Kudos to Sepp Blatter for confirming what anybody with a
part-time job can vouch for: Common sense is not necessarily
required to be a higher-up in a big organization.

On Monday, Blatter, the president of FIFA (soccer’s
international governing body) announced his plan for trying to
salvage the future of women’s soccer: skimpier uniforms.

Blatter’s justification? Women’s soccer needs to attract more
fans and different sponsors than men’s soccer, so more “feminine”
uniforms might entice fashion or cosmetics companies to back the
sport.

“Tighter shorts, for example … In volleyball women also wear
other uniforms than the men. Pretty women are playing football
today. Excuse me for saying that,” Blatter said to a Swiss
newspaper.

Now there’s a brilliant idea if I’ve ever heard one.

Female soccer players in Europe and the United States are fuming
and rightfully so. Blatter’s comment wasn’t just sexist, it was
ignorant.For now, I’ll leave the gender issues aside. Blatter’s
comment is completely without merit. He wants to attract more
sponsorship to women’s soccer, which is great. But wearing tighter
shorts to attract cosmetics companies? For those who aren’t sure
(i.e., Blatter), women generally don’t wear makeup on their thighs,
so I’m not sure how much tight shorts will encourage the use of a
particular brand of cosmetics.

First, uniforms are generally designed according to the nature
of a sport. For example, in beach volleyball, the game is played on
a beach. Men wear men’s swimsuits, women wear women’s swimsuits. It
makes sense.

Some uniforms are designed with the safety of the athletes in
mind. In gymnastics, leotards are worn (by men and women) to
minimize the chance of the gymnast or coach getting hurt. If a
coach had to spot a gymnast who fell while attempting a trick, the
coach’s hand could get caught in loose clothing, causing the coach
to probably break his or her wrist as both fell to the ground and
the gymnast suffered a more severe injury. Simple enough. In
soccer, there is no reason to wear a tight uniform. Shorter or
tighter shorts do nothing to help an athlete’s performance, and
they do not help keep the athlete safe.

Blatter also thinks tighter shorts would help women’s soccer
because it will attract fans. An audience, yes; fans, no. Blatter
assumes that different shorts will attract people to the sport, not
just the athlete. His comment also implies that people who would
enjoy seeing women in smaller uniforms are the most capable of
helping women’s soccer. The fact that Blatter used the term “pretty
women” instead of soccer players, footballers or athletes makes me
believe that he doesn’t consider these women athletes–he’s trying
to promote a sport by using their looks, not their talents or
contributions to the game.

If Blatter seriously wants to draw more fans to women’s soccer
and raise revenue, he should redirect his focus toward the heart of
what will drive women’s soccer in the future rather than the legs
of the women who play now. Women’s soccer can’t survive on
sponsorship from cosmetics and fashion companies alone, so Blatter
could consider trying to recruit other forms of sponsorship, say,
from companies that already sponsor men’s soccer and have a
relationship with FIFA.

In order to boost attendance at women’s games, there should be
women’s games to watch. Allowing leagues such as the WUSA to fold
because of financial reasons won’t help generate a fan base for
women’s soccer. To build a strong fan base for the sport of women’s
soccer, FIFA could work with national soccer programs to create
more womens leagues and developmental programs (such as under-20
and under-18 teams) to compete nationally and internationally in
championship matches, similar to the programs men have had for
years.

That way, FIFA might actually be able to build lasting support
for women’s soccer instead of simply rounding up fans who want to
see women in tight shorts, and it might lead to a better future for
the sport of soccer itself.