Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Trev from the Bush wrote: ↑Mon 17 Jan 2022 9:49am
I am unsure which is worse, the standard of the football or the hype, propaganda and media commentary that all demonstrate it is taboo to say anything negative (or honest) about the competition. Remember, the participants are well paid yet play only a handfull of games that comprise a season. Many push for higher-valued contracts based on what is paid to AFL players yet fail to mention the black hole of skill levels, general public interest and the extent that "crowds" will drop-off should they need to pay for admission.
It is a sideshow to the real game. AFL money and effort would be much better spent restoring country and suburban competitions and clubs that have been devestated by COVID. Football in many smaller communities is the only social outlet for many and should not be left to die at the expense of a sideshow that believes its bigger than Barnum and Bailey.
Well said Trev - they have even erected a statue for a girl who has kicked about 20 goals for her career. Im all for equal opportunities, but not at the expense of grass roots footy & country leagues being supported.
The AFL didn’t erect any statue, a bank commissioned an art piece.
If you’re going to search for things as an excuse to sh*t on AFLW, at least make them legitimate.
Does it matter who erected it? In my era statues were meant to symbolise individuals who have made a significant contribution to their sport? I wasnt putting sh*t on the AFLW, just questioning where there resources go? But now you have raised it, I understand the AFL wants to have 18 AFLW teams. If we are honest there is not yet enough real talent to support 4 teams. Then they get full AFL TV coverage, the average supporter would much rather have the opportunity to watch their VFL team play each week. Thats nothing against the AFLW its just the reality and nothing to do with equality.
In my era private companies could commission any art piece they felt like. And if you think they chose it because of how many goals she’s kicked…
And I would think doubling the player base of your sport was a pretty solid investment.
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
Trev from the Bush wrote: ↑Mon 17 Jan 2022 9:49am
I am unsure which is worse, the standard of the football or the hype, propaganda and media commentary that all demonstrate it is taboo to say anything negative (or honest) about the competition. Remember, the participants are well paid yet play only a handfull of games that comprise a season. Many push for higher-valued contracts based on what is paid to AFL players yet fail to mention the black hole of skill levels, general public interest and the extent that "crowds" will drop-off should they need to pay for admission.
It is a sideshow to the real game. AFL money and effort would be much better spent restoring country and suburban competitions and clubs that have been devestated by COVID. Football in many smaller communities is the only social outlet for many and should not be left to die at the expense of a sideshow that believes its bigger than Barnum and Bailey.
Well said Trev - they have even erected a statue for a girl who has kicked about 20 goals for her career. Im all for equal opportunities, but not at the expense of grass roots footy & country leagues being supported.
The AFL didn’t erect any statue, a bank commissioned an art piece.
If you’re going to search for things as an excuse to sh*t on AFLW, at least make them legitimate.
Does it matter who erected it? In my era statues were meant to symbolise individuals who have made a significant contribution to their sport? I wasnt putting sh*t on the AFLW, just questioning where there resources go? But now you have raised it, I understand the AFL wants to have 18 AFLW teams. If we are honest there is not yet enough real talent to support 4 teams. Then they get full AFL TV coverage, the average supporter would much rather have the opportunity to watch their VFL team play each week. Thats nothing against the AFLW its just the reality and nothing to do with equality.
The statue was not about her sporting attributes. It was a re-creation of a famous photo. The photo and the response to it was an important moment of change in our society.
And by the way, the statue of Nicky Winmar was exactly the same situation. It was not about his football career. It was a re-creation of a famous photo. The photo and the response to it was an important moment of change in our society. And yet you do not notice either of these facts.
Trev from the Bush wrote: ↑Mon 17 Jan 2022 9:49am
I am unsure which is worse, the standard of the football or the hype, propaganda and media commentary that all demonstrate it is taboo to say anything negative (or honest) about the competition. Remember, the participants are well paid yet play only a handfull of games that comprise a season. Many push for higher-valued contracts based on what is paid to AFL players yet fail to mention the black hole of skill levels, general public interest and the extent that "crowds" will drop-off should they need to pay for admission.
It is a sideshow to the real game. AFL money and effort would be much better spent restoring country and suburban competitions and clubs that have been devestated by COVID. Football in many smaller communities is the only social outlet for many and should not be left to die at the expense of a sideshow that believes its bigger than Barnum and Bailey.
I have to respectfully disagree Trev.
It is not about comparing the men versus the women's skill levels. That's is a cheap and simple argument point. It can never be bested so it is rolled out quickly.
One does not point out that people who are starting to play a sport aren't as good at it as the professional players. It is obvious.
It is about creating an opportunity for half of the population who were not allowed to play the game. If they want to play why is it bothering you?
The AFL is trying to create something. I always appreciate people who try to create. It is very easy to tear something down. It is a lot harder to build something up.
And "spend the money somewhere else" is also an old worn-out argument.
The WAFL is an investment that will, at some time in the future, create more money than it costs. (Same as the AFL versus the VFL). And at the same time bring sporting pleasure to thousands of people.
Remember it took our footy club 4 seasons to win their first football match, and it took a Royal Commission for us to win the game on a score being disallowed, so let's give it time.
The standard of our own AFLW team this season is quite another thing though - very concerned about the prospect of the Saints AFLW side winning a game this season due to our best two players missing the 2022 season, but having said that, we'll probably play a Qld team, or the Giants at a flooded venue in a monsoon and win by a couple of points in a game both sides only kick one goal in.
Trev from the Bush wrote: ↑Mon 17 Jan 2022 9:49am
I am unsure which is worse, the standard of the football or the hype, propaganda and media commentary that all demonstrate it is taboo to say anything negative (or honest) about the competition. Remember, the participants are well paid yet play only a handfull of games that comprise a season. Many push for higher-valued contracts based on what is paid to AFL players yet fail to mention the black hole of skill levels, general public interest and the extent that "crowds" will drop-off should they need to pay for admission.
It is a sideshow to the real game. AFL money and effort would be much better spent restoring country and suburban competitions and clubs that have been devestated by COVID. Football in many smaller communities is the only social outlet for many and should not be left to die at the expense of a sideshow that believes its bigger than Barnum and Bailey.
I have to respectfully disagree Trev.
It is not about comparing the men versus the women's skill levels. That's is a cheap and simple argument point. It can never be bested so it is rolled out quickly.
One does not point out that people who are starting to play a sport aren't as good at it as the professional players. It is obvious.
It is about creating an opportunity for half of the population who were not allowed to play the game. If they want to play why is it bothering you?
The AFL is trying to create something. I always appreciate people who try to create. It is very easy to tear something down. It is a lot harder to build something up.
And "spend the money somewhere else" is also an old worn-out argument.
The WAFL is an investment that will, at some time in the future, create more money than it costs. (Same as the AFL versus the VFL). And at the same time bring sporting pleasure to thousands of people.
I dont think anyone is against the women having the opportunity to play the game, plus growing the game is a positive. Have any of you that are pro AFLW had anything to do with country football? The game is dying in the country leagues despite the introduction of womens competitions. Like it or not these club foundations are based on the mens teams. There just isnt the amount of (male) kids wanting to play AFL as they are attracted to other interests. As a result the standard of the leagues I was previously involved in, has dropped significantly (its sad to watch). I dont believe having female teams is going to turn that around. These community clubs need to be supported by a significant lift in AFL resources getting back into the communities to ensure every country kid tries AFL. The AFL will roll out stats suggesting participation has grown, but that now includes female players which is a positive but doesnt help the struggling country clubs.
What bothers me with the AFLW is the gap in the competition standards. A few teams are a credit to the game, but too many are hopeless (like St Kilda), there just isnt the pool of players to be a semi professional competition. A state level tier VFL, WAFL, SANFL would have been smarter to develop the game before throwing the teams into the spot light of the AFL.
Its interesting that the same people who have criticised the AFL's spending on the expansion clubs (GWS & GCS) over traditional clubs, are now happy for the resources to be thrown at a sub-standard womens competition.
Trev from the Bush wrote: ↑Mon 17 Jan 2022 9:49am
I am unsure which is worse, the standard of the football or the hype, propaganda and media commentary that all demonstrate it is taboo to say anything negative (or honest) about the competition. Remember, the participants are well paid yet play only a handfull of games that comprise a season. Many push for higher-valued contracts based on what is paid to AFL players yet fail to mention the black hole of skill levels, general public interest and the extent that "crowds" will drop-off should they need to pay for admission.
It is a sideshow to the real game. AFL money and effort would be much better spent restoring country and suburban competitions and clubs that have been devestated by COVID. Football in many smaller communities is the only social outlet for many and should not be left to die at the expense of a sideshow that believes its bigger than Barnum and Bailey.
I have to respectfully disagree Trev.
It is not about comparing the men versus the women's skill levels. That's is a cheap and simple argument point. It can never be bested so it is rolled out quickly.
One does not point out that people who are starting to play a sport aren't as good at it as the professional players. It is obvious.
It is about creating an opportunity for half of the population who were not allowed to play the game. If they want to play why is it bothering you?
The AFL is trying to create something. I always appreciate people who try to create. It is very easy to tear something down. It is a lot harder to build something up.
And "spend the money somewhere else" is also an old worn-out argument.
The WAFL is an investment that will, at some time in the future, create more money than it costs. (Same as the AFL versus the VFL). And at the same time bring sporting pleasure to thousands of people.
The 2 games that the St Kilda AFLW team have played this year are certainly well below the standard of the past 2 years, not helped by the fact that a couple of their best players are unavailable. Overall the quality of play has been adversely affected by the restrictions due to Covid, an issue that could also impact on the AFL teams if things don't improve soon.
I fully support the AFL launching a competition for women and am confident that in time as the AFLW becomes more professional the standard of play will improve, but it is likeley to take many years.
An indication of the bright future of women's football is the announcement today that Crypto.com is signing a 5 year $75 million deal to back the AFLW, rated as "one of the biggest sponsorships in Australian sport" (The Australian Tuesday 18/01/2022).
"Any candidate for political office, once chosen for leadership, must have the will to take the wheel of a very powerful car, tasked from time to time to make a fast journey down a narrow, precipitous mountain road – and be highly skilled at driving. Otherwise, he is disqualified from the company of competent leaders."
John Carroll, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at La Trobe University.
Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Tue 18 Jan 2022 11:10am
I dont think anyone is against the women having the opportunity to play the game, plus growing the game is a positive. Have any of you that are pro AFLW had anything to do with country football? The game is dying in the country leagues despite the introduction of womens competitions. Like it or not these club foundations are based on the mens teams. There just isnt the amount of (male) kids wanting to play AFL as they are attracted to other interests. As a result the standard of the leagues I was previously involved in, has dropped significantly (its sad to watch).
….
Its interesting that the same people who have criticised the AFL's spending on the expansion clubs (GWS & GCS) over traditional clubs, are now happy for the resources to be thrown at a sub-standard womens competition.
I agree that it’s sad seeing standards drop. It’s sadder seeing some local comps die out and country towns that aren’t able to field a team for aussie rules footy. There have been issues with dwindling population numbers in some regional areas and small towns so perhaps the issue could be that more young men and young families are leaving the bush?
Maybe it’s also young boys spending far too much time on their ipads or on the playstation. Maybe they’ve taken up basketball or soccer or they just don’t participate in sport at all.
Wouldn’t you think an organisation as big as the AFL would have done their research and evaluated where the dollars should be spent and where the growth in the game is?
Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Tue 18 Jan 2022 11:10am
Its interesting that the same people who have criticised the AFL's spending on the expansion clubs (GWS & GCS) over traditional clubs, are now happy for the resources to be thrown at a sub-standard womens competition.
Pissing money away on unnecessary clubs up north vs something that opens up the game to 50% of the entire population.... yeah it's a no-brainer
If there's no money left for the country leagues, look north for you answer why.
And "sub-standard" compared to what? The men? Are we doing this again? Do you expect them to be faster and kick longer than men? Or do you think this is it and the standard of the game will never improve from here? Or do you expect it will improve but without any funding required?
I totally get that the womens game doesn't satisfy everyone. But people having a cry about funding and country footy need to look elsewhere for blame, it's not AFLW's fault. It's like trying to renovate your home but your partner keeps pissing money away on crap leaded cars, CD players and cigarettes. Then your kids start whinging that they can't have a pool because there's no money for it. We love pools, they're awesome, but tell your dumbass parent to stop spending on rubbish and then you might get one. The home benefits the most but the kids don't see that, they're happy to keep inhaling the smoke and whinging about not having a pool.
Gehrig emerged from scans yesterday saying he was "as sweet as a bun"
“AFLW should have it’s funding cut because their talent pool is so diluted, and the money should go to men’s country footy because their talent pool is so diluted”
Yep!
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
The_Dud wrote: ↑Tue 18 Jan 2022 2:56pm
“AFLW should have it’s funding cut because their talent pool is so diluted, and the money should go to men’s country footy because their talent pool is so diluted”
Yep!
The AFLW will be decades before they are self funded, any sucess they have had is on the back of supporters loyalties to the mens game. Its that poor of a spectacle if they had of introduced the sport as a stand alone competition it wouldnt have survived 2 weeks. I wonder how long it will take before other semi professional sports ban there players playing in the summer AFLW comp, due to the injury concerns? How many of the girls would chose other sports if it wasnt for the AFLW financial incentives?
The kids are still out there they are just chosing other sports/interests and thats where the AFL have lost tractIon. Im sorry I just dont see how having a womens competition assists the growth of the mens competition - as thats all most are interested in.
Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Tue 18 Jan 2022 3:34pm
Im sorry I just dont see how having a womens competition assists the growth of the mens competition - as thats all most are interested in.
Ding ding ding, there it is.
Why should the woman’s comp have to help the mens comp for it to be deemed worthwhile?
All posters are equal, but some posters are more equal than others.
Impatient Sainter wrote: ↑Tue 18 Jan 2022 3:34pm
Im sorry I just dont see how having a womens competition assists the growth of the mens competition - as thats all most are interested in.
Ding ding ding, there it is.
Why should the woman’s comp have to help the mens comp for it to be deemed worthwhile?
While I agree that it doesn’t need to help the mens comp to be deemed worthwhile, I still actually think it does and will.
The same reason when I started playing local footy as an adult, I had a better appreciation for the mens AFL league, and became a member for the first time. (And then an AFLW member the year after)
My daughter is going to watch the AFLW, and may be inspired to play herself, and the passion for the game will flow into all forms of the game (or so I hope anyway).
All I am asking for is that the women have the same choices that I had growing up, to play footy, or to not play footy.
AFLW is fine. I find myself watching it pretty much every week.
Goodness me it is a difficult watch at the moment. The skill level at times is pretty poor. I guess you could compare it to local comp park footy. And maybe C grade at that. The fitness level of the AFLW is probably the only saving grace. I guess you really need to go into it not expecting AFL level skills.
The comp just does not have twenty, thirty, sixty years of development behind it. Will take a long time.
If the equal pay conversation comes up at any point in the next decade, then we really have a problem.
"Now the ball is loose, it gives St. Kilda a rough chance. Black. Good handpass. Voss. Schwarze now, the defender, can run and from a long way".....
remember the kabbadi world cup in india in 2016. 10 days before the australian squad flew to participate schneider and milne were contacted by campbell brown asking if they wanted an australian guernsey. two training sessions was all they had time for. most of the team were ex-footy players. basically an easy way to get into the green and gold. money for jam so to speak.
the aflw is similar - an easy way for low level athletes to get a gig in a high profile comp and money for jam. there are a few stand out athletes who dominate the comp, but most are pretty poor. imagine sam kerr in this comp - she would tear it apart.
maybe that money for jam aspect turns people off - especially when they hear ridiculous calls for equal pay. it would be similar to suburban d graders arguing they do the same job so deserve equal pay. already payments are way out of alignment with the skillset of the players.
but it is a good thing to promote the game. i cant see that it will ever generate money by itself. in fact i'm pretty sure it wont, but indirectly if it opens up many new fans, or at least helps maintains afl as the country most followed football code, then it is a worthy investment. more importantly women deserve to have a high level comp to aspire to, and one day it will hopefully become a better spectacle and draw more fans. womens soccer (at national level) is now very watchable. now aflw will never catch that as it is world based and with much more on offer for players and fans, but for what it is, its a no brainer. i don't watch it myself, but i don't like watching any sport bar highest level elite sports. i.e. i love rugby tests and world cups but couldn't be bothered with domestic comps. watching sheffield shield would bore me to tears. as for what level the standard is, from early games i saw i have no doubt any decent schools under 15 boys would absolutely destroy any aflw team, but that's not the point of it all.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
