Remove this Banner Ad

Play Nice 2019-2022 CBA Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_Wookie
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

If the main problem with the offer is length of season, I think they should maintain the status quo for another season.

Will west coast rejuvenate interest out west creating a rivalry?
Will the grand final sway a few on the bench crows fans to follow them more?
Will Richmond get a big following with the fans wanting a treble this year?

Honestly feel this is a shit year to be renegotiating.

Should’ve done it last year and force the hand of playing everyone once still.
Or next year to see how the new teams and potential effect the 50+k gf will have on the league.

The points by sharni I think it was? Very good. If we lose coverage on games, I might lose interest. I do my best to attend or watch every crows game. And I found myself watching more AFLw than afl. Afl forces my hand and stops me being able to watch my team play? If games aren’t televised I hope it’s west coast/Fremantle, Brisbane/Gold Coast and any Melbourne derby. At least people can still attend. Cause if I can’t watch adelaide my interest overall will drop. With ESPN no longer showing red zone I’m watching less nfl this year because I can’t see even the highlights of Atlanta games live (perhaps a good thing)

One day the league will get to where the no voters want it. But perhaps now is too quick.
 
I’m surprised they’re even complaining at all to be honest. A couple of seasons ago they were amateurs, earning nothing from footy, playing to very small crowds.
Thanks to the men’s comp, they are now at least having an opportunity to earn money for doing what they love, and a chance to play in front of a lot more people thanks to the alignment with AFL clubs. The men’s comp is still paying their running costs as well as their wages, yet they are complaining it’s not enough.
Like it or not, sport is an entertainment business, so if you don’t get enough people paying to see you play, you shouldn’t be getting paid, yet right now we have a situation where someone else is earning the money to pay for this comp and instead of being grateful, some are demanding more. It baffles me that there are complaints from some players, who if it wasn’t for the AFL men’s comp, would be suburban footballers paying to play.
I’m all for promoting and helping women’s footy, coz I work in the industry, but this kind of stuff leaves a sour taste as it stinks of undeserved arrogance and self importance. They should be doing what’s best for the long term interests of the game, otherwise there may not be a league around in the future.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Herald Sun Lauren Wood 9.10.19

L. Wood initially wrote" This is not a dispute about money".

But then wrote
"The rebel players want:
5 per cent cent plus inflation year-on-year
wages to not be linked to AFL rookie wages, plus a pay equity review during the life of the CBA".

This indicates the dispute is also about money (not just length of season).
The "rebel 30%" appear to be wanting their pay rates based on higher, fully contracted (non- rookie) AFL player rates.
The rebels also appear to be foreshadowing a possible workplace gender discrimination claim, based on greater equity with their "co-workers", AFL men's rates. Anyone want a nice little gender war!? Great boost for female GR AF & the AFLW!?

There is still no mention in Wood's articles (or anywhere, AFAIK, in the MSM!?) that AFLW ratings have plummetted in 2018 & 2019- as if this issue is not crucial to determining the financial sustainability of the comp., & players' wages.

In 2016, players in the VWFL were playing in H & A games, with c.100 people watching, & weren't getting a cent. Pre 2016, VWFL GF's had crowds (paying $10) up to 2,000 (3 GF's on same day.)

The AFL & AFLW are now offering:-
. very generous wages
. professional training/facilities/rehab etc.
. a semi-prof career path (with the possibility of full time, well paid professionalism IF the ratings can be significantly increased; entry charges, + increases in other metrics)
. off-field Media & promotional/PR work etc. for a few

- but stupidity, greed & entitlement by a minority are threatening to derail the great work of the AFLW since 2017. Simply amazing!

Wookie, I can't find this article on the H./Sun's website. Can you, or anyone else, & post it here?
 
Last edited:
It's interesting to note from one of the Herald Sun articles today that on top of what they've claimed to be asking for, the splitters also want the wages to no longer be tied to AFL rookie wages, as well as an 'equity review' within the life of the CBA. Fairly clear now that the no vote is very much an opportunistic cash grab as much as anything, so it's no surprise that the 70% are filthy on the move.

The_Wookie said:
Click to expand...


Well no shit, the >10% vote is evidence of that. Pretty big whack though from Pearce suggesting that the delegates basically misled their constituents to get the result that they wanted.

It will be interesting to see what happens now that the AFLPA are going to be communicating more directly with the 4 'no' clubs. Perhaps without the delegates filtering the information the deal might pass in a few weeks time.
 
The_Wookie said:
ive literally linked it above.
Click to expand...
My post #1859 refers to an article by L.Wood in the Herald Sun hard copy paper of today, 9.10. It is a different Herald Sun article by L Wood, also apparently 9.10, that you have linked - see my direct quotes from Wood, which are different to your link.
 
BringBackTorps said:
My post #1859 refers to an article by L.Wood in the Herald Sun hard copy paper of today, 9.10. It is a different Herald Sun article by L Wood, also apparently 9.10, that you have linked - see my direct quotes from Wood, which are different to your link.
Click to expand...

lwood 09.10.2019.png
 
Starburns_ said:
It's interesting to note from one of the Herald Sun articles today that on top of what they've claimed to be asking for, the splitters also want the wages to no longer be tied to AFL rookie wages, as well as an 'equity review' within the life of the CBA. Fairly clear now that the no vote is very much an opportunistic cash grab as much as anything, so it's no surprise that the 70% are filthy on the move.



Well no shit, the >10% vote is evidence of that. Pretty big whack though from Pearce suggesting that the delegates basically misled their constituents to get the result that they wanted.

It will be interesting to see what happens now that the AFLPA are going to be communicating more directly with the 4 'no' clubs. Perhaps without the delegates filtering the information the deal might pass in a few weeks time.
Click to expand...
Conclusion Daisy reached is a pretty hard conclusion to avoid given how the vote went.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Tandy said:

AFLW, pay dispute, AFL womens, 2020 season, Darcy Vescio, AFLPA, legal action | FOX SPORTS

A quartet of influential and strong-willed women were the ring leaders behind last week's shock 'NO' vote that has spiralled the upcoming AFLW season further into doubt.
coupler.foxsports.com.au

The four clubs are
Carlton
Geelong
GWS
St Kilda

Two more players named. St Kilda haven't even played a season yet!!
Click to expand...
Geelong players complaining about something?!

Shocked to be sitting here.
 
Mkcaptain said:
Its hard to argue with Darcy about the standard of umpiring
Click to expand...

True, but thats not the whole argument. She wants the same umpires that do the mens season. And thats not going to happen, as not only do they have to do a full mens season, but they arent full time either.
 
CrowdedHouse said:
Bzzzzzzz. Wrong answer.

Before the AFLW began, the VFLW Grand Final of 2016 between Darebin and Melbourne Uni drew 4,000 paying customers (at $10 a head).

Last 2 VFLW Grand Finals roughly avg 7000 paying customers (at $20 a head).

Public will pay. In fact, most are surprised the AFL aren't at least doing gold coin donations for charitable causes.
Click to expand...
4000 would not be sustainable over the long term.

The last 2 vflw grand finals were also curtain raisers to the men's grand final
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

NimFromSudan said:
You cannot make that criticism without also questioning delegates that had high/unanimous YES votes. It cuts both ways
Click to expand...

No it doesn't "cut both ways"

The delegates who communicated support for the agreement were doing so on the advice of their union and the clear collective will of the delegates who were briefed by their union.

The delegates who walked out of a room where they were clearly outnumbered in their view to then: campaigned to vote no; hire lawyers to attack their union; and leaked like a sieve to the media are in no way analogous.
 
The_Wookie said:
True, but thats not the whole argument. She wants the same umpires that do the mens season. And thats not going to happen, as not only do they have to do a full mens season, but they arent full time either.
Click to expand...

Maybe we get the AFL umpires to umpire the AFLW games but also get the AFL players to play instead of the AFLW players?
 
The_Wookie said:
True, but thats not the whole argument. She wants the same umpires that do the mens season. And thats not going to happen, as not only do they have to do a full mens season, but they arent full time either.
Click to expand...

We probably do need full time umpires at this point, which would mean they could do both. But that would require money, which apparently the break-away group also wants more of, a vicious cycle.
 
The_Wookie said:
True, but thats not the whole argument. She wants the same umpires that do the mens season. And thats not going to happen, as not only do they have to do a full mens season, but they arent full time either.
Click to expand...

Cut a deal, give them Razor Ray.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom