What I Reckon with Tony Lynn 15 - Closing Down Sale.

[Blue and Blue]

I always have said I dont care if they play tiddliwinks. If its in Navy Blue then I support it. Forget the standard or the web of human politics that surrounds this discussion. Yes its crap...so was the soccer team....they are women playing..so what?...its Carlton.
End of debate.

 

[Tony Lynn 15]

I always have said I dont care if they play tiddliwinks. If its in Navy Blue then I support it. Forget the standard or the web of human politics that surrounds this discussion. Yes its crap...so was the soccer team....they are women playing..so what?...its Carlton.
End of debate.

That is fair enough. I understand and respect that. I am not a ‘footy nut’ so it is different for me.

 

[JustaBattler]

Oh dear the cranky fellas are getting all crankyish this morning - woopeedoo.

As I've said before - it takes time for skills and standards to develop and it will take money to encourage participation and improvement will take time.

I think the women's final in tennis was a far greater spectacle than the mens this year.

I don't need nuff nuffs to tell me that the playing standards of AFLW are poor relative to men atm - as if they are handing down a revelation. I don't need some cranky old men yelling and posturing about how the women's game 'sux' as if they have stumbled into a fountain of wisdom and wish to bath in its glorious epiphanies.

Again I say so what? If the AFL wish to expand their franchise and protect their brand - they will pay towards developing the AFLW and if they don't - there will be no AFLW.

 

[Blue and Blue]

That is fair enough. I understand and respect that. I am not a ‘footy nut’ so it is different for me.

I am no footy nut. I couldnt care less about AFL (not since it was the VFL) or AFLW as a whole. But I am a Carlton nut. I support my club and it's endeavours whatever they may be.

 

[HARKER]

If the AFL wish to expand their franchise and protect their brand - they will pay towards developing the AFLW and if they don't - there will be no AFLW.

Now you're talking sense, even though you couldn't answer my last question. All good.

May I just say, one of my good female friends who genuinely loves her football (she's a Dogs supporter) can't stand womens football.
I dare say she's not alone, as much as some women may dislike mens football. This is not a gender war, or at least it shouldn't be.
I'm just glad all my chosen friends are open-minded enough to be able to discuss any topic, at any time, with no fear of being 'labeled' a chauvinist, homophobe, racist etc etc..................although there was this one time......

 

[Laphroaig]

Where has anyone asked for equal pay? Asking for fair remuneration is not the same thing and I suspect you already know this.

For somebody prepared to denigrate opinions that don't meet your preconceptions, you are remarkably ill informed.

At the end of 2016, the AFLW players rejected the AFL offer and conducted a loud public campaign, resulting in a negotiated solution based on the AFL rookie list pay rate.

Which I find difficult to describe as "unfair" for a group that generated no income, in fact operates at a substantial loss.

In 2019 , amid an ongoing campaign for "fair" pay, the AFLW players pay case has increased that 2017 base rate by around 75%.

Are you suggesting that AFLW players are not involved in their own pay cases, and that decision to reject the 2017 offer in particular just materialised unbidden out of a hole in the space time continuum?

Your name calling of AFLW and/or the players hardly helps you present a convincing argument.

Calling something what it is does not constitute name calling, whether you like the calling of a spade a spade or not.

Comparisons can be a dicey exercise, but the situation of an apprentice tradesman is illustrative. The apprenticeship system exists to provide skilled workers at some time in the future.

Apprentices get paid a pittance because:

1. They lack the skill required to complete quality work
2. They actually cost the boss money, because the time spent instructing and supervising them generates no income

If we apply the logic commonly trotted out to illustrate that AFLW players pay is "unfair"; then we must conclude that a poorly skilled apprentice should be getting the same hourly rate as a qualified, income generating tradesman (AFLW pay in 2019). We must also conclude that this is still "unfair" because a master craftsman gets paid more than that.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

I watched a quarter of yesterday’s game. It’s always a little rusty at the start of the season.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The women need to have a smaller playing area. I base this on the average kicking distance of 30 to 40 metres.

 

[AceAndy]

I watched a quarter of yesterday’s game. It’s always a little rusty at the start of the season.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The women need to have a smaller playing area. I base this on the average kicking distance of 30 to 40 metres.

I mentioned last night to Mrs AA the AFLW had started and one team had kicked two goals to one to win the match.

Mrs AA (who has no interest in AFL at all) just said well why dont they just play on a smaller field than the men.

 

[ODNBlue]

I personally think the women's game is second tier and as such doesnt get my attention when time is important. Happy for the pro lobby to go along and pay full fair for it. Fill your boots on a level of footy that is 3-4 levels down the order.

It's not sexist, it is just blah. Get it out of the way of real footy.

Average crowds for UK women's football matches are very low. Little interest in UK which is a good match to AFLW. Lots of girls play in the underage years. No one cares about the female adult league over here - close to zero profile.

I'm not sure it matters whether or not the majority embrace AFLW. It only needs enough interest and enough support. The fact that it doesn't get your attention doesn't actually mean much. Truth is it only has to attract a small percentage of female viewers who were otherwise not football followers for it to be successful.

I'd be interested to know how you think the AFLW gets in the way of "real footy"? How is it diminishing your experience of the men's comp?

I'm unsure as to why so many people who think the AFLW is "just blah" seem to take its existence so personally.

 

[goreds]

I mentioned last night to Mrs AA the AFLW had started and one team had kicked two goals to one to win the match.

Mrs AA (who has no interest in AFL at all) just said well why dont they just play on a smaller field than the men.

You would be lost without Mrs AA...!!

 

[Laphroaig]

Again I say so what? If the AFL wish to expand their franchise and protect their brand - they will pay towards developing the AFLW and if they don't - there will be no AFLW.

So you are of the opinion that things the AFL decides to do are therefore by completely OK, and exempt from criticism?

Interesting concept, that. Brave call.

And I think your prediction of no AFLW will come to pass within 5 years.

 

[AceAndy]

You would be lost without Mrs AA...!!

Absolutely

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

Maybe Robbo and Mrs AA have been collaborating.

 

[Laphroaig]

I'm unsure as to why so many people who think the AFLW is "just blah" seem to take its existence so personally.

Just for starters.

I have in the past worked around the edges of several elite female sports. I greatly admire the women involved for both their ability and their sacrifice, to reach the stellar standards they achieve.

And I find it offensive that an absolute shower of a pretend elite sport is handed greater status and remuneration on a plate. I then find it REALLY offensive when the undeserving recipients both passively and actively lobby for MORE status and remuneration using a quite cynical distortion of gender equality as the reason.

 

[Robertio]

Just for starters.

I have in the past worked around the edges of several elite female sports. I greatly admire the women involved for both their ability and their sacrifice, to reach the stellar standards they achieve.

And I find it offensive that an absolute shower of a pretend elite sport is handed greater status and remuneration on a plate. I then find it REALLY offensive when the undeserving recipients both passively and actively lobby for MORE status and remuneration using a quite cynical distortion of gender equality as the reason.

As a family friend of a young girl playing her first game for Carlton this afternoon i find your post offensive. I would like it very much if you hop down from your soapbox and stick it over your head.

 

[BeijingBlue]

We all acknowledge that the standard is low and coming from a very low base. I wish them well. It is my choice not to watch second rate footy. It has nothing to do with gender.

 

[ODNBlue]

Just for starters.

I have in the past worked around the edges of several elite female sports. I greatly admire the women involved for both their ability and their sacrifice, to reach the stellar standards they achieve.

And I find it offensive that an absolute shower of a pretend elite sport is handed greater status and remuneration on a plate. I then find it REALLY offensive when the undeserving recipients both passively and actively lobby for MORE status and remuneration using a quite cynical distortion of gender equality as the reason.

So are you essentially saying that because there are elite sportswomen in other sports that are not well remunerated and supported that women playing AFL should also remain poorly remunerated (or not remunerated at all as per your previous posts) and supported?

The problem has been that women's sports IN GENERAL do not receive anywhere near the recognition of men's sports and it's about time that this imbalance is addressed. As it stands, the AFL is in a unique position to be able to do so. Thus, to advocate that the AFL has no right to promote women's football is to advocate maintaining the status quo, where, for the most part, the only valid and well paid sporting careers, certainly team based, are available to those who already have all the advantages, and the appropriate appendage.

 

[Arr0w]

For somebody prepared to denigrate opinions that don't meet your preconceptions, you are remarkably ill informed.

At the end of 2016, the AFLW players rejected the AFL offer and conducted a loud public campaign, resulting in a negotiated solution based on the AFL rookie list pay rate.

Which I find difficult to describe as "unfair" for a group that generated no income, in fact operates at a substantial loss.

In 2019 , amid an ongoing campaign for "fair" pay, the AFLW players pay case has increased that 2017 base rate by around 75%.

Are you suggesting that AFLW players are not involved in their own pay cases, and that decision to reject the 2017 offer in particular just materialised unbidden out of a hole in the space time continuum?



Calling something what it is does not constitute name calling, whether you like the calling of a spade a spade or not.

Comparisons can be a dicey exercise, but the situation of an apprentice tradesman is illustrative. The apprenticeship system exists to provide skilled workers at some time in the future.

Apprentices get paid a pittance because:

1. They lack the skill required to complete quality work
2. They actually cost the boss money, because the time spent instructing and supervising them generates no income

If we apply the logic commonly trotted out to illustrate that AFLW players pay is "unfair"; then we must conclude that a poorly skilled apprentice should be getting the same hourly rate as a qualified, income generating tradesman (AFLW pay in 2019). We must also conclude that this is still "unfair" because a master craftsman gets paid more than that.

Very poor comparisons

 

[mediumsizered]

I watched a quarter of yesterday’s game. It’s always a little rusty at the start of the season.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The women need to have a smaller playing area. I base this on the average kicking distance of 30 to 40 metres.

I think this will make a significant difference.

Bring the goals in 10 metres at each end & I think you will reduce the number of scrimmages & obviously increase the scoring.

 

[goreds]

So are you essentially saying that because there are elite sportswomen in other sports that are not well remunerated and supported that women playing AFL should also remain poorly remunerated (or not remunerated at all as per your previous posts) and supported?

The problem has been that women's sports IN GENERAL do not receive anywhere near the recognition of men's sports and it's about time that this imbalance is addressed. As it stands, the AFL is in a unique position to be able to do so. Thus, to advocate that the AFL has no right to promote women's football is to advocate maintaining the status quo, where, for the most part, the only valid and well paid sporting careers, certainly team based, are available to those who already have all the advantages, and the appropriate appendage.

You show me the ratings spike and I will pay you a kings ransom...

The ONLY woman’s sport in the world that gets equal pay is tennis. Why?

Because the ratings are only marginally under the men’s, even though it’s only best of 3 sets in grand slams...

Forget anything near equal until it rates AT ALL on tv.

The AFL know this but are not about to come out and say it...

 

[Laphroaig]

As a family friend of a young girl playing her first game for Carlton this afternoon i find your post offensive. I would like it very much if you hop down from your soapbox and stick it over your head.

I don't think your obvious bias is likely to moderate my opinions.

Or are you trying to suggest that if you didn't know somebody in the game you might make a more rational judgement?

 

[Laphroaig]

So are you essentially saying that because there are elite sportswomen in other sports that are not well remunerated and supported that women playing AFL should also remain poorly remunerated (or not remunerated at all as per your previous posts) and supported?

The problem has been that women's sports IN GENERAL do not receive anywhere near the recognition of men's sports and it's about time that this imbalance is addressed. As it stands, the AFL is in a unique position to be able to do so. Thus, to advocate that the AFL has no right to promote women's football is to advocate maintaining the status quo, where, for the most part, the only valid and well paid sporting careers, certainly team based, are available to those who already have all the advantages, and the appropriate appendage.

Don't rewrite my opinions to suit your platform, thanks.

If you can't or won't wrap your head around the idea of rewarding on the basis of merit being more equitable than rewarding on the basis or PR spin, then that's you.

Just don't bother reinventing what I say to make it into something else.

 

[Laphroaig]

Very poor comparisons

I think they are excellent.

But thanks for your well thought out analysis of the weaknesses of the case.

 

[Gethelred]

I don't know of any other business that launches a highly expensive to produce new product line with no expectation that it will ever make money.

Yes, you do.

There have been any number of motion pictures/television shows of truly terrible quality that have been released at a loss at the box office in order to copy the real profit of the Star Wars trilogy through merchandising and spinoff media.

Ask yourself this question: is what the AFL is gaining from the release of the AFLW in terms of increased participation, merchandising, and the opportunity to create a completely new market to monopolise worth the currently inferior yet still completely worthwhile product (at least, from where I'm sitting) given the fact that the competition will only get stronger?

As for your claim that it is an insult to elite sportswomen to have this as a supposed elite competition, that's market correction at work. Women have always wanted to play AFL, and the players being poached were denied that opportunity and are playing the sport that (were the wages/competition there) they would've played if the option was there.

AFL for women has always been a sleeping giant in this state, and it should come as no surprise that, now that the option is financially viable, the people involved are driving higher standards and for more money. And it isn't as though the AFL don't have it to spend, either.

 

[Arr0w]

I think they are excellent.

But thanks for your well thought out analysis of the weaknesses of the case.

Happy to highlight your flaws then

"At the end of 2016, the AFLW players rejected the AFL offer and conducted a loud public campaign, resulting in a negotiated solution based on the AFL rookie list pay rate.

Which I find difficult to describe as "unfair" for a group that generated no income, in fact operates at a substantial loss.

In 2019 , amid an ongoing campaign for "fair" pay, the AFLW players pay case has increased that 2017 base rate by around 75%."


So the salary they were fighting for is equivalent to a rookie, playing around half the season, yet you deem this is unfair, for a group that generates no income? Tell me, how much income would the AFL generate if the standard across the league was at a so called rookie level you compare the AFLW against? I am confident that the stats would be very similar

Surely AFLW/Rookie contracts are similar to the comparisons you make regarding apprentices? As they develop, they improve their skillset and pay structure accordingly, once qualified they can test their skillset against others in their field.

If they fail along the way, or are not cut out for the requirements, they will be cut, as with any player that suffers from similar circumstances