them to comment in depth but with the sports that have the majority of viewership (NBA, MLB, Premier League Football, NFL etc) are a completely different kettle of fish from squash. The sports are very much established and whilst the pay gap is still huge, the coverage is ever increasing which will lead to the gap being made smaller. Note ‘smaller’. Whilst the WNBA is a much smaller franchise than the NBA, it is still hugely profitable and maintains a steady viewership on ESPN. The salary cap for the WNBA is currently less than $1million, whilst for the NBA it is more than $58million. The NBA has an average viewership of approximately
    3.8 times more than the WNBA.

    The world isn’t a fair place, I’m not under any illusion. Change is not necessarily negative, maybe more equal tours would actually boost the game as a whole and thus lead to an increased viewership etc etc.

    “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.”
    ― Aristotle

    When you say ‘dollars from viewing public’ I assume you mean TV revenues, ticket sales and such like. How do you know people won’t pay as much to watch the top women as for the top men? I’m not saying they will, I’m saying how can we know?
    I am working on facts and logic here, what the people who paid to watch us have told me of their own freewill. Like I said in the article, I know some people prefer to watch men’s squash but there are also people who get more enjoyment out of watching the women. What would you say to the people that express their enjoyment of women’s squash?

    If you have any data on any ‘dollars from viewing public’ I’d be interested to see that.

    As for my attitude, I’m not here for self assurance as a person. But I am definitely not one to sit down whilst my fellow players and I are being publicly disrespected.

    If someone you respected said a film wasn’t worth paying to see, chances are you wouldn’t go and see it. To another person, that film might be worth ten times the actual price of a ticket. So whilst I respect that everyone is entitled to their opinion, I believe those who have some pull should be aware of the greater effect of anything they say publicly.

    Each and every player is an ambassador for squash and that needs to be recognised. And as Emma previously said with Social Media being so accessible, the audience reached can be vast and varied. A potential sponsor might be deterred by reading a tweet putting down any aspect of our sport, whereas that same opinion kept away from social media would have little to no impact.

    PC police? I have no agenda but when ignorance, with respect to something that I care about deeply and directly affects me, comes in to play I will make myself heard. I would be doing myself an injustice to sit by and allow people’s views to be influenced by the ill-judge comments of the ignorant. I am for allowing people to make their own minds’ up, and trust in their reasoning, once presented with all the information.

    “You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
    ― Harlan Ellison

  8. Well Bill, may I call you Bill I don’t want to be politcially incorrect or anything but let me just add my say for the day and for the sake of fun I wont be PC anymore.
    I am sorry I was born with a Vagina instead of a Penis, no matter how well I play I will never be as good as a most pro men, my bad. You say that “whether you choose to make room for it or not: Women squash players will deserve equal prize money to men when, and if, they attract equal dollars from the viewing public”. With PSA squash TV now showing all of the women’s matches live streaming, this could start to happen. We as an organization (wsa) do not give our players enough of a platform for this to occur, as we are not yet willing to accept help from bigger organizations such as PSA like we should. That is shame on us for sure. However, as more opportunities arise, women are live streamed more, a bigger following will come, that is a certainty. PSA squash tv is now giving us that opportunity. We will build on it.
    Inequality in pay has been a pervasive issue for a long time between men and women, the gap is still present in modern day business. You go to the average office and ask in one department where everyone is doing the same job what each person makes. I can almost guarantee you that the men will still be making more money than the women even if the women are better educated and doing a better job. It is just the way it currently is, and that is on top of the fact that more women are now attending university and graduating than men! It is not just in sport that this happens, it is everywhere! Having any event with equal prize money is a great step for women, given the opportunity us women will shine, I can guarantee you of that. Would you like us to wear smaller skirts and extra makeup to make ourselves more marketable? If you are going to insult our marketability at least add some pointers for us.
    Women are marketable, they are smart and they play amazing squash. We are not complaining about the discrepancy between prize money in the sport in general, but enjoying and celebrating the fact that for once we are equal in prize money. For in life, most the time for women things are not equal and that is simply the truth.
    Now please Bill, go flagellate yourself for not seeing the light, but don’t go watch the women play as you do so. That is just not PC. (look up the full definition of the word if you need explanation of that.)
    And SJ great article! Hope next year you get to experience the greatness of the US Open!

  9. The correct statement should not be “Men and Women should be paid equally” – it should be “When performing the same amount of work, Men and Women should be paid equally”.

    In this instance, equal pay is justified. Both men and women are playing best 3 out of 5. When the work (or the rules surrounding work) is equal, the amount of payment should not be different due to gender.

    However, for other sports (Tennis being the most obvious), equal pay for women is absurd as they play best 2 of 3. When asked to play best 3 of 5, most of the proponents argue that women aren’t ‘built’ for 5 sets, or refuse to address the fundamental question of: why should women be paid on par for less work?

    Secondly, I find it EXTREMELY interesting that no-one has commented on the pay disparity at the Malaysian Open (Men’s – $50k, Women’s – $70k). When people support equal pay for women, but are silent when pay discrepancies are in the favour of women, one naturally has to ask whether they truly have equality in mind.

    For the record, I am fully supportive of equal pay for equal work.

    1. Tennis is an interesting one. I am of the belief that most of the women could play 5 sets in the Grand Slams but the draws are so big that scheduling is now an issue. The men rarely play best of 5 outside these. But the sums of money are so large at the top of tennis that I think it’s there as an example, the ATP is much larger outside of the Grand Slams.

      A major point is that the men’s US Open is the same prize money as last year and the women’s has been brought up to that, US Squash have worked hard to ensure they increased the prize fund overall. So I congratulate them for securing the extra $45k to do so, a considerable increase!

      The Malaysian Open is I believe one of only 2 events in the year (the other also being in Malaysia) where the women’s prize money is bigger than the men’s. The difference between those and say the US Open is they are different level events. For the women $70k is World Series whilst for the men it would need to be at least $110k to be a World Series event.
      Choosing to hold varying level events is usual practice on the tour. More often than not with the men’s event being larger, but usual practice all the same. I am not going to come out and say all the World Series events should be equal prize money at this moment in time, I am more concerned that some feel the need to make sure we know we aren’t as good as the men as soon as we close the gap a little.

      Work will always be relative, as I’m sure you’re aware. All the players work day in day out to be as fit as they can so we can push ourselves past physical limits in order to win matches and play the best squash we can. Men (usually) have a higher natural fitness level than women. That being said, the ever rising athleticism and fitness shown by such a high number of the girls on tour can’t be ignored. As Danny said in his article; faster, stronger, leaner and meaner!!

  10. Surely the promoter of an event dictates the prize money levels. If a promoter wants to make it equal money for the man and women, then hats off to them! But no one can dictate to the promoter that they have to abide by an “equal purse” for both sexes.
    England Squash have put on the Mens World Open in Manchester, but have decided that a women’s event isn’t even worthy of running. With £295,000 from UK Sport, I don’t understand why there couldn’t have been a WSA event along side – so much for the UK Government’s equality in sport campaigns!
    Lets face it they are so few events where there are both men’s and women’s draws anyway. The fault lies with the WSA and their dismal attempt to run the women’s game at the moment. The association has suffered since they got rid of Andrew Shelley.
    No World Open still announced for 2013, although with the closing date of the WSA Hong Kong Open mysteriously extended a week, maybe we could expect an announcement – but they are leaving it very late and usually such an event requires a longer lead in time for registration – but they will just change the rules to suit!
    WSA are doing nothing to help the up and coming players. There are constant rule changes to allow top players to enter overlapping events, especially the elitist 16 draw $50k tournaments that pepper the WSA calendar at the beginning of 2014. I can’t not understand how the WSA hierarchy think they are encouraging young players to play professionally when the rules just protect the top 12 players.
    Also as a promoter, if you get the top 16 players entering your $50k 16 draw, why are you going to increase the prize money! Simple fact is – you are not.
    Instead of whinging about this equal prize money issue, the WSA girls should be looking at their own association’s ability to run their tour and actually put sufficient events on.
    Laura Massaro’s next event is the $25k Monte Carlo Open, where the maximum points she can win is 892.5 – her average is 1841.25!! So now all promoters know if you put on a $25k at the right time you could get the world no.2 playing – so why put up more money?? And as a knock on effect from that, why give equal prize money?
    Sorry girls – you need to get your own house in order before you start trying to defend this equal prize money debate.

    1. You make some valid points. It’s unacceptable that there is no Women’s World Open this year. I keep expecting to see some article at least acknowledging this, but there hasn’t even been a mention! I would have thought this would be a big deal for the sport.

  11. In my view, it’s easy. Equal pay means that WSA tour and PSA are equal contributors to Squash bussines. At this moment thats it’s not happening at all. PSA tour is much more followed and mens players generate more mony with sponsors and covering. Due to that the price money of mens tournaments has evolve itshelf to this situation. Supply makes demand (is this expression correct in english? sorry if not). Equality doesn’t mean give the same when the situation is different. squash is not sexist (just my opinion), squash, as all sports is just bussines.

    1. The promoters have chosen to make the prize money equal, it was not forced by any means so does this not suggest they may take a different view on money generation from sponsors to your own?

      I am not calling for any rules to force tournament organisers to have equal prize money, I am more worried at the level of disrespect shown towards the women by a minority of individuals.
      Do we not deserve respect as athletes because we will never be as good as the top male players? I sincerely hope that is not the case.

      I am fully aware of supply and demand. Business is, like you said, all to do with money, bringing in sponsors and filling seats. As WSA continues to grow, opportunities will become larger and prize money will naturally increase.

      When people use generalisations such as ‘people would rather watch the men play than women because the men are better’, it frustrates me. The women’s British Open final was one of the most intense, entertaining matches I have ever seen.

      The sponsors and spectators do indeed rule the roost, so to start throwing your toys out the pram because one event decided to have equal prize money, saying the standard of the squash isn’t up to scratch shows ignorance.

      1. My only point was just that I don’t consider squash as a sexist sport as I could read somewhere. To have different prize money in some tounaments doesn´t mean to be sexist, it´s just the choice of sponsors based on supply-demand. Im fully agree with your answer, I wasn´t saying the opposite

  12. Just for the record. The men’s US Open prize money actually dropped by $15k this year compared to last year.

    Also, the World Chanpionships this year is primarily Manchester City Council’s event, run in conjunction with England Squash.

  13. The sport of squash is metamorphosing into a great spectacle to watch..

    In the coming years there will be greater changes to make it even more accessible to all kids/adults/disabled.

    The US Open has done very well in making the tournament equal pay for women, a standard all tournaments to take up the example lead the US open set.

  14. Bill Adamson’s post says it all, yet unsurprisingly instead of anybody addressing his very solid points, the outcry from all the poor offended little lambs and PC activists everywhere is to instead simply point and shout ‘SEXIST!!’, and follow up with their ridiculous strawman arguments. Instead of arguing with feelings, emotion, and pseudo-intellectual claptrap, why not try addressing the actual fundamental argument here – that the men’s ‘product’ is far better than the women’s ‘product’, and thus they should be (and are) paid in line with this. It really is very simple, and is the same basic structure observed in just about any industry/marketplace in the world.

    Don’t go off the subject and start bleating about general ‘inequality’, as that isn’t the argument here – nobody is claiming that women are inherently inferior to men, as that is ridiculous. What is also ridiculous however, is to claim women’s squash is anywhere near the level of men’s squash – physically, technically, or mentally. To call some of the women in the top 40/50+ range of the rankings ‘athletes’ is laughable. The majority of men DO train way harder, particularly at these levels – I see it with my own eyes.

    I have huge respect for the player(s) who have come out with their honest opinions on social media regarding this, and it is terrible that they are being demonised simply for saying what the vast silent majority believe – I know for a fact a huge amount of other PSA players believe exactly the same, but they quite rightly fear coming out and saying so due to the PC backlash that hits them. As the comments on here and on Twitter show, a lot of the most vocal people are those least capable of rational unemotional argument. Some of the personal insults bandied around have been embarrassing.

    Simply put, the men’s game is leagues better than the women’s, so they deserve more money – Nicol David would barely scrape top 150 if she was on the men’s tour, and she’s the only one even close. Outside the top 10 the women are barely male county standard. Athleticism is no excuse, as squash is not even a power based sport – unlike football, basketball etc – yet the gap between men and women is far larger in squash than in a lot of those other sports. I’d love there to be equality between the men’s and women’s games, as I love the sport. I also love to watch female athletes in other sports too, such as tennis, athletics, and badminton, so this has nothing to do with sexism. Instead of all the women getting over emotional and angry with someone’s honest opinion, why not address some hard truths and look a bit closer to home at why the standard of the women’s game is so poor, and thus has so much trouble gaining sponsorship/prize money in comparison to other sports?

    People can argue and stamp their feet all they like but this is reality, and as the vast majority of people that matter thankfully agree with this, there quite rightly WON’T be parity between men and women’s squash in the near future… Not until the WSA standard improves massively from where it is now.

    1. So basically, women should never be paid the same as men in sports, because they will never be capable of delivering the same product. That’s awful reasoning. Even if they train equally as hard as the men (which they physically can’t), this logic will deny them their fair compensation.

      Shouldn’t they be rewarded for excelling in their line of work? It seems like you’re saying that a woman who pushes herself to the max should not be rewarded for that. You talk about encouraging woman to raise their standard, but your argument would likely demotivate women’s players.

    2. You’re welcome to come and watch me train Dave.

      Your comment that it’s not a power based sport is not one I agree with to be honest. The movements are more often than not explosive movements from a static position, which requires a lot of power. Repeated throughout each rally, that makes for a pretty power based sport.

      Who are the people that matter? And why so thankful they agree? As I’ve said before I’m not saying I believe there should be change overnight, my main issue was that the squash tours need to move forward together and can’t afford (as a whole) to publicly disrespect one another. I’m applaud Ben for being big enough to come out and apologise for his original tweet. Not because I disagree with his opinion, because it wasn’t the correct place to voice his opinion.

      I don’t agree with personal insults at all, I am putting across my point from where I stand without disrespecting anyone. Anyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter but the argument that because we will never be as good as the men, we are incapable of entertaining to the same level is insulting to us as athletes.

      Did you watch the finals last night? Very different matches but BOTH great to watch. A fantastic event and all credit to everyone involved.

  15. Isnt it a shame that this is even a topic. Dave Smith you sound very angry about women. Fact is why on earth would you drop a sad comment that Nicol David would barely make top 150. As if she would even be interested in comparing herself. Fact is , wouldn’t it be a shame if a fantastic sponsor like Delaware Investments who are clearly behind the sport as a whole heard these rediculous arguments and pull out from men’s and women’s events in the future.I hope for the future of Squash ( mens and women) this doesn’t happen. Well done Delaware Investment for paving the way and believing in the beautiful game of squash. And you wonder why squash is yet to make Olympics. More equality please.

  16. As I tweeted earlier, US Squash and Delaware Investments deserve a lot of praise for their promoting of equal prize money in this years US Open, and also to a commitment of equality for the next 10 years. Whilst we are not saying everyone must follow, it is fantastic that they are setting an example.

    I like Ben Coleman, he is a good guy, but boy did his tweet look ridiculous after tonight’s respective finals. And I am in a perfect position to comment.

    I’m also sorry that Dave Smith spoilt his argument with 2 statements….1, that Nicol David wouldn’t be ranked in the top 150 in the mens game……this might be true but where would Serena Williams be ranked in mens tennis?? Probably similar. Secondly, that ‘athleticism is no excuse, as squash isn’t even a power based sport’. Dave, I can assure you squash is a very power based sport. I train for speed & power every day!!

    Let’s all try to pull together on this guys……surely it’s a positive for the future of squash?

    Best wishes


    PS. I don’t actually agree with equal pay in tennis but would do if the women also played best of 5 sets. 🙂

  17. A pretty fraught argument… fairness/equality being the inherently subjective concepts they are.

    I like the idea of prize-money being directly linked to revenue generated by each sex. Revenue including anything that contributes to any particular event being economic/profitable, from broadcasting revenue (measured through ratings), ticket sales, merchandise sales, etc. This is very difficult to measure – for example finding ratings information can be very difficult (I would be interested to see Sarah-Jane’s NBA/WNBA source) – particularly for smaller sports like squash. So a nice theoretical paradigm, but probably pretty unwieldy to execute in practice.

    A slightly more interesting idea is that of total prize money being linked to total revenue. Other sports do this with salaries – for example the NBA, NHL and others. There has been some talk of tennis following this route too. This article (http://youkantbeserious.com/2012/09/06/how-much-of-the-pie-to-tennis-players-deserve-by-roderick-shambly/) makes the case that global squash events generally aren’t economic, and prize money only exists thanks to the generosity of sponsors making essentially charitable donations.

    Playing devil’s advocate… if prize money/salaries were linked only to revenue generated by the sport/tournament; would squash players receive ANY prize money? Would they be paying entry fees instead!? How grateful we are to the generous sponsors of the game!

  18. This issue is disgusting me, so I’m just gonna leave one last comment.

    We cannot move forward with the sport and hope for Olympic recognition, if PSA players discredit their female counterparts after ONE TOURNAMENT where they give equal prize money. Have you guys seen the vast disparity in prize funds between the 2 tours?? The money required for a World Series event for the men is practically double that required for the women. It’s particularly noticeable when there are joint events. It’s clear from looking at the prize money levels required for the varying grades of events that the men don’t have to worry about women threatening their prize money in the near future.

    Yes, Ben and others are entitled to their opinions. But to cry foul over Nicol et. al getting a little bit more money for once (some of these women have families and equal expenses for travel etc.) seems to suggest a deep subconscious hatred for these women’s squash players.

    This discussion would have more value if WSA or WSF came out and declared a widespread equality policy, but that’s obviously not the case. WSA is just trying to do the best to with what they have.

    If I was an IOC rep and I saw all this hoopla over I repeat, ONE TOURNAMENT, I would disregard this joke of a sport for life.

    P.S. I’m a male squash player, so don’t go assuming I’m an angry feminist. I just can’t stand for this selfishness and insensitivity. I know some people think women should ALWAYS be below men, but please keep it to yourself (especially when you’re an ambassador for the sport).

    1. An excellent article from Sarah – Jane Perry, but unfortunately followed up by many of the replies which seem to be missing the point here. Rather than repeat what has been said already, I’ll (try) and make some new points:-

      This is not really about equality, for the very simple reason that we are not talking about pay, but prize money – two very different things. The winner of any Final receives more than the runner-up – for playing the same match.

      The argument for equal prize money is fundamentally flawed when you look across all sports. Can you imagine Women’s Football paying similar wages to the Men? if your argument is valid then it should apply to all Sports. The Golf and Tennis Tours generate hugely different revenues between the Men’s and Women’s game, for the very simple reason that more (not all) people want to watch it. The fact that Men play Sport to a generally superior competitive level than the Women is not the issue – that is a result of basic physicality and the base of playing numbers, nothing else.

      The truth is that more people watch Premiership Football than The 2nd Division because of the quality of the Product – no other reason. It’s not a ‘reward’ for time spent on court – which is why the ‘Tennis argument’ (Nick Matthew and others) of 5 sets -v- 3 sets is utterly spurious. It is ALL about entertainment / generating revenue – that is why different sports pay different prize money – it’s in DIRECT proportion to the public interest – therefore Sponsorship interest, therefore money!

      Do you seriously believe that if Global TV rights for Wimbledon were sold separately for the Men’s event and Women’s event that TV companies would pay the same money? it’s a farcical thought. The Doubles Events pay a lot less in prize money – ask yourself why? For those of you who are not quite getting this yet, the answer is that more people would rather watch Serena Williams v Victoria Azarenka than the Bryan Brothers play Daniel Nestor and his Partner. This is a perfect example of Women playing for MORE money than the Men – quite rightly too!

      As soon as Women’s Tennis / Squash / Golf / Basketball generate more interest – therefore sponsorship – than the Men’s game will be the day that I heartily congratulate them for playing for MORE Prize money than the Men. Every sport is played for prize money in DIRECT proportion to it’s profile/popularity. That is what drives the purse. Look at the Forbes list of highest earning Sportspeople and it tells its own story. Unfortunately Nick and Ramy aren’t near the top, and it has nothing to do with whether they train as hard as Lebron James or Christian Ronaldo.

      As a Final Point – and this has been referenced already, the Malaysian Open pays more prize money for the WISPA event than the PSA. I know it’s a higher grade of tournament, but the truth is that this is a PERFECT example of why I believe in my argument. Nicol David is a HUGE star in Malaysia, and her presence attracts sponsors and generates more revenue. If that was reflected Globally, then the Women would be playing for more prizemoney than the men, and they would deserve it.

      Sarah, I enjoyed your article, but please don’t talk about training, I’m assuming that you and Ben Coleman train equally hard, but as the World No. 81 he is typically, and quite correctly, playing for less prize money week on week than you are as World No.14. The Squash Public and Sponsors alike would rather showcase you playing Rachel Grinham than Ben playing Declan James – that’s how it should be.

      1. Well said David. It’s good to finally see someone dispassionately acknowledging the economic realities of the issue, rather than getting drawn in by red herrings and crying conspiracy theory.

  19. question one: what the hell is squash?
    question two: why the hell should anyone care? Frankly, I’m stunned that anyone makes any money from this sport, men or women. Those who do manage to draw a pittance from a sport that nobody watches should probably be happy.

  20. I think bens comment got blown way out of proportion especially by the wsa players… I agree the way he worded it wasn’t great but the way that the wsa players went about it was if to say because he dosent agree with the equal money that means the wsa players do not work hard or are a second nature to males, where as all he was trying to say I think is that how can the women be on equal pay when the psa has its own website that streams them live (psasquashtv) hence the name.. The only reason women are played on it is because they are there at the major tournaments. You only have to look at canary wharf to see how popular the mens game is and it is virtually sold out every night… I agree that the tournament in the Cayman Islands was packed for the wsa there but didn’t ramy ashour and alister walker get invited to a non psa there too and for exhibitions ?

    Also those that go on about how if the women are on the same pay as the men then surley that will get more recognition but how is that even possible? If enough people and sponsors was interested in the wsa they would already have enough sponsors and enough prize money to go around.. Hearing that they are on the same money as the psa players who have more of a following wouldn’t even come into consideration. Sponsors and spectators don’t just say ‘oh good, the prize money has been equaled now the women’s game is going to be great and attract more people to watch them and bigger sponsors’ its ludicrous because if people already was attracted to the game like people are stating gey are, it wouldn’t take equal prize money to show the wsa’s worth.

    I think everyone knows and agrees that the women players work extremely hard and dedicate themselves the same as the men in the sport and they also deserve the money for sure! However I just struggle to see how that is possible with the demand of the women’s game compared to the psa.

    The only real way to see the demand of the wsa compared to the psa is a psa world open on in one month of the year and a wsa on in another month of the year.. Then depending on ticket sales, tv rights, psa squash tv viewing etc.. we can really judge and really have the facts and figures on what has a higher demand and them go from their on equality…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *