Women's football licences to be announced today- who gets in???

[1892]

Not to mention the conflict of interest of holding a professional netball licence as well, but Eddie is good about conflicts of interest the VIS are absolutely loving their home at the Holden Centre.

GWS hold both as well, but I guess they weren't competing with the saints for a Victorian spot so it's ok for them to hold a netball and women's footy licence.

It's good you're passionate about a saints women's team, but the AFL elected to go down the aligned route and selected the clubs. You can't fault any side for wanting to be involved in women's footy and making a bid, so any anger at missing out is best directed at the AFL not Collingwood or Carlton.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

So going off what Jake Niall reported:

1. One club from each state outside of Victoria.

2. Fremantle had a 200 page submission and they involved Curtin University. Their push of the product was ahead of West Coast despite West Coast being the bigger club.

3. Geelong had a fantastic submission based on geography and the area they would cover. Problem was that their area and Western Victoria doesn't produce a lot of female players.

4. The Northern Corridor, North of Melbourne where Darebin plays, Carlton have been very strong in that area and are geographically close to that area so they had an advantage there.

5. Collingwood are also strong in that Northern Corridor and they felt that Collingwood's brand was strong and they wanted a powerful club.

6. The balanced off a bit with the lesser supported clubs Melbourne and the Dogs who made all the running against bigger clubs which cost St Kilda who have a strong women's football area as well. He seemed to throw in a little bit more supposition on this point though.

7. Richmond disappointed as they felt having a female president and a culture push they have made gave them a strong submission.

So Carlton probably didn't get a spot because they got on their knees. They did put in the work in the Northern Corridor and they were in a very strong area for playing stocks. Collingwood do share the same area but it was their massive brand the AFL felt they needed to have to add balance and get more support. This may help with sponsorship and crowds, time will tell.

It appears St Kilda were unlucky but were a victim of the AFL wanting Collingwood's brand and the fact that Melbourne and the Dogs were deemed to be more deserving because of the work they had put in previously.

Cats are just plain unlucky in that their area isn't well represented at this time.

Nothing of the North submission though.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Would you want a transgender biological man that size playing in a women's league?

When you do a risk assessment, you look at the risk, the likelihood of that risk occurring and the possible consequences. I reckon they'd probably get stuck on the likelihood and worry about something like that if it was to happen. It's not as though women haven't played football at all to this point, it's just going to have a national pathway.

 

[Ry009]

If all teams were starting to invest in womens football today then youd be right. But that's not the case, the Dees and Dogs have invested four years of time resources and energy into getting this to where it is today and should see some level of reward for effort. Not suggesting what that should be but both clubs have invested in developing players where other clubs are just now waking up to the opportunities. Id be very surprised if Carlton hadn't been invited to get onboard earlier, they chose not to so why should they have an easy ride to building a team?

North has strong ties with Melbourne Uni Women’s Football Club, as well as being involved with various other carnivals and youth programs, yet have missed out on a license altogether, so im not sure existing development of womens football was a pre-requisite to being granted a licences.

This is a genuine question as I haven't taken the time to research any further, but outside of the exhibition games put on by the Dogs/Dees, what have the other clubs done for the development of women's football? Not a sour grapes question, just genuinely interested as to the cases put forward.

 

[1892]

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2016-06-15/daisy-chats-to-gill

I think they're pretty aware. Even Gil was making the joke to Daisy about playing elsewhere...I doubt they'll be forced to play elsewhere.

Which means right now you'd expect a few to be set.

Melbourne: Daisy Pearce
Western Bulldogs: ?
Brisbane: Tayla Harris
Carlton: Lauren Arnell?
Freo: ?
GWS: ?
Adelaide: ?
Collingwood: Meg Hutchens?



It won't be on the 'G in February, cricket obviously puts paid to that idea. But you can see the VFL grounds being used for sure.

Dogs: Whitten Oval
Carlton: VISY Park
Collingwood: ?
Melbourne: ? (Casey?)
Adelaide: One of the SANFL grounds
GWS: Spotless
Brisbane: ?
Freo: One of the WAFL grounds

You would expect that as part of the bids all teams have a nominated home ground apart from the major stadia.

I'd expect the majority of 'pies games to be at Olympic Park.

There's been some talk of a Collingwood Carlton nab challenge match at Victoria Park as part of our 125 year celebrations, if that goes ahead a double header maybe a chance.

 

[Bostonian]

When you do a risk assessment, you look at the risk, the likelihood of that risk occurring and the possible consequences. I reckon they'd probably get stuck on the likelihood and worry about something like that if it was to happen. It's not as though women haven't played football at all to this point, it's just going to have a national pathway.

It was more a mental image thing ODN. Would be a funny sight.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

So going off what Jake Niall reported:

So they went for 2 clubs strong in the northern corridor One that already holds a licence in another sport and none in the South East or Regional Victoria?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

GWS hold both as well, but I guess they weren't competing with the saints for a Victorian spot so it's ok for them to hold a netball and women's footy licence.

GWS were the only bidder for a NSW licence. Holding a licence for another sport should have counted against Collingwood.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

3. Geelong had a fantastic submission based on geography and the area they would cover. Problem was that their area and Western Victoria doesn't produce a lot of female players.

That should have actually been a plus for Geelong as it meant they had greater potential to grow the game.

 

[CrowdedHouse]

Season 2 Episode 11 (45th Overall) of the Girls Play Footy Podcast:
https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/girls-play-footy-podcast/id1114815416?mt=2

Katie Lambeski chats with Susan Alberti, Darcy Vescio, Sam Lane and Michelle Cowan at the MCG, post winning bids announcement.
Peter Holden gets reaction from Brian Barrish at the USAFL and Sarah Ongarello at AFL Europe.

 

[JeffDunne]

So going off what Jake Niall reported:

1. One club from each state outside of Victoria.

2. Fremantle had a 200 page submission and they involved Curtin University. Their push of the product was ahead of West Coast despite West Coast being the bigger club.

3. Geelong had a fantastic submission based on geography and the area they would cover. Problem was that their area and Western Victoria doesn't produce a lot of female players.

4. The Northern Corridor, North of Melbourne where Darebin plays, Carlton have been very strong in that area and are geographically close to that area so they had an advantage there.

5. Collingwood are also strong in that Northern Corridor and they felt that Collingwood's brand was strong and they wanted a powerful club.

6. The balanced off a bit with the lesser supported clubs Melbourne and the Dogs who made all the running against bigger clubs which cost St Kilda who have a strong women's football area as well. He seemed to throw in a little bit more supposition on this point though.

7. Richmond disappointed as they felt having a female president and a culture push they have made gave them a strong submission.

So Carlton probably didn't get a spot because they got on their knees. They did put in the work in the Northern Corridor and they were in a very strong area for playing stocks. Collingwood do share the same area but it was their massive brand the AFL felt they needed to have to add balance and get more support. This may help with sponsorship and crowds, time will tell.

It appears St Kilda were unlucky but were a victim of the AFL wanting Collingwood's brand and the fact that Melbourne and the Dogs were deemed to be more deserving because of the work they had put in previously.

Cats are just plain unlucky in that their area isn't well represented at this time.

Nothing of the North submission though.

Pretty much as St Kilda supporters suspected.

Marketing again trumps what's in the best interests of the sport.

 

[LeverPuller]

I'd expect the majority of 'pies games to be at Olympic Park.

There's been some talk of a Collingwood Carlton nab challenge match at Victoria Park as part of our 125 year celebrations, if that goes ahead a double header maybe a chance.

Wouldn't want to play there though, the surface is horrible now. Like a sandpit

 

[The_Wookie]

Pretty much as St Kilda supporters suspected.

Marketing again trumps what's in the best interests of the sport.

you think marketing isnt in the best interests of a newly launched competition?

 

[coniglio_number1]

Premiers: ???
Brownlow: daisy Pearce
Coleman: Tayla Harris

 

[Iamcarlton]

How many times can you freaking miserable ****** go over and over the same freaking topic ? If someone wants to pay these women to play a sport they love then I say good luck to them whatever club they represent . How many metropolitan and country leagues are there where there's quite a lot of money being thrown around at players ? a lot ! Is the standard s**t hot ? I dont think so . From the little ive seen of the women they have a hell of a lot of skill . if you don't like it don't go and don't watch it on TV . It's simple

 

[Bostonian]

That should have actually been a plus for Geelong as it meant they had greater potential to grow the game.

Sections of Geelong want the city to be a soccer presence.

Between Soccer, Netball and Basketball in Geelong growing AFL in this area needs a lot more work done before an AFL team can be awarded too it.

 

[sportsmaniac89]

Geez Saints supporters still cracking the shits. Get over it FFS, you got a provisional license for 2018 so stop your bleating for god's sake. You're making Plugger's umpire rants appear normal.

In saying that, I am ecstatic that Freo got the license and am proud that the club had the best submission out of all of them.

 

[LeverPuller]

Premiers: ???
Brownlow: daisy Pearce
Coleman: Tayla Harris

It'll be the Daisy Pearce Medal for best women's footballer soon enough

 

[JeffDunne]

you think marketing isnt in the best interests of a newly launched competition?

Not really.

Well not blatant exploitation of that marketing.

The marketing dollars are already there. Sure that may be inflated being aligned to certain clubs but there's no guarantee that the money raised will go into Women's Football. There's no mechanism either to make sure it's not centralised around a handful of clubs.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

That should have actually been a plus for Geelong as it meant they had greater potential to grow the game.

Well no, you put the start up teams where the breeding grounds are and therefore more likely to have support in those areas.

Why make most of the players travel to Geelong? It doesn't actually stimulate the local scene to have all drive in/drive out players. As it stands, they have a year to stimulate more interest using the national comp as an incentive.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

So they went for 2 clubs strong in the northern corridor One that already holds a licence in another sport and none in the South East or Regional Victoria?

Yes. Carlton because they had put in the work in a strong geographical area. Pies because they are a powerhouse club capable of generating publicity, support and money.

I'm just happy to put the AFL pet rubbish to bed where Carlton are concerned. Carlton are deserving.

If you want to take issue with their marketing angle, I'm sure others will listen.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

I'm just happy to put the AFL pet rubbish to bed where Carlton are concerned. Carlton are deserving.

But when you already have a strong club for the Northern corridor in Collingwood they aren't anymore. You can have one or the other not both otherwise you are robbing another corridor that is equally or more deserving.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

But when you already have a strong club for the Northern corridor in Collingwood they aren't anymore. You can have one or the other not both otherwise you are robbing another corridor that is equally or more deserving.

I couldn't care less where Collingwood are located. We are not Collingwood. Our bids are not joined.

Carlton have been putting in a power of work in the Northern Corridor, we have hosted several Women's Academy clinics and used our players and coaches to assist in development. We have been out in the community pushing for it. We have organised facilities for it. We have been in the media promoting it loudly since at least November last year. We have hired a couple of players, made one an ambassador and have been helping her progress in her coaching credentials. We have sponsors on board to sponsor the team.

5 teams put their hands up to host the Academy girls and provide access to facilities, coaching, medical and rehab. Carlton, Melbourne, Bulldogs, Essendon and Richmond. Only Richmond missed out on a 2017 licence as Essendon didn't apply.

We actually lobbied for a curtainraiser game between Carlton and Essendon 8 months ago.

So aside from that relationship with AFL Victoria and their Women's programs, we actually created a partnership with the Northern Football League to help develop young female footballers.

We restructured our Women of Carlton group to assist in the process. We got Kate Jenkins - The former Equal Opportunity and Current Sexual Discrimination Commissioner on to our board and gave her free hand to develop our bid and change the culture in our club. Some really tangible efforts to show how badly we wanted this.

Now, I'm not saying that other clubs have not done these things or even different things. I am saying that we never sat idly by saying 'hey we are Carlton and we have a fertile zone and money to spend.' We actually did a heap of things in house and in the community.

Now you should either go find another team who you believe is undeserving or tell us where our bid doesn't stack up. Lumping us in with Collingwood as though it somehow halves our claim because of our geographical location is far too convenient because you don't actually have to acknowledge the good things we have done that way.

 

[LeverPuller]

I couldn't care less where Collingwood are located. We are not Collingwood. Our bids are not joined.

Carlton have been putting in a power of work in the Northern Corridor, we have hosted several Women's Academy clinics and used our players and coaches to assist in development. We have been out in the community pushing for it. We have organised facilities for it. We have been in the media promoting it loudly since at least November last year. We have hired a couple of players, made one an ambassador and have been helping her progress in her coaching credentials. We have sponsors on board to sponsor the team.

5 teams put their hands up to host the Academy girls and provide access to facilities, coaching, medical and rehab. Carlton, Melbourne, Bulldogs, Essendon and Richmond. Only Richmond missed out on a 2017 licence as Essendon didn't apply.

We actually lobbied for a curtainraiser game between Carlton and Essendon 8 months ago.

So aside from that relationship with AFL Victoria and their Women's programs, we actually created a partnership with the Northern Football League to help develop young female footballers.

We restructured our Women of Carlton group to assist in the process. We got Kate Jenkins - The former Equal Opportunity and Current Sexual Discrimination Commissioner on to our board and gave her free hand to develop our bid and change the culture in our club. Some really tangible efforts to show how badly we wanted this.

Now, I'm not saying that other clubs have not done these things or even different things. I am saying that we never sat idly by saying 'hey we are Carlton and we have a fertile zone and money to spend.' We actually did a heap of things in house and in the community.

Now you should either go find another team who you believe is undeserving or tell us where our bid doesn't stack up. Lumping us in with Collingwood as though it somehow halves our claim because of our geographical location is far too convenient because you don't actually have to acknowledge the good things we have done that way.

I think the only way I would question Carlton is the merits of them against Geelong - I know there were flaws down there too, but Geelong bloody loves the Cats, they'd show up to a grass-growing competition if it meant supporting the Cats. Can't say that for others.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

I couldn't care less where Collingwood are located. We are not Collingwood. Our bids are not joined.

No but your bids overlap the same area therefore it should have been one or the other not both.