The Contract Crisis in Women’s Football
You’d think that as women’s football continues its rapid growth, the game’s most crucial assets - the players - would be protected. But female footballers are often still forced to juggle their careers with little security. The latest WSL transfer window, for example, saw a mind-blowing level of squad churn. This instability doesn't just mess with players' livelihoods, but creates problems for national teams too.
It’s generally accepted that successful national sides are built on consistency. The kind of consistency where players can picture teammates’ runs in their sleep and have a telepathic understanding on the pitch. The strongest teams in international football - both men and women - thrive on a settled core.
But in the women’s game, many of these core players are less than settled at their clubs. Short-term contracts leave them in a regular state of limbo, anxiously awaiting the next round of contract talks or offers via their agent.
Another adverse effect of this issue is physiological. The unsettling prevalence of season-ending ACL injuries in women’s football has been a key talking point in recent years. Could you blame professionals for assessing whether they can afford to prioritise international duty over club commitments?
A serious injury sustained during international duty could be devastating for a female footballer. In the men's game, this is an unfortunate but manageable setback. There is likely a decent contract length cushioning the blow, maybe a bit of rehab, and all is well. In the women’s game, the unfortunate victim could end up unable to play and in a sticky situation financially. And the national team? Down a key player.
This instability could hamper national teams from building the kind of cohesion they need to compete at the highest level. Men tend to have multi-year deals, financial security and the freedom to view international duty as the honour it should be. The disparity here isn’t just a nuance, but a systemic issue.
Short-term contracts may keep budgets tight and risk-free, but they’re also undermining the entire structure of the sport. Introducing multi-year deals shouldn’t be viewed as a radical idea, but a basic investment in the future of the game.