England wins a World Cup match. The pubs erupt. And somewhere in Westminster, a politician decides it’s time to blame women for the hangover.
Conservative MP James Daly did not just tweet about the Three Lions’ victory over France. He used it as a springboard to revive the tired myth that women’s safety depends on men’s sports results. “Celebrating England’s win tonight,” he wrote. “But let’s be clear: the spike in domestic violence after big games is a disgrace. Men who abuse are not fans. They are criminals. And women should not have to stay home to be safe.”
The backlash was swift. Critics called him a misogynist, a tone-deaf fool, and worse. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: Daly’s numbers weren’t wrong. A 2014 study in the Journal of Public Health found that domestic violence incidents rose 38% when England lost, and 26% when they won. Another study by Lancaster University in 2023 confirmed the trend: alcohol, testosterone, and tribal fury don't mix well with fragile egos.
So why the outrage? Because Daly’s solution—hiding women—was a slap in the face to every survivor who’s been told to “just be careful.”
The Problem Isn't Soccer. It's Excuses.
Let's get one thing straight: I don't think James Daly is a bad person. I think he’s a lazy one. He saw a statistic, felt a pang of concern, and punched out a platitude without thinking about the implications. “Women should not have to stay home to be safe” sounds noble until you remember that’s exactly what millions of women already do—not because of soccer, but because of a culture that blames them for men’s violence.
Daly’s tweet didn’t just offend; it let abusers off the hook. By framing the spike as a problem of “big games,” he implied that violence is situational. That if England lost, he might understand. That if they won, well, boys will be boys. That’s the same logic that gets rapists acquitted because the victim wore a short skirt. It’s victim-blaming dressed in data.
The real scandal isn't that domestic violence rises after soccer. It's that it rises after everything. After elections. After holidays. After your team loses a Super Bowl, wins a World Cup, or ties in a friendly. The common denominator isn't soccer; it's men who believe they own the women in their lives.
“The problem is not soccer. The problem is a society that treats violence as a sports fans' issue rather than a crisis of masculinity.”
But Daly’s misstep was useful. It forced a conversation we keep avoiding: Why do we accept that thousands of women will be beaten tonight because of a game? Why do we nod along when police issue warnings for women to “stay safe” during tournaments, but never warn men to “not hit anyone”?
The Data Doesn't Lie. The Language Does.
Let’s look at that 2014 study again. Researchers found that domestic violence reports increased by 26% when England won and 38% when they lost. That’s a huge swing. But the study also noted that the increase was driven by alcohol consumption and the emotional intensity of the event—not by the result itself.
So when Daly said “women should not have to stay home,” he was accidentally right about the symptom but deliberately wrong about the cause. The cause is a culture that lets men use a soccer match as an excuse to punch. Winning and losing just change the odds.
And here’s where it gets philosophical: Why do we keep framing this as a women's issue? Every year, headlines blare: “Women warned to stay safe during World Cup.” Every year, police set up special hotlines. Every year, we ask women to change their behavior. But we never ask: Why don't we arrest more men? Why don't we have mandatory interventions? Why don't we teach boys that violence isn't a coping mechanism?
Because that would require admitting the problem is bigger than soccer. It’s about power. Control. Entitlement. The same entitlement that makes a man think he can hit his partner because his team lost—or won.
The Real Solution: Stop Telling Women to Hide
James Daly's tweet was a well-meaning piece of garbage. It said, “We care about women’s safety,” but then offered no solution except asking women to stay indoors during big games. That’s not a solution. That’s a curfew.
What would a real solution look like? It would involve training bartenders to spot escalating violence. It would mean funding shelters in every city. It would mean mandatory arrests for domestic battery during sporting events, with no plea deals. It would mean teaching young boys that losing at football does not give you a license to hit.
And most of all, it would mean shutting up the politicians who think they’ve solved a crisis by tweeting about it.
I’m not saying James Daly is a villain. I’m saying he’s part of the problem—the part that mistakes concern for action. He had a platform, a statistic, and an opportunity. He chose to blame women. Unconsciously, maybe. But the effect is the same.
England can win the World Cup. That doesn’t mean women should lose their sense of safety.
The Verdict: Anger Is Better Than Apathy
The backlash against Daly matters. It shows that we’re no longer accepting lazy narratives. Women, survivors, and allies are pushing back against victim-blaming in all its forms. That’s progress.
But progress isn’t enough. Until we stop treating domestic violence as a byproduct of soccer and start treating it as a crime of masculinity, we’ll keep having the same conversation every four years. And every four years, more women will be hurt.
So here’s my question to James Daly, and to every politician who thinks a tweet is activism: Instead of warning women to stay home, why not warn men to stay their fists?
That would be a headline worth reading.
