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

Remove this Banner Ad

Swimming is sport where I don't think there is much difference at all technically skills wise between sexes. Teens and adults males will obviously swim faster with more strength, but as far as kids go the girls quite often swim quicker than boys the same age because they can develop physically earlier.
 
Last edited:
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.
Which skill based games are you referring to?
 
This is exciting news for those of us who always dreamed of wearing the baggy green but were never quite good enough. Just one question though. Is cross-sex hormone replacement therapy reversible?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This is exciting news for those of us who always dreamed of wearing the baggy green but were never quite good enough. Just one question though. Is cross-sex hormone replacement therapy reversible?
I mean, your hacky joke is boring, but you raise a decent point.

Which is that no one goes through hormone replacement theory to change sex and play sport. No one. But it's always the first outrage point when some organisation implements a pro-transgender policy. To basically the entire first page of this thread, whatever your stance on the issue, can we be real and recognise that female comps are not going to be overriden by hundreds of dominant females born male?
 
Last edited:
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.
The church is being persecuted! /s
 
I mean, your hacky joke is boring, but you raise a decent point.

Which is that no one goes through hormone replacement theory to change sex and play sport. No one. But it's always the first outrage point when some organisation implements a pro-transgender policy. To basically the entire first page of this thread, whatever your stance on the issue, can we be real and recognise that female comps are not going to be overriden by hundreds of dominant females born male?

Mate I'm actually surprised someone as basic as you actually understood the joke (and the topic). Well done..
 
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.

Turn it up. The whoa was me "the only gay in the village" persecution complex is really old and boring.

You would be surprised with how many of those evil heterosexual, centrist/conservative white men have gay mates and family members..
 
Last edited:
This is exciting news for those of us who always dreamed of wearing the baggy green but were never quite good enough. Just one question though. Is cross-sex hormone replacement therapy reversible?
I hear the ropes are closer in too. Let's do it. Time to hit some "fast" bowls into row Z. Then we can transition to AFLW


giphy.gif
 
I hear the ropes are closer in too. Let's do it. Time to hit some "fast" bowls into row Z. Then we can transition to AFLW


giphy.gif
Brilliant. The Australians women's cricket team has just found it's opening batsmen (women). I'll meet you at Sportsgirl in an hour.
 
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.

Id rather face 140km/hr from someone 5'6" thsn 120km/hr from someone 6'6".

The extra height and arm length is partly why the ball takes longer to make the journey, but the actually delivery speed is similar.

Plus the extra height leads to massively more variable bounce.

But yes, cricket is one of the less likely to be affected by gender.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The issue isn't so much that the elite men and the elite women are 20% apart, it's that the average man is only a little bit behind the elite man compared to how far behind the average woman is from the average man.

The elite athlete women are a small percentage of all women and their standard level is potentially at the standard for an average man.
 
The issue isn't so much that the elite men and the elite women are 20% apart, it's that the average man is only a little bit behind the elite man compared to how far behind the average woman is from the average man.

The elite athlete women are a small percentage of all women and their standard level is potentially at the standard for an average man.

In cricket or in general? Wouldn't the short amount of time that most female sports have been professional mean that the gap between professionals and the average Jane is likely to be smaller, rather than larger?
 
In cricket or in general? Wouldn't the short amount of time that most female sports have been professional mean that the gap between professionals and the average Jane is likely to be smaller, rather than larger?
I think the elite athletes in women's sports would have succeeded in any sport because they are so far above average.

I think the best women in almost every sport would get beaten by average dudes because elite for a woman is still fairly ordinary by human standards.
 
Swimming is sport where I don't think there is much difference at all technically skills wise between sexes. Teens and adults males will obviously swim faster with more strength, but as far as kids go the girls quite often swim quicker than boys the same age because they can develop physically earlier.
Not true. If you lookup the best times for each gender and age group, male swimmers are far quicker comparably per age group.
 
Last edited:
I mean, your hacky joke is boring, but you raise a decent point.

Which is that no one goes through hormone replacement theory to change sex and play sport. No one. But it's always the first outrage point when some organisation implements a pro-transgender policy. To basically the entire first page of this thread, whatever your stance on the issue, can we be real and recognise that female comps are not going to be overriden by hundreds of dominant females born male?

we don’t have equal pay yet
 
We don't have equal value for the product sold either yet. The product being the game being sold to broadcasters

no s**t. you couldn’t pay me to watch the ‘product’.

the moment it’s unpackaged from mens’ game and has to stand on its own you will see the demand side go off a cliff.
 
no sh*t. you couldn’t pay me to watch the ‘product’.

the moment it’s unpackaged from mens’ game and has to stand on its own you will see the demand side go off a cliff.

For the cricket the product is not too bad. Has a way to go but delivers some good entertainment. AFLW is miles behind
 
Anyone bagging out women's cricket hasn't watched an awful lot of it. Different game to footy, and the lack of power means that they've actually got to time the ball a lot better to hit a boundary.

Timing makes for better shots than raw power does.

As for the thread topic, this is a bit of a non-issue. When someone transitions and then opts to play cricket, they've got a policy; no-one's going to transition in order to play cricket.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top