Society/Culture Cricket Australia releases Transgender and gender diverse policy for players

[Frank Bunn]

Cricket Australia has today announced the direction for the inclusion of transgender and gender diverse people in elite and community cricket.​

​

Commencing consultation with key stakeholders in October 2018, Cricket Australia has developed an Elite Cricket Policy and Guidelines for Community Cricket to support players electing to participate in cricket in line with their gender identity, whether or not this aligns with the sex they were assigned at birth.​

​

Megan Schutt, Australian cricketer said:​

​

“Inclusion matters in every sense. Cricket Australia's vision is to be a sport for all, so everyone deserves to be included.​

​

“To have a policy and guidelines that includes transgender and gender diverse players will create a better environment for everybody to play the game.​

​

Cricket Australia takes action to include transgender and gender diverse people | Cricket Australia

Cricket Australia takes action to include transgender and gender diverse people

www.cricketaustralia.com.au

The criteria is that the player’s testosterone level is less than 10 nmol/L1 continuously for a period of no less than 12 months prior to nominating their gender identity.

I'm thinking that if Mitchell Starc gets on the hormones for 12 months he'll still be 6'5. Women's fast bowler Megan Schutt is 5'6.

 

[Eagle Wrath]

Megan wont be celebrating in the future, when she fails to even make the B team. This stuff wont affect mens sport, except when they soften the rules to make it more inclusive (AFL is already on this bandwagon).

It will be the death of womens sport though.

 

[Ok Boomer]

Females will be on board until they get denied success or selection by a man posing as a woman.

We have seen several examples of this in other sports already.

 

[Hamingja]

Not as big a deal in cricket where technique trumps size and strength and less risk of getting hurt.

Size and strength will help hitting the ball further and bowling faster but it would be negligible if they are on hormone treatment which would negate the strength aspect a bit.

Women's cricket is much higher standard than women's football too.

I'm sure Ellyse Perry would be up to standard playing local club cricket against men. Throw Daisy Pearce into a men's metro footy league and ......

Would only be a problem if a heap of state level cricketers decide to become women IMO.

 

[Hamingja]

There’s a 30km/h difference between top speeds for fast bowlers for each sex. Partially has to do with speed, but also to do with leverage. If my arm is 80cm long and yours is 50cm, I’m going to deliver that ball a lot faster than you ever can.

So sure Starc bowls at 150km/h and Perry bowls at 125km/h but how many men's cricketers below international and state level are bowling above 130? Not that many I would think. You only have to look at the bowling competition they had on the cricket show during lunch breaks with club cricketers and while there were a few that cracked some good speeds most of them were bowling high 120s and low 130s and that was when they were specifically trying to bowl fast and not bowling like they would in a match. Narrow it down further to the number of those that want to become women and it is basically a non issue.

 

[Hamingja]

Starc bowls at 150km/h, Hazelwood bowls at 135-140km/h, McGrath at the end of his career and Stuart Clark bowling at 125-130km/h and the same sliding scale would apply to the women. Not sure of the point.

 

[Contra Mundum]

The Seniors in the Country comps need every person they can get but nooooooooooooooooo lets have another never ending skirmish in the Culture War. The culture warriors are like Trostsyists permanent revolution in a war that is already over
Good to see our PM focusing on the important issues

 

[ShanDog]

The Seniors in the Country comps need every person they can get but nooooooooooooooooo lets have another never ending skirmish in the Culture War. The culture warriors are like Trostsyists permanent revolution in a war that is already over
Good to see our PM focusing on the important issues

A fair game isn't just predicated on having the numbers to play it.

 

[Bradesmaen]

So sure Starc bowls at 150km/h and Perry bowls at 125km/h but how many men's cricketers below international and state level are bowling above 130? Not that many I would think. You only have to look at the bowling competition they had on the cricket show during lunch breaks with club cricketers and while there were a few that cracked some good speeds most of them were bowling high 120s and low 130s and that was when they were specifically trying to bowl fast and not bowling like they would in a match. Narrow it down further to the number of those that want to become women and it is basically a non issue.

Mohammad Irfan is 7'1" and bowled at speeds of 135.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Not as big a deal in cricket where technique trumps size and strength and less risk of getting hurt.

Size and strength will help hitting the ball further and bowling faster but it would be negligible if they are on hormone treatment which would negate the strength aspect a bit.

Women's cricket is much higher standard than women's football too.

I'm sure Ellyse Perry would be up to standard playing local club cricket against men. Throw Daisy Pearce into a men's metro footy league and ......

Would only be a problem if a heap of state level cricketers decide to become women IMO.

Good local male cricketers and any state level player would be better than most of the national women's players.

It will be women that miss out on prestigious positions from this ruling. The TERFs are going to lose their s**t.

 

[ShanDog]

Have to say I agree. This decision is just ideological and the negative repercussions are wrongly deemed to be worthwhile.

 

[Maddhew]

As a percentage of the population, there are very few transgender people in Australia. Only 9% of the population play cricket. This this policy will make not make a discernible difference.

The question has to be asked....then why release it at all?

 

[Keys]

This is an issue for female players of whichever sport they’re involved in

If they’re happy playing against a transgender woman then there’s no issue. I also doubt there’s going to be any increase in the number of men wanting to become female so they can play sport - it’s not as if sportswomen are making big bucks in most sports

Just something for people to jump up and down about that has zero impact on their life

 

[Maddhew]

Do women have to pretend to be comfortable sharing a shower with a player with male genitalia?

 

[CheapCharlie]

As a percentage of the population, there are very few transgender people in Australia. Only 9% of the population play cricket. This this policy will make not make a discernible difference.

The question has to be asked....then why release it at all?

Virtue signalling is a commodity cricket Australia likes to trade in

 

[Snake_Baker]

I think the best gals could play to a high level, such as district cricket, but ultimately biology will win the day.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

This site needs an entire trans related board.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Holy s**t.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

I was half joking about the board. Murdoch gave you all a section in a national newspaper.

 

[Gough]

Holy s**t.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

I was half joking about the board. Murdoch gave you all a section in a national newspaper.

Still smarting from the hiding they took on gay marriage the culture warriors have now decided that trans people are going to be the ones to bring society to it's knees. They're easier to spot than those sneaky NTTAWWTters too.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Why do we have women’s sports in the first place? If you answer that question, you will know why this change is unfair to women.

Sometimes the bleeding obvious needs to be stated. We have women's sports because they are not as good at sport as men.

A biological man going on hormones for 12 months does not cancel out that advantage.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Sometimes the bleeding obvious needs to be stated. We have women's sports because they are not as good at sport as men.

A biological man going on hormones for 12 months does not cancel out that advantage.

Typical chauvinist response. It depends on the type of sport and the aim of the game. If it is to lift the most or run the fastest sure, but if it is skill based then that is not correct.

 

[Kram]

Typical chauvinist response. It depends on the type of sport and the aim of the game. If it is to lift the most or run the fastest sure, but if it is skill based then that is not correct.

Name some sports in the world that both sexes play and in which the best player is a woman.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Name some sports in the world that both sexes play and in which the best player is a woman.

It's hard to name a sport in general where women and men play against each other in general without it being a mixed doubles type affair. Equestrian is the only one at the Olympics.

Would you say something like Shooting or Archery requires you to be female or male?

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

It's hard to name a sport in general where women and men play against each other in general without it being a mixed doubles type affair. Equestrian is the only one at the Olympics.

Would you say something like Shooting or Archery requires you to be female or male?

Regarding archery, I remember reading this on reddit a while back:

Hi there, collegiate-level female archer here; hoping to shed some light on this good question!
Men and women compete separately in individual archery competition because men's scores are typically higher. For example, the new WRs are 700 (male) and 673 (female).
This is in large part due to the men having higher arrow speeds. Higher speed leads to higher scores because higher arrow speed = less wind interference + more forgiveness for form mistakes. As such, men don't have to account for the wind as much or be as precise with their movements. (They're still REALLY precise though!)
So how do men get this higher arrow speed? Two major reasons:

• longer arms = longer draw length (basically how far you can pull back the bow)
• stronger muscles = able to handle higher draw weight (basically how much force the arrows leaves the bow with)

So in conclusion, different physiologies require different categories.
As a side note, I can confirm that breasts DO NOT hinder female archers in any way.
Also, men and women do compete together in an event called "mixed team" where one female and one male face-off against another female-male pair. This is my favorite event! My partner shoots a 45 lbs (draw weight) bow and I shoot a 37 lbs one, and our draw lengths are 31'' and 26.5'' respectively.
tl;dr There are gendered categories in archery because men have longer arms and stronger muscles that lead to faster arrows that in turn forgive bad form and don't get ruined by wind.

No idea if there are any advantages to being male for shooting.

 

[ShanDog]

Name some sports in the world that both sexes play and in which the best player is a woman.

Lingerie football.