I don’t want women’s sport to grow

A radically different way of thinking about elite sport

I am bored of talking about how to drive the growth and visibility of women’s sport. I want the people participating and working in elite women’s (and men’s) sport to thrive.

The primary measure of progress for elite women’s sport (and men’s sport) is commercial value or economic growth, yet we rarely pause to consider whose interests this serves.

Every year broadcasters, sponsors, the government, and private investors release surveys, reports and reviews on how women’s sport can grow its commercial value.

A Deloitte report in January 2025 found that elite women’s sport revenue is predicted to exceed £1.8 billion, stating that the “commercial appeal of women’s sports and its athletes have never been higher.”

A Sky Sports News survey this week on women’s sport fandom debunked the myth of women’s sports fans being ‘niche’, saying, “this broad appeal makes women's sport commercially valuable.”

This belief that economic growth should be elite sport’s prime objective is firmly rooted in the popular consciousness. Suggesting otherwise would be foolishly radical.

However, embarrassment or shame should not prevent the question:

“Growth of what, and why, and for whom, and who pays the cost, and how long can it last, and what’s the cost to the planet, and how much is enough?” – Environmental scientist Donella Meadows, late 1990s.

Growth of what?

Revenue. This is made of matchday, broadcast and commercial revenue in elite women’s sport. The latter includes sponsorships, partnerships, merchandise sales and pre-season tour income.

These forms of revenue are driven by match attendance, viewership figures, fan engagement, investment activity and media coverage.

When growth is the goal, these metrics are prioritised. Justice, fairness, rights, well-being, and happiness (essential ingredients to thrive) are automatically placed secondary.

Why is growth the goal?

Elite sport is a source of pleasure and excitement. National and regional sports teams and athletes foster connection and unity among citizens, inspire participation in physical activity, raise money for charity and awareness of social issues. Growth means more of these goods.

There is also the popular belief that growth brings about progress in the form of justice, fairness, and rights for women and marginalised people.

Except this is not the full picture of elite men’s and women’s sport. Elite, organised, competitive and commercial sport currently reflects and reproduces significant harms: classism, sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, and violence, including psychological, physical, and sexual violence, are a few of many examples.

Though the harms remain so significant, growth remains the primary goal of elite women’s and men’s sport, which says a lot about whose interests’ growth serves.

And history shows that it was not commercial growth, but women and marginalised people who had to pressure the sports industry into taking steps towards social justice.

Who does growth benefit?

Increased revenue enables clubs and competitions to enhance operations, improve their infrastructure and increase jobs and pay for athletes and staff. Fans gain access to higher quality, more frequent sport to watch in-person and on television. Broadcasters, sponsors, brands, and investors all make increased returns.

However, hierarchies and socio-economic inequalities are already prevalent in women’s sport as wealth and income is being distributed unequally.

Chelsea and Arsenal hoard most of the trophies in recent women’s football league and competition history, and there is a significant pay disparity throughout the top two tiers of the English football pyramid.

Southern Vipers dominated the domestic cricket scene between 2016 and 2024, with only the top tier of the new three tier domestic competition featuring full-time professional contracts.

The Telegraph reported “the gulf between the best and the rest is widening” in women’s rugby with evidence of significant pay disparities and competition dominated by the ‘Big four’ of Gloucester-Hartpury, Saracens, Bristol Bears and Exeter Chiefs who own most of the England players.

Across the Women’s Tennis Association Prize Money Leaders, prize money earnings are starkly unequal.

Sponsorships and endorsements, only given to the most elite teams and athletes, inevitably worsen these inequalities.

Just as in men’s sport and wider society it is the “ruling elite” who control elite, competitive, commercialised sport, that stand to gain the most when growth is the primary objective.

When elite sport makes more money, financial brokers, shareholders, wealthy top executives, conservative politicians, and upper-middle class people extend their power.

Who pays the cost?

Athletes become products whom clubs and organisations seek to extract as much profit as possible from. This means congested match schedules, burnout and mental health problems, low pay, and inadequate and inconsistent welfare and safeguarding provision.

Disabled athletes aren’t perceived as an acceptable product to a mainstream audience and are forgotten about whenever the Paralympics isn’t on.

Fans become customers who will be expected to pay more for match tickets and TV subscriptions every year.

As more and more resources are shifted into elite, organised sport and away from grassroots and recreational sport, millions of people who don’t participate or have access to physical activity lose out.

The planet and the human race face existential threats as big corporations promote high-carbon, polluting lifestyles through advertising and sponsorship deals with sports teams.

Fixating on growth does not serve and will never serve the majority in elite women’s (and men’s) sport and beyond.

We are so addicted to charting match attendance, viewership figures, fan engagement, investment activity and media coverage that we’ve lost sight of what matters most: how to make everyone thrive.