Australian Rugby / RA

[Lee Enfield]

The reality is, the only way they have a viable competition is if revenue generated by the men's game is diverted to the aflw. The same way men's cricket revenue is being used to pay the women cricketers, men's tennis revenue is used to pay women players.
The commercial reality is women's afl, nrl and rugby will need to be subsidised heavily by the men's game to exist, as there is little market demand for women's sport.

 

[dru]

The reality is, the only way they have a viable competition is if revenue generated by the men's game is diverted to the aflw. The same way men's cricket revenue is being used to pay the women cricketers, men's tennis revenue is used to pay women players.
The commercial reality is women's afl, nrl and rugby will need to be subsidised heavily by the men's game to exist, as there is little market demand for women's sport.

Yeah. Nah. I'll find time to come back to it later. Picking up dinner at the moment.

 

[Lee Enfield]

It may be a league in its first season, but it isn't an obscure, new or small sport. It is the women's version of the most popular game in Australia, a game which for its supporters could be classified as a religion

The Women's Big Bash averaged crowds of 10,083, and afl draws bigger average crowds than 20/20 cricket. So crowds of 6828 with free tickets, prime time scheduling, and being the only source of afl, even with more spin than a Warnie leg break, cannot be classified as excellent and certainly not the basis of a commercially viable competition.

The only way aflw can be remotely successful, is if it never competes with the regular afl season. That will ring true for all codes, the women's competition will never be viable if it competes with the men's competition. Basically the women's competitions will either need to stand alone with smaller seasons, or be relegated to curtain raisers at men's games.

 

[KOB1987]

It's a league in its first season where players were paid a pittance so weren't really professional.

I think people are kidding if they think crowds would have flatlined if tickets weren't free. How many people turn up to things just because they're free?

Some NRC games have been free and it doesn't really produce different crowd numbers.

AFL Women's is a no brainer for the AFL to put more money into so the players can be properly professional. That will cause standard to rise rapidly and interest will increase.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

In fairness to Lee Enfield - lots. That's not saying I agree with most of his other content though.

I do think the real test for the AFLW crowd barometer is to charge a gate fee. Doesn't have to be huge, just what they think is justified to gauge how commercial the product is.

 

[kiap]

there is little market demand for women's sport.

I partly agree with this (although who subsidises women's netball?) There is less demand for women's sport – but there is demand out there.

The idea that running women's competitions brings nothing is wrong. Why do all these sports do it – merely political correctness gone mad?

No, it's part of the full-court press across all parts of the community needed by any sport. More participants, players, spectators, patrons, and more support for juniors. Hearts and minds. Not having a healthy women's game is negative for rugby.

By the same token, saying that any women's competition cannot hope to match the men's … and therefore (in the interests of fairness) we should do nothing … is wrong.

It doesn't have to be the same as the men's.

A women's NRC played before the men's comp could be done quite easily. It might not start out as pro or even semi-pro. It may not have eight teams initially, and so on – but you've got to start somewhere. I'd say it might cost around double what they spend on the current 3-day national tournament. Simply done.

 

[Slim 293]

The crowds were still excellent and would have remained that way even if modest ticket prices were charged.

Plenty of people watched it on TV.

The reality is they well and truly have a viable competition that will get much stronger very quickly if they pay the players enough to be full time professionals (even if only for six months a year).

Indeed......

Last year's sole women's game was Channel 7's highest rating Saturday night match for the year.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Indeed..

Last year's sole women's game was Channel 7's highest rating Saturday night match for the year.

Free tickets weren't a

The WBBL easily out rated anything either Super Rugby or the A-League could muster. Alongside the WAFL game you allude to anyone suggesting there isn't the interest or demand are way off.

As a side. Years ago I actually wrote a piece and posted it on The Roar about the very subject of the Women's game. I was rather surprised by how many were still stuck in the 50s on the subject.

 

[lou75]

The reality is, the only way they have a viable competition is if revenue generated by the men's game is diverted to the aflw. The same way men's cricket revenue is being used to pay the women cricketers, men's tennis revenue is used to pay women players.
The commercial reality is women's afl, nrl and rugby will need to be subsidised heavily by the men's game to exist, as there is little market demand for women's sport.

be that as it may, the ARU is custodian of the game for all Australians - not just 50%ish and their constitution expressly states that the (clause)
2.1 Objects of the Company : b. to foster, promote and arrange Rugby throughout Australia
which would include both male and female rugby I would have thought

 

[sidelineview]

If the AFL are doing it you can bet it has a good chance of being successful.

They're very good at what they do in terms of marketing and want it all: they want to attract the kids, the men & the women.

I dont think they'll care if women's AFL is a viable stand alone proposition. It fits within the big picture of their marketing strategy.
They're giving the punters what they want.

Women's sport in Australia is a growing market, no doubt.

As soon as the ARU board aka F Troop is gone, the new ARU board hopefully will be as switched on.

 

[I like to watch]

To be fair to ARU, the AFL announced the concept, and were flooded with aspiring players.
There is not that sort of interest here, I'm not sure how the ARU could generate it, but just throwing women on planes every week cos that's what the men do, is not the solution.

 

[sidelineview]

To be fair to ARU, the AFL announced the concept, and were flooded with aspiring players.
There is not that sort of interest here, I'm not sure how the ARU could generate it, but just throwing women on planes every week cos that's what the men do, is not the solution.

It may have to be developed one step at a time.

 

[kiap]

To be fair to ARU, the AFL announced the concept, and were flooded with aspiring players.
There is not that sort of interest here, I'm not sure how the ARU could generate it, but just throwing women on planes every week cos that's what the men do, is not the solution.

They already move 6 squads worth for a 3-day tournament. I dunno, circa $90k in flights.

5-team round-robin + finals, 13 squads worth: circa $195k in flights.

Get Josephine to help sponsor most of the difference.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Where are the 390 women clamouring for this opportunity?

 

[kiap]

Where are the 390 women clamouring for this opportunity?

Same places as the ones already playing in the 3-day national tournament.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Same places as the ones already playing in the 3-day national tournament.

THIS opportunity: from Dave beat's report it sounds as if the type of game (7s, 10s, 15s) can only be determined shortly before kick off in the 7 team club comp. I suspect the weekly commitment is different to committing to the tournament they already play.
It is not unreasonable to expect that there be some solid indication of numbers and demand - and the only evidence in that score is negative.
If Sukkar had been serious she would have attacked the issue by first demanding equality or comparability in the amateur levels of the game. Of course that doesn't play to the grandstand.

 

[kiap]

There is an 18 round comp with 8 teams in Perth. I'm sure they could scrape up enough players for 2 x home + 2 x away games in an NRC curtain-raiser round-robin.

If Sukkar is serious, she could put Buildcorp money where her mouth is and back such a comp. With the men's cash freed up, maybe that will happen.

 

[mst]

I think Buildcorp did put their money where their mouth was plus some. The women have spent a long time self funding to represent their country and the ARU (for those that are unfamiliar the are the Buildcorp Wallaroos) and its arguable that the ARU are riding on the coattails of the 7's since they became successful. Now the women XV appears to have been overlooked in preference of the 7's.

Argue all you want that the ARU could not afford the women's XV and but without Buildcorp the ARU would have been able to fund many parts of the game.

Many will tell you that the women who play in or are associated with are also very involved in clubs at the grassroots level.

Read the article and judge for yourself about what was being spruked then think about what has happened.

http://www.aru.com.au/MediaReleases...sponsor-ahead-of-Eden-Park-double-header.aspx

 

[dru]

As you know MST the double header with the WBs gave the Wallaroos more press than anything previously.

The coaching team had told us that further international comp was being arranged. Nothing came of it until this second tour to NZ flying completely underneath the radar. While teams like the Ferns and England have been building. Leading to yesterday's lop-sided game. In a World Cup year.

Girls are turning up to clubs, probably on the back of Olympic 7s. This is without doubt grassroots growth. It should be nurtured. Commercial value of a womens national comp misses the point of what a womens game does - grass root growth; increased club numbers; encourages ladies to get engaged; including mothers hence a snowball effect; and ultimately increases the sport's commercial fan base.

Now, if only we could think of an engaged long term financial supporter to get this thing going. Where might we find such a person?

 

[sidelineview]

Couldnt agree more dru.

The AFL know what they're doing and are doing it right.

Once again, they're winning the race to engage the Australian public and understand how important women are within the equation.

The ARU need to get on board ... if you snooze you lose.

So what if the women's game has to be subsidised by the men's game short term or long term.

Girls - women - babies - children playing sport - commitment to a particular sport for life .. building .. growing ... networking ...it all makes sense.

So exactly when will the next ARU board be appointed?

 

[Inside Shoulder]

So what if the women's game has to be subsidised by the men's game short term or long term.

Are you joking?
What are they going to subsidise it with?
Where and how does this arrest the decline in rugby in oz? is it envisaged we will enter a unisex Super Rugby comp?
One thing about you blokes is that you're starting to make the ARU Board look like the least worst option.