News 2021 St.Kilda AFLW Media Thread

[AFLOnline]

won't call you sexist, but I will call you incredibly short sighted.

Meh, call me what you like.

Footballs a mans sport, always has, always will be. I can't see the competition catching on or ever growing in real popularity besides being a bit of a gimmick.. That's just my opinion, as I said, I'm probably being sexist, but I can find as many women who would probably agree with what I'm saying lol. Not even chicks wanna watch chicks play footy.

 

[Strahany]

Its almost as if professional sports attract those freak outliers.. fancy that hey?

You clearly didn't read my post properly before firing off.

Freak physical outliers of women will be approximately equivalent to VFL/WAFL/SANFL tier players, at best.
Average AFL player >>> Freak physical women
Elite AFL players >>>>>>>> Freak physical women

And just like how all physical male outliers don't playe AFL, not all physical female outliers will play this sport, too. Once it gets up and running, you may see 1 per team, or 2 at best.

 

[Saintos The ITK]

I think they're getting in a bit early with this one. The level just isn't there yet, its like watching tall U8's. Maybe one day when the womens comp has matured enough.

 

[Nutsngum]

You clearly didn't read my post properly before firing off.

Freak physical outliers of women will be approximately equivalent to VFL/WAFL/SANFL tier players, at best.
Average AFL player >>> Freak physical women
Elite AFL players >>>>>>>> Freak physical women

And just like how all physical male outliers don't playe AFL, not all physical female outliers will play this sport, too. Once it gets up and running, you may see 1 per team, or 2 at best.

Oh no I read it, i just think its garbage based on a preconceived notion that women are naturally weaker and because of that will never have the skills to play decent football.

 

[Masquerade]

I was in the train today, thinking about this. And it came to me that I although I wanted St Kilda to have a women's team, it wasn't really for 'right' reasons.

I feel that getting a women's teams playing as the Saints will serve the men's side well in the future. Why? Well, you'd think we'll get more exposure which will be good for sponsors as well as attracting new members (especially females). It also helps with good publicity - something we tend to run a little short on.

However, what I realised was that none of the above reasons are very beneficial, if at all, to actual women who are interested in playing footy. For me, getting this team up and running is only about potential benefits to our males side. Personally, I don't think I'll ever watch a game of female AFL footy. Why? I only have a limited amount of time in a week and watching footy that will be rungs below VFL level is low down on my list of things to do. Very low in fact. Following this, it came to me that the thought of women playing AFL didn't excite me in anyway.I don't think this makes me sexist or one of the many assorted terms but I can't help but feel there would be tens of thousands of male AFL fans that feel exactly the same way.

Anyway, I think the point I'm trying to make is that my concern for a women's team is only due to the fact that it can help bolster our male side. I can't help but feel a little guilty about this. Do any of you think similarly? Or am I the only one?

 

[Moorabbin Ghost]

The bid for a women's team is a complex issue.
The thing is, if we could run a women's team in what is expected to be a relatively highly attended/high tv ratings league, for what would probably be zero cost (or next to nothing) then I think we'd be absolutely mad to at least not put in a bid. Between AFL funding, memberships and extra sponsorship we believe that there are only positives to be had by having our own women's team.
We need to seperate the men's and women's teams as they have no relation to each other in that they are completely seperate onfield entities.
Whether you think the standard is great or not it really doesn't matter, there are thousands of young girls and women who love playing organised footy, and that's just in what St Kilda think of as our "area", from St Kilda to Frankston.
The AFL have told the club that they are extremely impressed with our submission, and we are hopeful if not confident that we will be granted a license.
The thing that we need to ask ourselves is "why not"?

 

[plugger66]

The bid for a women's team is a complex issue.
The thing is, if we could run a women's team in what is expected to be a relatively highly attended/high tv ratings league, for what would probably be zero cost (or next to nothing) then I think we'd be absolutely mad to at least not put in a bid. Between AFL funding, memberships and extra sponsorship we believe that there are only positives to be had by having our own women's team.
We need to seperate the men's and women's teams as they have no relation to each other in that they are completely seperate onfield entities.
Whether you think the standard is great or not it really doesn't matter, there are thousands of young girls and women who love playing organised footy, and that's just in what St Kilda think of as our "area", from St Kilda to Frankston.
The AFL have told the club that they are extremely impressed with our submission, and we are hopeful if not confident that we will be granted a license.
The thing that we need to ask ourselves is "why not"?

How does it cost nothing for a start and by even doing a bid we have used valuable time and I would say that means money. Also to say it is separate seems a bit far fetched. Are you saying not one person currently involved with the Saints will be involved with the womens side? Cant have that myself. As for being highly attended and high rating well I reckon that is also over the top. Bidding is fine but if it effects the real side than I certainly don't want it. Still doubt we are a chance in year one anyway. And those are my why not reasons.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

I saw a bit of the melbourne womens game and i thought it was extremely good.. They were highly competitive. It looked exciting. Physicality was there. Competitiveness and skills were pretty good for teams that were really just an adhoc representation of what will come.
Im not surprised by the short sighted negative response this has recieved by some.
But this will become a proper proffesional competition and im looking forward to seeing how it develops and am very glad that Saints will be part of this.

 

[dct66]

I thought it was great that Melbourne FC not only have Daisy Pearce doing the on ground stuff with Robbo but when they had a couple of punters trying to take a mark over Robbo, Daisy was the one providing the set up kicks.

 

[Moorabbin Ghost]

How does it cost nothing for a start and by even doing a bid we have used valuable time and I would say that means money. Also to say it is separate seems a bit far fetched. Are you saying not one person currently involved with the Saints will be involved with the womens side? Cant have that myself. As for being highly attended and high rating well I reckon that is also over the top. Bidding is fine but if it effects the real side than I certainly don't want it. Still doubt we are a chance in year one anyway. And those are my why not reasons.

You honestly think that the St Kilda Football Club would put the women's team before the men's? Not one person involved at any level of the men's or women's teams have ever expected that, let alone say it.
I can't remember which game it was but the televised women's game last year out-rated some men's AFL matches and killed the A League and NBL ratings.
I should have guessed you would be one of the supporters against it Plugger.

 

[Geary Is GOAT]

by even doing a bid we have used valuable time

 

[plugger66]

You honestly think that the St Kilda Football Club would put the women's team before the men's? Not one person involved at any level of the men's or women's teams have ever expected that, let alone say it.
I can't remember which game it was but the televised women's game last year out-rated some men's AFL matches and killed the A League and NBL ratings.
I should have guessed you would be one of the supporters against it Plugger.

When did I say the club would put the women's side ahead of the saints side? Please give me some credit. And yes a one off game should rate. That doesn't mean it will make money or continue to rate. And I'm against it because it will have time and money that we may not be able to afford. I don't see how you would know it wouldn't unless you work for the club. I'm guessing because I think it's logical.

 

[George]

Some more developments on the story + a club restructure here;

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...all-restructure-revealed-20160504-golq0t.html

 

[Strahany]

Oh no I read it, i just think its garbage based on a preconceived notion that women are naturally weaker and because of that will never have the skills to play decent football.

"Preconceived notion" implies that this is a matter for debate; it is not. By your standards, saying men cannot give birth is merely a "preconceived notion". Women are physically inferior to men, and that is a simple fact that is not a matter for discussion; you cannot subvert physiological differences with any amount of social commentary.
As for whether this reflects on the quality of football; go watch a game of amateurs on the weekend, and then watch two AFL clubs play, and tell me which game had the higher quality of skills, and drew higher general interest. That answer will be the very same answer as to why no women's competition will ever compete to the standard of the men's.

Don't get me wrong; if this can work within the parameters required, then I am all for it. However, I struggle to see how this will gain footing when the demand for female sporting leagues is almost non-existent, and are a complete money sink which we, as a club, would be unwise to pursue unless there are all sorts of financial frameworks in play to ensure a successful venture.
I am also a fervent supporter of gender equality, which is why I dismiss this third-wave feminism rubbish that overlooks facts, such as the physiological differences I've highlighted, and labels those that raise said facts as some form of distributor of hate speech.

 

[jonathons11]

Some more developments on the story + a club restructure here;

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...all-restructure-revealed-20160504-golq0t.html

Good article.
Here's some interesting points.

St Kilda's football department will be restructured – 14 posts dedicated to men's footy will expand to include women's footy responsibilities, and nine new female footy positions will be created – if the club wins a women's league licence.

St Kilda's pre-season training camps would also become mixed gender events for male and female playing lists in an array of related changes.

Among eight clubs competing for the four Victoria-based women's team licences the AFL initially planned to award for 2017 – the league now appears open to increasing that number – St Kilda's pitch centres on fully integrating female football in the traditionally exclusively male elite playing setting.

The bid says there will be at least one mixed training session between St Kilda's lists of male and female footballers. The club has looked closely at elite cricket and soccer for inspiration about how to best align, and market, women and men on shared platforms.

An excerpt of the Saints' pitch seen by Fairfax Media says: "For a women's team to be successful on and off the field, they need to be completely absorbed and immersed into the club. One club."

St Kilda's submission has made it clear the club wants all of its AFL female league matches broadcast on Saints media channels at a minimum, if not on television.

The club has also stipulated it wants joint fixture opportunities for its male and female sides to allow fans to actively support both teams.

#TeamAngelica

 

[Linton St]

Saints' grand plan for football restructure revealed

St Kilda's football department will be restructured – 14 posts dedicated to men's footy will expand to include women's footy responsibilities, and nine new female footy positions will be created – if the club wins a women's league licence.

Two full-time women's team chiefs would have key roles in a reimagined club set-up: a new director of coaching and head coach. St Kilda's pre-season training camps would also become mixed gender events for male and female playing lists in an array of related changes.

Plans for the recast Saints football hierarchy, where Jamie Cox's position as football performance boss is crucial to integrating a pioneering women's team, were put to the AFL formally on Friday. St Kilda, however, have been refining their transformative vision – taking advice from external consultants, an internal steering committee and former Australian cricket captain Belinda Clark – over the past six months.

Among eight clubs competing for the four Victoria-based women's team licences the AFL initially planned to award for 2017 – the league now appears open to increasing that number – St Kilda's pitch centres on fully integrating female football in the traditionally exclusively male elite playing setting.
The bid says there will be at least one mixed training session between St Kilda's lists of male and female footballers. The club has looked closely at elite cricket and soccer for inspiration about how to best align, and market, women and men on shared platforms.

St Kilda have planned a new football department model featuring three employees: those dedicated purely to the men's (AFL/VFL) programs, those devoted to women's programs and those who will become shared resources.

It's envisaged the club's entire administrative workforce, headed by CEO Matt Finnis, will essentially fit the "shared" definition given St Kilda plans to fully integrate the women's team in every aspect of day-to-day functioning and shop-front window.

Further integrated initiatives St Kilda has put to the AFL include:

- joint male/female teams captaincy and leadership group announcements;

- expanding the traditional annual team photo to include male and female playing lists;

- public jumper presentations to male and female teams;

- women's team in marketing and membership campaigns;

- male and female coaches in media conferences;

- joint male/female teams community work.

An excerpt of the Saints' pitch seen by Fairfax Media says: "For a women's team to be successful on and off the field, they need to be completely absorbed and immersed into the club. One club."

St Kilda's submission has made it clear the club wants all of its AFL female league matches broadcast on Saints media channels at a minimum, if not on television.

The club has also stipulated it wants joint fixture opportunities for its male and female sides to allow fans to actively support both teams.

An internal committee of current overarching St Kilda football boss Cox, trailblazing assistant coach Peta Searle – who will have a key role in a St Kilda women's team – and customer and community executive Lisa Laing has steered planning since November.

The Saints are using the name 'Team Angelica' to rally support for its women's bid and have increasingly aligned to the St Kilda Sharks Victorian Women's Football League side.

Finnis believes the AFL should expand its original plan from an eight-club national competition in the inaugural 2017 season, provided submissions from the 13 applicant clubs are strong enough. He has told Fairfax of St Kilda's pitch: "This is not a case of a women's program simply benefiting from the IP (intellectual property) that resides in an elite male program."

"We absolutely believe there's a transfer of knowledge, and gains, that will result from having more and different elite athletes in the one program."

Asked about the thoughts of senior men's coach, Alan Richardson, on the plans, Finnis said: "We've talked a lot about it. I asked him just last week: 'how do you think everyone's feeling about it within the football program?' And his off-the-cuff remark to me was 'I think that everyone thinks this would be such a great thing for our football club'."

It's anticipated the AFL will announce the women's teams licence winners in June.

MIXING IT UP: BRAVE NEW ST KILDA FOOTY WORLD

Proposed 2017 'integrated' football department and football services model
- based on St Kilda winning women's team licence.
- 14 cross-over roles – male/female program responsibilities: general manager football performance, executive assistant to GM football performance, sports science assistant, football services officer, player development co-ordinator, football services officer, head doctor, player development manager, high-performance manager, nutritionist, psychologist, property manager, two trainers.
- 9 new women's AFL team jobs (including two full-time with integration in male program): director of coaching (FT), head coach (FT), three assistant coaches, doctor, performance analyst, physiotherapist, high-performance co-ordinator.
- 24 dedicated men's AFL team roles, as per existing structure: coaching, medical, management.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/saints-grand-plan-for-football-restructure-revealed-20160504-golq0t.html#ixzz47gb9bH6r

 

[Defacto]

Interesting

 

[CursingFijian]

It's interesting to read some of the comments from supporters on here suggesting that the game will be an inferior spectacle because of the inferior levels of athleticism and skill. Nobody can deny that women will not be able to attain the same levels of athleticism, but this does not remove from the quality of the entertainment value. Using that logic we must shut down the development league and all amatuer and golden oldies leagues. Oh and Frankston might have to forfeit it's license because there's not much happening there.

At the end of the day I think of womens football as a different sport. I really won't be interested in this new sport, unless I am prepared to be emotionally invested in it, and the best way for me to become emotionally invested is to make a financial investment. But regardless, any lack of investment from the pro-male subscribers will do nothing to affect the enjoyment, excitement and inspiration that girls and ladies of all ages will be able to reap from a womens football league. That pro-male attitude certainly hasn't dampened young girls enthusiasm for netball, basketball, rugby, swimming, tennis, cricket and many other sports.

The only point I want to make is that the AFL is a very wealthy organisation, and has tremendous resources at its disposal. If the AFL really makes womens football a financially rewarding option for female athletes across Australia and the world, then it has the potential to become a premium showcase of top end, elite female athleticism. And that is a marketable commodity.

I honestly believe that a female St Kilda Football Club team will provide a solid pecuniary spin off to the mens side in time, IF the AFL is serious about developing womens football. But right now they need a little bit of spin-off from the supporters of the mens team to kick start them into existance. And I agree with others here, if you don't think any of this can happen then you are short sighted.

 

[Nutsngum]

"Preconceived notion" implies that this is a matter for debate; it is not. By your standards, saying men cannot give birth is merely a "preconceived notion". Women are physically inferior to men, and that is a simple fact that is not a matter for discussion; you cannot subvert physiological differences with any amount of social commentary.
As for whether this reflects on the quality of football; go watch a game of amateurs on the weekend, and then watch two AFL clubs play, and tell me which game had the higher quality of skills, and drew higher general interest. That answer will be the very same answer as to why no women's competition will ever compete to the standard of the men's.

Don't get me wrong; if this can work within the parameters required, then I am all for it. However, I struggle to see how this will gain footing when the demand for female sporting leagues is almost non-existent, and are a complete money sink which we, as a club, would be unwise to pursue unless there are all sorts of financial frameworks in play to ensure a successful venture.
I am also a fervent supporter of gender equality, which is why I dismiss this third-wave feminism rubbish that overlooks facts, such as the physiological differences I've highlighted, and labels those that raise said facts as some form of distributor of hate speech.

Of course its up for debate. No one is going to deny that women in general arent physically as strong as men but there is a huge amount more to the game then brute strength.

Youre then attempting to compare the highest level of the competition with one that literally draws from local footballers and stating, as if it were fact, that this is the only level we can hope to achieve with womens football. You dont know this to be true, you are only guessing based on your "fact" that men are stronger then women and can run faster.

Stop pretending as if "raising your facts" is some sort of argument winner as if we are blissfully unaware of the differences between the sexes. The POINT of this is to create an avenue for women to continue football careers into a professional setting, something they have been unable to do so far. If you did give a s**t about gender equality you would be backing this despite the chance it may not be as successful as we hope.

Have you thought that your issue with "third wave femenism" might be because your ideas ARE antiquated and not as progressive as you thought?

 

[Strahany]

Of course its up for debate. No one is going to deny that women in general arent physically as strong as men but there is a huge amount more to the game then brute strength.

Yes there is more to the game than strength, speed, co-ordination etc. But you cannot deny that players inferior in some of these categories, let alone all of the ones that women are naturally inferior in, make for poorer quality of players.
And, yes, whilst there is much more to football than physical attributes, you also cannot deny that if Matchup A and Matchup B had 4 teams of equal skills, but Matchup A has physically superior players compared to Matchup B, then Matchup A will be a better spectacle.
The point is that physicality contributes significantly to the quality, and therefore the viability of games. Look at basketball, cricket, tennis etc. etc. These are games that also require skill, but the physical differences alone causes more people to prefer the male competitions, to the extent that the female competitions are a money and energy sink (barring tennis).

Youre then attempting to compare the highest level of the competition with one that literally draws from local footballers and stating, as if it were fact, that this is the only level we can hope to achieve with womens football. You dont know this to be true, you are only guessing based on your "fact" that men are stronger then women and can run faster.

You missed the comparison I was making. The physical attributes of women who would play in this competition would be akin to that of the men in the amateur competition (i.e a woman in a professionally trained environment will be roughly equitable, in terms of physical attributes, to that of a man in a semi-professional environment).

Here's a quick snapshot of facts to back it up; there are countless examples everywhere. This is NOT a matter of opinion. The epitome of elite female athletes barely break even with amateur males. It's a simple case of basic human physiology. Without wanting to 'appeal to authority', this is my field of expertise, and I feel as if I'm talking to a wall.

You can have your own opinions, but you cannot have your own facts.

Example of Strength:
Female Olympic Records
Male British Amateur Records

Example of Speed:
Female Olympic Records 100m
2012 Hertfordshire County Amateur Athletics Mens 100m

Stop pretending as if "raising your facts" is some sort of argument winner as if we are blissfully unaware of the differences between the sexes. The POINT of this is to create an avenue for women to continue football careers into a professional setting, something they have been unable to do so far. If you did give a s**t about gender equality you would be backing this despite the chance it may not be as successful as we hope.

Yes, I understand that this is designed to create an avenue, and yes, they have not had the opportunity. But said lack of opportunity was not due to suppression by the powers that be; there has simply been no demand that warrants such a large step being taken, and nothing has changed of late.

Your viewpoint on this situation is rather obtuse. I raise these facts about the inferior quality of the game because, ultimately, sporting leagues in the mould of the AFL are a product for consumption designed to be profitable. Female sporting ventures are almost never profitable, often requiring to leech off the male equivalents in order to stay afloat. Only earlier this year, the Matildas (female Australian soccer players) were in a pay dispute and demanded more, despite their program being unprofitable, with their pay coming from the revenue generated by the A-League and the Socceroos.

And, no, gender equality is about acknowledging that there are inherent differences between men and women; we don't all need the same thing. Women don't need this to be equal, just like men don't need paternity leave as extensive as maternity leave, freedom from conscription, etc etc. Both sexes have pros and cons; making everyone the same is impossible and downright ridiculous.

Have you thought that your issue with "third wave femenism" might be because your ideas ARE antiquated and not as progressive as you thought?

No. Just, no. Third wave feminism is inherently driven towards female superiority. I would continue, but this is not the place, nor have I issued a sufficient 'trigger warning'

Really, I loathe to drag this out any further in this thread, but my responses are as above.

I'm done here.

 

[Nutsngum]

Really, I loathe to drag this out any further in this thread, but my responses are as above.

I'm done here.

Despite the fact that the olympics is technically an amateur competition you do realize that the two running examples there has the female record holder beating the amateur holder right anyway?
Seems close enough to me to show that there are certainly women out there with the "goods" to create the spectacle that you think is required. You simply assume that there will be no one out there good enough
to provide it.

Heres a quickly googled article stating that on average the top women athletes hit 90% of mens world records pretty much across the board.
http://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...ere-catching-up-to-men-but-theyre-not/260927/

Close enough in my opinion to be worth the dice roll.

Meanwhile it seems to me that your entire argument is based on the status quo of "boys stuff is for boys, not girls" and then point at incredibly male dominated areas of society to attempt to prove your point.

Have you stopped to consider that the reason women's sport is 2nd tier is due to the fact that just about every other sport originated in heavily male dominated eras of history where any chance of women's leagues being a thing would have been quashed in an instant? You dont think that this has a follow on effect that heavily skews male involvement with sports at nearly every level?

Its incredibly ******* naive to ignore this and then point at the concept of an "inferior" product when so far no one has been able to even produce that product to see if it does have a future.

The entire idea of "men and women arent the same so should not have the same things" is a garbage frame of mind which is exactly what restricts women from actually advancing careers in male dominated fields. This isnt even about football, its about allowing people to follow the same aspirations and not be restricted by their sex.

Finally, holy s**t you have a skewed idea of feminism if you honestly believe that s**t. Go and talk with women who are actual proponents of it and its not about superiority, its about gaining an equal footing that people like you choose to pretend exists when it still does not.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

"Preconceived notion" implies that this is a matter for debate; it is not. By your standards, saying men cannot give birth is merely a "preconceived notion". Women are physically inferior to men, and that is a simple fact that is not a matter for discussion; you cannot subvert physiological differences with any amount of social commentary.
As for whether this reflects on the quality of football; go watch a game of amateurs on the weekend, and then watch two AFL clubs play, and tell me which game had the higher quality of skills, and drew higher general interest. That answer will be the very same answer as to why no women's competition will ever compete to the standard of the men's.

Don't get me wrong; if this can work within the parameters required, then I am all for it. However, I struggle to see how this will gain footing when the demand for female sporting leagues is almost non-existent, and are a complete money sink which we, as a club, would be unwise to pursue unless there are all sorts of financial frameworks in play to ensure a successful venture.
I am also a fervent supporter of gender equality, which is why I dismiss this third-wave feminism rubbish that overlooks facts, such as the physiological differences I've highlighted, and labels those that raise said facts as some form of distributor of hate speech.

Tell that to ronda rousey.

 

[The New Sainter]

Tell that to ronda rousey.

The point here though is that Ronda would get mauled by McGregor or any male counterpart.

#GoTeamAngelica though!

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

The point here though is that Ronda would get mauled by McGregor or any male counterpart.

#GoTeamAngelica though!

No its not the point. Women arnt competing with men. Im sure when womens mma was being set up there would have been a lot of scepticism too.

 

[CursingFijian]

The point here though is that Ronda would get mauled by McGregor or any male counterpart.

#GoTeamAngelica though!

Maybe so. But she would probably give me a beating even when I was at my best. To say that I can't get close up to her and admire her training ethic and her bravery in the ring and maybe be a little scared but in a nice edgy way of her fighting ability is a non truth. Because millions of men do that from afar, and she is very marketable to industry relevant to her sport.