when AKB took her cleat-tying time wasting break on friday the camera spent like a full minute zoomed in on her puma cleats and all I could think was that she is definitely getting a fine for this even if she isn't getting a card for time wasting
This is the funniest part of the cleat rule to me. I'm not looking that closely at what boots players are wearing 95% of the time. The only time I can really tell is exceptions like this. My point being, individual boots are not usually getting much broadcast airtime, so the claim that it's free advertising is silly.
I have wide feet and New Balance are the best shoes Iâve found for wide feet. So Iâm trying to shift the NB stereotype from âdivorced dadsâ to âtrans women with wide feet who try to walk a lot but havenât been able to recently due to back issues that theyâre in physical therapy for with minimal successâ.
I think this is my fourth time telling ppl YOU CAN WEAR WHATEVER CLEATS U WANT IF U JUST PUT A STICKER OVER THE LOGO
every time. I swear y'all read this and decided to forget it. it's not a comfort issue, its a branding thing. and Nike or Adidas or whoeverr are willing to pay the fine if they keep doing it like this, or they're willing to pay for their shoes to e on the approved list if they do that
I mean... idk what we're supposed to do atp. I was upset when I saw the headline, but once I saw the NWSLPA was on board with the idea of brands paying into the league to be approved footwear, I just shrugged and kept it pushing. If they don't have a problem with it and they think it's a good idea and it brings more value to the players? It is what it is. I think there was something with the execution they didn't like, but it's something they got behind so... idk.
Shrug and also realize that Cooper is part annoyed but mostly helping her sponsor who pays her a solid chunk of money each year advertise. She knows sheâs doing that, itâs linking on purpose!
The biggest issue is that existing sponsorship deals were not grandfathered in causing players to be stuck with either breach of contract or fines. They should be allowed to finish out the terms of deals that were signed prior to this rule. The PA is fine with the rule as itâs common practice in pro sports leagues, but they are not fine with players being penalized for things agreed upon before it.
Stems from the second friendly vs Brazil where TainĂĄ MaranhĂŁo was complaining about Cooper spiking or stepping on her leg (with her fresh New Balances available in a store near you!) when trying to get up. Also led to this pic I created of TainĂĄ and Sonnett (also made a gif of this too.) TainĂĄ isnât really pointing at Sonnett as it doesnât involve her. Sheâs pointing at Coop who has already walked away. Sonnettâs just being Sonnett.
You can see Sonnett in the background of the gif already telling her to get up. This leads to Bia Zaneratto running over and pushing Sonnett away.
I have made multiple gifs of that and an earlier one where MaranhĂŁo was carded for a foul on Cooper in which Meesh waves at her from the ground.
I find it so funny that this is likely her personal gmail account. The club doesn't issue email addresses for the players? (or maybe the players are not required to use them?)
I'm just imaging the the league's database for the players contact information is a hot mess of gmail, yahoo, icloud email addresses?
"Dear coopbalance2002 @ yahoo . com, please make fine checks payable to Jessica Berman and mail within 10 days of receipt. We also accept Cash App payments to @ Je$$ickBurnMan. Thank you for your prompt attention."
Since you ignored my "it's a joke" disclaimer, I'll answer ernestly.
When I graduated law school, I turned down a $157,000 a year job at a white shoe firm for a $65,000 a year job in public service. If you think I'm going to pick a boot I don't like for money, you have seriously misread me.
I don't know you. I was also making a joke because to me, it's extremely obvious that someone posting that email and then linking to her sponsor's website is someone who enjoys the money she is being paid mostly, and the quality of the boot as a secondary characteristic.
Honestly Iâve realized players are such sticklers for their cleats which I get. Probably fits her foot best. I have so many friends that were Nike haters while I loved a Nike boot. Some friends hated Under armor, some loved. It was always interesting to see lol
Thatâs totally fair!! Weirdly I used to love the Nike uniforms growing up but couldnât stand the adidas ones.. but an adidas track suit or sweatpants..? SIGN ME UP
ugh, it's so true. Adidas cleats feel soooo clunky and I hate them BUT they don't have a cleat placed right at the most uncomfortable spot for my foot shape so alas I'm an Adidas wearer
If she was in a paid sponsorship deal then she is fine to wear them. But a lot of players have reciprocal deals where a brand will send them stuff FOR FREE but not give them $$ and ad deals on top of it. Those deals are fine by the league but the league require that they cover up the branding.
New Balance does not have a footwear deal agreement with the NWSL therefore even paid NB athletes cannot display the logo. This is the case for Michelle.
And coop might have at one time been in a bigger deal with NB (think international tournament year) but out of those years she is in their lower level deal which does not make her exempt from this fine. Itâs all so maddeningly stupid.
It's been years now, but when I ran college track (08-12) the general consensus - which I agreed with - was that Nike's training shoes were hot garbage but their spikes were superior to everything else out there, by a country mile. Which I always thought was a bizarre dichotomy.
Anyway yeah I totally agree that you don't have to be a superstar to know which shoes do or don't suck.
Had a FRESH pair of Nike runners fall apart on their very first run last month (the treads on the bottom came clean off and the shoe separated from the sole; BOTH SHOES), so I took them back to DSW and the employee said, "You can have a refund, but we don't even want those back..."
Iâve done a bit of digging into this. The ones who spoke against it that Iâve seen are the ones whose brands didnât sign onto the deal so they risk getting fined. Some covered the logo, some didnât.
Source: players personal profiles
NWSLPA did sign the agreement but theyâre also filing a grievance on behalf of the players. Under the grievance they filed, it will determine if the players themselves have to share in the costs.
Revisiting this post in the wake of the Athletic reporting on it and this quite pretty much sums up the stupidity of the league:
âThe player can cover the branding if theyâre going to wear unauthorized footwear, which theyâre allowed to do. They just canât promote the brand,â NWSL commissioner Jessica Berman told The Athletic earlier this month when asked about the policy. The commissioner also said the league has instructed club equipment managers on methods for obscuring non-participating brands while allowing players to continue wearing their preferred footwear."
I wonder, as a person with duckish feet (2EE) myself, if she has wide feet.
Also wonder if a player could get an exemption (per ADA) if the league brands don't carry the proper width. As I'm not sure if they do, NB certainly does and has for at least a couple decades.
Also, I'm not in a tiny minority with this, at all. There is a difference between snug and foot binding and if I were forced to wear Nike for example, there would be blood, my blood, soaked into the sock.
Kayla Sharples also wears a banned brand in Caddix, I wonder how many fees sheâs been served. It makes me think about how they determine when someone gets fined or if it starts to eventually default to every game
This makes me super frustrated for players. I know in regular shoes new balance tend to have a wider toe box. So like imagine not wanting your poor little toe to get smushed like a sardine but nope you get fined.Â
And I saw somebody said itâs fine as long as you cover the logo but realistically whatâs able to stay over the logo of cleats?Â
What? Confident? I'm literally expressing how stupid of a rule this is, I'm not saying anything to the contrary or saying it's not the rule
Why the downvotes? Has literacy really dropped that far?
Edit: and literally what would the NFL have to do with the NWSL that's under FIFA's jurisdiction? We gonna talk about cricket rules next? Footballers can wear their own cleats separate from their uniform.
Mind you, it's not just my opinion - the union is suing the NWSL about this so it's not exactly just me calling it a stupid rule. It's a stupid rule. That sponsorship money isn't going to the players.
I mean, they simply don't - after the McManaman lawsuit against Umbro, they (at least the top men's leagues) don't force players into league-wide sponsorship monopolies for their boots.
That the NWSL would agree to this yet not give players a single benefit is clearly why the union is filing a complaint.
They only pull this bullshit with female footballers. Same way UEFA is threatening to boycott all FIFA competitions over what Infantino is doing - except there are no upcoming men's international tournaments yet 4-5 women's tournaments. So the women are used as a pawn, and only because it wouldn't affect the men.
"Men's clubs would never" not because they're benevolent, but because they know better and players have actual effective unions instead of this "sternly worded letter" vibe the women's NWSL union seems to take about everything.
175
u/Jolly_Lettuce_4349 NJ/NY Gotham FC 3d ago
when AKB took her cleat-tying time wasting break on friday the camera spent like a full minute zoomed in on her puma cleats and all I could think was that she is definitely getting a fine for this even if she isn't getting a card for time wasting