Carlton Supporters Club

So gender reassignment would only cost Starc 10 km/h? Is there some research that justifies that assumption? Could it be he'd drop 20 km/h or more? Could gender reassignment force Starc to alter his bowling action and make it hard for him to generate late swing at the lower top pace?

And when do you think that all the best male bowlers in the world are going to transition just so they can star as women? This is a scare campaign which is laughable on its face.

Wow, who needs science when we can just make claims without evidence?

Apparently, a man who decides to keep up the training so he could compete as an alternate gender would lose very little or nothing at all. And they would be bigger, stronger and capable of physical acts that far exceed what a normal non transgender female could be capable of.

Please point me to the evidence rather than the supposition.

By the way, a big District cricketer who is castrated and injected with estrogen won’t necessarily scare women cricketers any more. The Romans were no longer scared of Samson after Delilah cut off his hair. They mocked him instead. Only a special deal with God enabled him to pull down the temple. I’m guessing testicles are more powerful than hair.

Have a look at at England vs New Zealand womens cricket on Kayo right now .....new ball bowlers going at 113kmh, batswomen being beaten for pace.....and you want male transgender athletes bowling at these woman@140k plus, you have to be kidding?
I wouldnt allow my daughter to play, ask any of the fathers on this forum if they want their daughter playing in a competition that allows such a dangerous advantage to the transgender athlete.

You assume transgender athletes would bowl at 140+ after being castrated. Where’s your evidence?

One competitive cisgender female runner, who did not want her name used, explained how “incredibly unfair” this is to her, attributing the rule change to the IOC’s “trying to be politically correct.” Another cisgender female athlete, former Olympic judo competitor Ronda Rousey, went further (and got graphic) when she complained to the media about her competitor Fallon Fox, a trans woman, claiming: “She can try hormones, chop her pecker off, but it’s still the same bone structure a man has. It’s an advantage. I don’t think it’s fair.”

[Bruce Jenner: ‘Have an open mind and an open heart’]

But here’s why we all had it wrong: The first-ever study of transgender athletes showed that the hormone therapy that facilitates male-to-female transition does more than just suppress testosterone. Published last year in the Journal of Sporting Cultures and Identities, the study showed that as testosterone levels approach female norms, trans women experience a decrease in muscle mass, bone density and other physical characteristics.

“Together these changes lead to a loss of speed, strength and endurance — all key components of athleticism,” the study’s author, Joanna Harper, wrote in The Washington Post. Harper, who is chief medical physicist at Oregon’s Providence Portland Medical Center, a trans athlete and a participant in the IOC meeting that overhauled the trans guidelines, explained to me that “it’s not the anatomy that matters, it’s the hormones.” After a year of hormone therapy, for example, female trans distance runners completely lose their speed advantage over cisgender women.

Do transgender athletes have an unfair advantage at the Olympics? Washington Post, 8/8/2016.

You assume transgender athletes would bowl at 140+ after being castrated. Where’s your evidence?

Has Hannah Mouncey been full medically reassigned? or just the hormone therapy?