- Jul 27, 2015
- 2,196
- 2,678
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Manchester United
AFLW: Transgender woman preparing to try out | Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...e/news-story/db8ee1cf85fd3920292102b924604b0a
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
If a fully developed man drops their testosterone to female levels for a year how much muscle mass do they expect to lose?
Can see some massive abuse of this rule.
lol as if AWFL wasn't farcical enough already.
If a fully developed man drops their testosterone to female levels for a year how much muscle mass do they expect to lose?
Can see some massive abuse of this rule.
Do you honestly think a man would go through gender reassignment surgery just to rort the aflw and the pittance they currently earn?
You dont have to have the surgery anymore. That is the change. And this wasnt just about the AFLW, its now the Olympic rule.
And I'd say people have gone to all sorts of insane lengths to win Olympic medals.
You dont just tuck. Even chemical castration has a massive effect. I think you are massively overplaying the rort potential
That was what I was asking. How much of the muscle mass would be lost after 1 year (or more likely 18 months given you need to be at the proscribed level for 12 months continuously)?
I cant answer that (not a doc), but not being able to salute is a massive price to pay to play the aflw
Fwiw ive heard that the muscle loss is significant
It is, but as I posed in a thread in the general discussion area ages ago;
If a male athlete admitted to using steroids for a decade but had been clean for 12 months would he be allowed to compete in the Olympics? (Or any other WADA registered competition)
Also, see the study I posted earlier.
Depends which country he competes for
Whether you agree or disagree with the decision the timing of the AFL ruling is a disgrace as this woman has absolutely no recourse or right of appeal. And the timing was no coincidence.
You've missed the point completely.I don't know about a "disgrace"...jesus christ
They may have just not wanted the AFLW to get dragged into a circus for months. It is a fledgling league that has been successful in a large part because the AFL has got the comms right
What's disgraceful is how our society now arse scratches so comfortable flippantly calling others a "disgrace" who actually have real responsibilities to make decisions in highly charged public environments
As disappointing as it is for this woman it should hardly be a shock that she has not been allowed to play. The AFLW is essentially a top down move to professionalise a women's sport.
You've missed the point completely.
I'm not arguing that the decision was right or wrong, I clearly stated that unlike just about everyone else in the same position she was not afforded any right of appeal.
The timing of the ruling was a disgrace and I stand by it - not really that difficult to understand.
I work in the industry here in WA, I am part of MRP for junior football both boys and girls as well as the WAWFL (WA womens football league) and the last thing you do is not give someone an opportunity to argue their case. I know it is a different scenario but it is basic procedural fairness.No I got your point.
"They may have just not wanted the AFLW to get dragged into a circus for months. It is a fledgling league that has been successful in a large part because the AFL has got the comms right"
A lot easier to fling the word "disgrace" around on social media than it is for those in positions of significant public exposed responsibility who need to handle situations like this one.
I assume that they consciously chose to announce their decision a day before to reduce the window that a potential legal challenge could be pursued and, along side this, the AFLW become pulled into a media circus for months ahead of the 2nd draft / season.
I work in the industry here in WA, I am part of MRP for junior football both boys and girls as well as the WAWFL (WA womens football league) and the last thing you do is not give someone an opportunity to argue their case. I know it is a different scenario but it is basic procedural fairness.
A media circus it might be but that goes with the territory of the AFL. Just give this person the right to argue her case. The AFL have known since at least June, but I'm sure earlier as we in WA heard about it late last year.
Give me an example of any other situation where a decision can be made without a person having the right to challenge that.