A simmering debate has erupted within the world of football commentary, ignited by Eni Aluko’s powerful assertion: women’s football coverage should be “by women, for women.” Her words, delivered on a podcast, weren’t intended as a slight, but as a fierce defense of a hard-won space – a space built on years of dedication and struggle.
Aluko’s frustration stems from a perceived imbalance. She recounts a history of tirelessly championing the women’s game, even when it offered little reward, and now feels that its burgeoning success should translate into proportionate representation behind the microphone. She points to instances where experienced female pundits, like herself and Fara Williams, were overlooked for major finals, while male counterparts were given prominent roles.
The core of her argument isn’t about excluding men, but about prioritizing the voices of those who have invested deeply in the growth of the women’s game. Aluko passionately believes that women should be at the forefront of narrating their own success, reaping the rewards of their labor, and serving as role models for aspiring female players and broadcasters.
She highlighted a specific example: at the Women’s Euro final, while she was in the stands, a male pundit was part of the BBC’s main broadcast team. This disparity, she argues, isn’t simply a matter of opportunity; it’s a continuation of the patriarchal structures the women’s game has fought so hard to overcome.
Aluko’s perspective extends beyond fairness. She contends that her presence – and that of other women with extensive experience in the game – carries a unique weight, offering inspiration to a generation of young girls dreaming of a future in football. She believes this impact surpasses that of even the most respected male commentator.
However, her views haven’t been universally embraced. Laura Woods, a prominent broadcaster who has worked alongside Aluko, strongly disagrees. Woods argues that “gatekeeping” the women’s game would be detrimental, hindering its growth and alienating potential fans. She believes inclusivity, including the involvement of male allies like Ian Wright, is crucial for expanding the sport’s reach.
Woods champions a different set of criteria for punditry success: communication skills, insightful analysis, and engaging personality. She points to the award-winning ITV coverage of the Women’s Euros as evidence that a diverse team, including both men and women, can deliver exceptional results. For Woods, talent and chemistry trump caps earned on the pitch.
The debate isn’t simply about who gets a seat at the table, but about the very soul of women’s football coverage. Aluko envisions a space where women’s voices are prioritized, reflecting their investment and inspiring future generations. Woods advocates for an inclusive approach, believing that broader appeal will ultimately benefit the game. The conversation, though contentious, underscores the passion and dedication driving the continued evolution of women’s football.
Aluko ultimately seeks a more equitable distribution of opportunities, suggesting that if she is passed over for a women’s final but offered a men’s final, that’s acceptable. However, she feels blocked from both, and believes the limited premium opportunities should be reserved for those who have dedicated their careers to the women’s game.
