Orange’s Viral World Cup Ad Is Great, But When Will We Stop Comparing The Men’s & Women’s Games?

French telco Orange has set the internet ablaze with its viral Women’s World Cup ad showing Les Bleus superstars Kylian Mbappé and Antoine Griezmann tearing defences apart and scoring screamers.

But, a big reveal shows that fans were not, in fact, watching the often brilliant but reliably confounding and dysfunctional men’s team. A message (in French, naturellement) reads: “Only Les Bleus can give us these emotions. But that’s not them you’ve just seen”

They were, in fact, watching the women’s team play with men’s heads edited on during post-production.

Produced by Publicis Groupe’s Marcel, the ad has received wide-ranging praise from journos, the public and, most importantly fans.

Replying to the video, which has attracted almost five million views at the time of writing, one user commented:

“Got me emotional. I frankly didn’t care much for the men’s segment because I don’t follow football. But once the twist was released I felt a lump in my throat from a mix of pride and disappointment. The double standard is heavy.”

Another said:

“Great idea, great message! Love it!!”

Kristin Galluci, global marketing lead at Adobe, commenting on The Drum‘s site, said it was “one of the best sports ads” she’d ever seen.

But is it?

In the past 15 years or so, the women’s game has experienced a growth in interest, significance and marketing spend that few other sports or brands will ever receive. That, of course, is far from a bad thing.

The history of the women’s game is chequered with discrimination and sidelining. In the UK, the Football Association banned women’s football entirely in 1921 after its expansion and growth — games attracted thousands of fans — affected the profits of the men’s game.

“The game of football is quite unsuitable for females and should not be encouraged,” the association wrote, before adding “an excessive proportion of the receipts are absorbed in expenses and an inadequate percentage devoted to charitable objects.”

The ban was in place until May 1970.

In Australia, the first women’s teams were formed as early as 1903 but, a committee in Australia concurred with the Football Association’s opinion, and said it was “medically inappropriate” for women to play football. Instead, swimming, rowing, cycling and horseback riding were considered more appropriate.

By 1974, there were regular women’s football leagues taking place in most Australian states and, in the same year, the first national championship was formed.

A series of Australian women’s sides would be invited to play in international tournaments but, even today, the legacy of these teams is debated and who can and should be called the First Matildas.

While previously men said that football was “inappropriate” for women, now the conversations have switched to comparisons of the quality. So-called football fans will regularly bemoan that the women’s game is too slow, or that the goalkeeping standard is poor (have they watched any Premier League football recently) or that it is just not as exciting.

To be sure, the women’s game is slower than the men’s. The players are generally smaller — a result of inarguable genetics — but Messi, Maradona, et al are far from giants. The top players are slower than men, again a result of genetics, but also a lack of equal training and development following a lack of funding.

The point around the lack of excitement seems to stem largely from media hype and fan behaviour. In the major footballing nations — England, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and France — media coverage is rapacious. But, the media follows fans. Complaints about the lack of noise and drama in the terraces at women’s games ignore the long, bloody and shameful history of fan hooliganism around Europe, not to mention the excessive and unduly violent treatment of fans by police.

By luring fans in with what is ostensibly an exciting compilation of skills from the stars of the men’s game before a big “gotcha!” moment reveals that they have been watching the women’s team, Orange and Marcel have unwittingly played into these stereotypes and lazy comparisons.

The women’s game has its own stars who should be allowed to stand, play and shine on their own two feet and on their own stage. Sam Kerr, for example, has a global stardom that few Australian men’s footballers could ever have hoped to emulate — with the possible exception of Mark Viduca or Harry Kewell (though neither were ever in the running for the Ballon d’Or as Kerr has been on two occasions).

American stars Megan Rapinoe and Alex Morgan cut through to the men’s game in a way that few have. England stars Alessia Russo and Chloe Kelly, regularly star in their ad campaigns in the UK without the presence of men.

If brands want to highlight their work around this World Cup (Orange is not technically a sponsor or partner, either, though it has worked extensively with the Women’s Africa Cup of Nations tournament) they should look to do better.

These women are the best athletes in their field and deserve to be treated as such when tapped for marketing campaigns.