No gotcha or point being made, just honestly perplexed. Just to use soccer as an example, a commissioner got in trouble for stating the women in the women's only league are less capable (at soccer) than the men playing in an open league. This seems to me an obvious truth, and I don't know what someone would gain from disputing it. If it's not true, then that'd mean there is no need for a separate gender restricted league, and there should just be a single open league. Which in some sports should have already happened or has happened (like car racing). But presumably advocates for the women's only league believe that in some sports, if the league didn't exist then women wouldn't be able to play professionally in that particular sport. So, why argue against this statement? Isn't doing so implying they think there shouldn't be a gender restricted league for that sport?