Money, Money, Money

This year's Wimbledon is well underway and once again proving to be a huge success, but one thing has been griping my mate. Money.

This is the second year at SW19 that men and women have been awarded the same prize money, with this year's victors taking away a ridiculous, £750,000 each.

Pressure on the LTA to pay women the same as men had been mounting for some time, when they eventually bowed last year.

David Cameron, Tessa Jowell and Richard Branson all supported the change and with little room for manoeuvre, Wimbledon followed in line with the Aussies and the Yanks. (The French still only pay the winners the same)

Members of the women's tour including the Williams sisters and chief exec, Larry Scott made their feelings unequivocally clear, Scott said: "In the 21st Century it is morally indefensible that women competitors in a Grand Slam tournament should be receiving considerably less prize money than their male counterparts."

Strong words, especially from a guy, you suspect there must be a strong willed woman in his life somewhere, and he must have a hard time of it at home when he casually asks 'Whats for tea dear?'.

Hard Work

What gets my mate (and me if I'm being honest, and a bit brave) is that there is no doubt the men have to work considerably harder for their money.

In 2006 Federer won 202 games on his way to the title, compared to just 142 for Mauresmo, and Federer doesn't hang around much on the grass.

Five set games are considerably harder and more draining than a mere three, and this is the one reason why equal pay is absurd.

If you were at work, (something I am on the look out for) and your female colleague went home at lunch everyday while you slaved away into the night, you would be pretty peeved if she was getting the same pay as you.

Well why should tennis be any different? It is their job, their profession, why should they be getting paid for doing half the work.

Poor Quality

The other factor in equal pay, which is more subjective, is the quality of women's tennis. This year like many others the quality of the women's game has been poor.

All the big names have choked, leaving a bunch of no-hopers to be demolished by the Williams sisters who will undoubtedly be meeting each other again come Saturday.

As I said, the quality issue is subjective, and if it just came down to this then I would not dispute the equal pay, but this is not the crux of the argument, it is the time and effort involved in winning games.

Either they should make women play five sets, (could be good for a laugh) or admit their mistake and start paying them less again. We the punters are the ones who probably suffer, through increased ticket prices.

Anyway, hopefully this will have stirred up some anger amongst both those who are pro and those against equal pay (in tennis), and I expect a tirade of abuse from any feminist friends (I really must do something about them).