Carlton Supporters Club

Lily Of Laguna => Ladies Lounge => Topic started by: LP on October 04, 2019, 04:16:08 PM

Title: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 04, 2019, 04:16:08 PM
Rumors surfacing that Vescio is one of or the ring leader of a group of AFLW players allegedly pursuing legal advice over the terms and conditions for future AFLW seasons.

At least that is apparently how a couple of the footy media organisations want it publicly represented.

I'll leave it to you to guess which media organisations and who they employ! ::)



On a more serious note, I have to laugh when I read these AFL / AFLW pay disputes. The media and player associations carry on like they are so far removed from the next level that they may as well be supernatural extraterrestrials wearing red underwear from Krypton.

But I can tell you without fear or favour, you could wipe 750+ names from the AFL playing lists and within 12 months of full-time AFL coaching you'd barely notice them missing. The ones with opportunity are not that much better to the ones who just fail to make a list, and the perception of competitiveness is all player relative!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 04, 2019, 04:49:03 PM
Got no issues with the ladies kicking up a fuss about their pay. They are a semi-professional league at best currently, with next to no certainty in their lives.
How many games are they playing this year?
When is the first game?
When is the last game?
When do they have to travel?

Some people need to put leave in 12 months in advance from their jobs.
The AFL need to sort their $hit out and either pay them a handsome wage so they don't need to structure their lives around an uncertain AFLW season, or give them some more certainty a long way out.....ideally both.

As for Vescio or anyone being outspoken on the matter and who is reporting what.....WGAF.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: DJC on October 04, 2019, 09:27:36 PM
I listened to the “break away” AFLW players’ lawyer on the wireless today.  She was very cagey about how many players she was representing so it’s hard to know whether it’s 5 or >50.  Either way, it’s not really clear how their log of claims differs from those players who are happy to be represented by the AFLPA.

The lawyer did say that her clients wanted a longer season and more certainty about fixturing.  It’s understandable that players want certainty so that they can juggle other commitments with the AFLW season.

It is a joke that AFLW players don’t yet know when their pre-season training is meant to start.  After such a promising start, the AFL seems to have dragged the AFLW down to mediocrity as far as industrial relations goes.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 04, 2019, 11:05:26 PM
I listened to the “break away” AFLW players’ lawyer on the wireless today.  She was very cagey about how many players she was representing so it’s hard to know whether it’s 5 or >50.  Either way, it’s not really clear how their log of claims differs from those players who are happy to be represented by the AFLPA.

The lawyer did say that her clients wanted a longer season and more certainty about fixturing.  It’s understandable that players want certainty so that they can juggle other commitments with the AFLW season.

It is a joke that AFLW players don’t yet know when their pre-season training is meant to start.  After such a promising start, the AFL seems to have dragged the AFLW down to mediocrity as far as industrial relations goes.

They went through all this last year, and if they don't take a stand, they will probably have to go through it all again next year.

Kudos to them for forcing the AFL to start taking them seriously.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: DJC on October 05, 2019, 09:21:31 AM
I understand that the deadline for voting on the AFLW CBA was 1700 yesterday.  Daisy Pearce was quoted as saying that she hoped everyone voted in favour and that’s not going to happen.  However, it seems likely that the dissenters will be left out in the cold. 

I don’t know enough about the concerns but I hope the AFL can address them to the satisfaction of all.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 05, 2019, 03:20:09 PM
I understand that the deadline for voting on the AFLW CBA was 1700 yesterday.  Daisy Pearce was quoted as saying that she hoped everyone voted in favour and that’s not going to happen.  However, it seems likely that the dissenters will be left out in the cold. 

I don’t know enough about the concerns but I hope the AFL can address them to the satisfaction of all.

It only needs 75% of the vote in favour for it to go through, so if all of the above is true and it doesn't go through, then there is a significant amount of girls who are unhappy.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 07, 2019, 08:16:07 AM
Gee the AFL media are going to town on Darcy, almost unanimously across the board they have pretty much made her the face of the AFLW pay dispute!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: madbluboy on October 07, 2019, 08:27:55 AM
What are Patrick Dangerfield's thoughts on this?
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: DJC on October 07, 2019, 08:35:55 AM
At least 30% of the AFLW voted against the CBA.

It seems that the players weren’t allowed to see the CBA but could only access a summary.  No wonder it wasn’t approved ... and what on earth is the AFLPA up to?
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 07, 2019, 08:40:54 AM
What are Patrick Dangerfield's thoughts on this?

He thinks he is very pretty!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: DJC on October 07, 2019, 10:49:39 AM
It seems that the players weren’t allowed to see the CBA but could only access a summary.  No wonder it wasn’t approved ... and what on earth is the AFLPA up to?

According to Paul Marsh of the AFLPA, there isn’t a CBA document as such.  All they have are notes of the negotiating points  ::)

How on earth are the AFLW players able to make an informed choice on their CBA if the CBA doesn’t exist?  Or is Marsh telling porkies?
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 07, 2019, 11:30:06 AM
My personal opinion.

We discussed this a couple of seasons back, there were clear signs that factions within the AFLW and the AFLPA were putting the $ cart before the horse. They want big dollars now, despite not really generating any income for the sport, at the moment they are a cost and part-timers.

This whole philosophical debate, the idea full-time professionalism has to come before the women's game can be profitable is bogus. Bring the sport at a high level, looking and playing professionally, and the dollars follow, not the other way around.

Unfortunately as I see it, what the AFLW girls need to accept is that those that come after them will benefit from their efforts while they may not. For those currently involved, it's both good and bad time, because they will be foundation members and legends, but they won't profit. I suppose it's no different to Bobby Skilton looking at Buddy Franklin!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: dodge on October 07, 2019, 12:19:01 PM
From what I gather, the group of players aren't going against the AFL, they are going against the AFLPA for not representing them properly.  Breaking away from the AFLPA or setting up a AFLWPA was seen as an unwanted option.

Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 07, 2019, 12:26:02 PM
From what I gather, the group of players aren't going against the AFL, they are going against the AFLPA for not representing them properly.

Was Danger was too busy filming a new episode of carpool karaoke, or perhaps too busy advising the MRP on how to suspend Carlton players?
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: Thryleon on October 07, 2019, 03:28:05 PM
At least 30% of the AFLW voted against the CBA.

It seems that the players weren’t allowed to see the CBA but could only access a summary.  No wonder it wasn’t approved ... and what on earth is the AFLPA up to?

The AFLPA has its hands tied a little bit.

AFLW doesnt net anywhere near the money required to truly look after the girls best interests in the same way they do the mens (which is to do with many different things including post football payments etc).

They go into bat for the girls too hard, and they risk having to rob Peter (the AFL Men) to pay Paula (the AFL women) and that is in itself a conflict of interest.

I dont see how they can hope to fight for the womens rights at the expense of the mens (which is not a hard choice if you follow business principles, of protecting the bigger generator of money like any other business).

Fundamentally the girls game needs to grow, and whilst I support them fighting for their rights, they need to be mindful that you cannot build Rome in a day.

Once the money starts to flow properly for AFL W for now, they are fighting for the future rights of the competition at the expense of today.  Having no settlement suits no one and simply cuts off their nose to spite their face in the long term, but I see why an individual would be that way inclined.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: DJC on October 07, 2019, 03:32:00 PM
My personal opinion.

We discussed this a couple of seasons back, there were clear signs that factions within the AFLW and the AFLPA were putting the $ cart before the horse. They want big dollars now, despite not really generating any income for the sport, at the moment they are a cost and part-timers.

This whole philosophical debate, the idea full-time professionalism has to come before the women's game can be profitable is bogus. Bring the sport at a high level, looking and playing professionally, and the dollars follow, not the other way around.

Unfortunately as I see it, what the AFLW girls need to accept is that those that come after them will benefit from their efforts while they may not. For those currently involved, it's both good and bad time, because they will be foundation members and legends, but they won't profit. I suppose it's no different to Bobby Skilton looking at Buddy Franklin!

The disagreement is about the length of the season and has little to do with remuneration.  The dissenting group want a longer season.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 07, 2019, 05:47:00 PM
The disagreement is about the length of the season and has little to do with remuneration.  The dissenting group want a longer season.
Correct.

The wages is not an issue....its not even a debating point.

Its the length of the season for 2020 and beyond.

The AFL has flagged a minimal increase in season length for 2020 (10 rounds instead of 9) and potentially building up to 13 in a few years.
The AFLW players want 13 now and potentially longer in the future.

AFL is not so much opposed to the idea in principle, it is just worried (supposedly) that it will not be able to televise all games (live?), and doesn't want to miss out broadcasting whole games at all.

The longer the season, the more they have to dodge up the fixture to accomodate the AFL/AFLW overlaps and scheduling conflicts. Not only in grounds, but also broadcasting.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: DJC on October 07, 2019, 08:12:34 PM
Correct.

The wages is not an issue....its not even a debating point.

Its the length of the season for 2020 and beyond.

The AFL has flagged a minimal increase in season length for 2020 (10 rounds instead of 9) and potentially building up to 13 in a few years.
The AFLW players want 13 now and potentially longer in the future.

AFL is not so much opposed to the idea in principle, it is just worried (supposedly) that it will not be able to televise all games (live?), and doesn't want to miss out broadcasting whole games at all.

The longer the season, the more they have to dodge up the fixture to accomodate the AFL/AFLW overlaps and scheduling conflicts. Not only in grounds, but also broadcasting.

Angela Pippos has a theory that AFL wants the AFLW season to start just after the AFL grand final and finish just before the AFL round 1 - 12 months of footy!

I’m not sure whether she’s on the money but it will be a long term goal if she is.

13 weeks makes sense!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 07, 2019, 08:14:57 PM
Angela Pippos has a theory that AFL wants the AFLW season to start just after the AFL grand final and finish just before the AFL round 1 - 12 months of footy!

I’m not sure whether she’s on the money but it will be a long term goal if she is.

13 weeks makes sense!

In an ideal world, sure.

Problem is a lot of the grounds will have a cricket pitch in the middle of it which makes it impossible.

Thats why the AFL doesn't want to expand the season.
Push it later and it cuts into the mens season.
Make it earlier and you have no grounds to play on.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: dodge on October 07, 2019, 10:56:34 PM
The added element in length of season is that for the 2020 season there are 2 more teams, but no more games.

Can't agree more with the women - they are being shafted - AFL/PA isn't taking them seriously.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: Thryleon on October 07, 2019, 11:48:01 PM
Surely there are grounds available for women's afl.

What about the old vfl grounds?

They were suitable enough, they should be sufficient now.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 08, 2019, 06:11:02 AM
Surely there are grounds available for women's afl.

What about the old vfl grounds?

They were suitable enough, they should be sufficient now.

If a ground is good enough for AFL footy, it is certainly good enough for cricket.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 08, 2019, 08:18:26 AM
Surely there are grounds available for women's afl.

What about the old vfl grounds?

They were suitable enough, they should be sufficient now.

Most of them have central turf wickets and are used by the VCA for District Cricket over summer, no way they'll allow football on them.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: Wet Willie on October 08, 2019, 09:41:35 AM
You could start the AFLW season from the bye weekend after the H&A fixture.

Showcases the competition on a dead weekend before the finals, then gives fans something to watch during the finals if their team isn't playing in AFL finals.  Effectively, finding five weekends of crossover...then AFLW continues through Spring until Xmas.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: Thryleon on October 08, 2019, 10:18:27 AM
Most of them have central turf wickets and are used by the VCA for District Cricket over summer, no way they'll allow football on them.

Are you guys telling me that Punt Road Oval, Ikon park, Kardinia Park, Victoria Park, Windy Hill, Whitten Oval Etc arent available to play AFL W on?

SURELY, these grounds are suitable enough for AFL W and are not used for Cricket?
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: No1inParticular on October 08, 2019, 10:19:51 AM
Most of them have central turf wickets and are used by the VCA for District Cricket over summer, no way they'll allow football on them.

If its an issue about grounds how about the following:-

Feel free to left me know if cricket is played on these ground during spring/summer.

Ikon Park - Parkville
Preston Oval - Preston
Victoria Park - Collingwood
Olympic Park - Melbourne
Arden Street - North Melbourne
Port Oval - Port Melbourne
Punt Road - Richmond
Kardina Park - Geelong
RSEA Park - Mooorabbin
Whitten Oval - Footscray
Casey Fields - Cranbourne

Most of these would be used by the men for pre-season, but surely there would be enough grounds with correct scheduling to enable a spring/summer football comp to work.
Enough ground & spread to cover the Victoria based teams.

Also, most of the AFLW teams are already utilising these ground for their pre-season and their AFLW season. They are available now so makes sense to me that they could be available for a Spring/Summer competition.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 08, 2019, 10:59:18 AM
Ikon Park - Parkville ✔️
Preston Oval - Preston ❌
Victoria Park - Collingwood ❌(+Soccer)
Olympic Park - Melbourne ❌(+Soccer(Melbourne Victory))
Arden Street - North Melbourne ❌
Port Oval - Port Melbourne ❌
Punt Road - Richmond ❌
Kardina Park - Geelong ❌❌❌(+Soccer, +Rugby, +Cricket)
RSEA Park - Mooorabbin ❌ (+Baseball)
Whitten Oval - Footscray ✔️
Casey Fields - Cranbourne ✔️

✔️ Available due to sole AFL tenant.

❌ Limited by multiple/shared tenancy.

If possible I've listed additional tenants when they are not cricket, obviously all these venues excluding Kardinia are nowhere near utilized 100% of the time, but they do have existing tenants, some with commitments to other sports.

Training is obviously not affected by having cricket tenants as they fence off the square, but I doubt they would allow games.

Keep in mind, most of the shared tenants also have 2nd, 3rd or even under-age squads.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: No1inParticular on October 08, 2019, 11:47:44 AM
✔️ Available due to sole AFL tenant.

❌ Limited by multiple/shared tenancy.

If possible I've listed additional tenants when they are not cricket, obviously all these venues excluding Kardinia are nowhere near utilized 100% of the time, but they do have existing tenants, some with commitments to other sports.

Training is obviously not affected by having cricket tenants as they fence off the square, but I doubt they would allow games.

Keep in mind, most of the shared tenants also have 2nd, 3rd or even under-age squads.

Thanks for the feedback LP.

Re: Olympic Park (i'm talking about the CollingwoodFC oval on the site of the old Olympic track). Does soccer/Victory use that?

With Kardinia, I think you'll find that the outside ovals are used pre-dominantly for the cricket & other sports, other than the big bash stuff.
Hold on the new soccer Western United are going to be based down there aren't they  :-\
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: No1inParticular on October 08, 2019, 12:03:20 PM
Looking at the list of potentially available venues.

Clubs could play their home games across them.

Say

Ikon (lighting would need to be upgraded, already muted to be done) - Carlton, Collingwood & Richmond
Whitten (lighting good) - WB, Geelong & North
Casey (lighting ?) - Melbourne & St. Kilda

Play match day double headers.

Ground over usage wouldn't be too dramatic if training is limited on them.
Teams affected would be Carlton (outside ovals available) & Doggies.
All others already have training bases elsewhere.

Victoria Park, Kardinia, Arden, RSEA, Punt etc... could still be used when available for the home teams to use.

The match day double headers could in theory happen now.
The AFL could extend the season to thirteen games as the most want.
Play the double headers and still fit the season into the 10-12week time frame the AFL wants.

Games would still get boardcast.

Haven't done the sums re: costing it etc... but it does open it up for the AFL to charge even a small amount and they'll still get crowds.

Imagine a round of

Thu
WCE vs Freo (night)

Fri
GWS vs Adel (night)

Sat
Melb vs StK (Casey early afternoon)
Bris vs GC (late afternoon)
WB vs Geel (Whitten night)

Sun
Carl vs Coll (Ikon afternoon)
Rich vs North (Ikon night)
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 08, 2019, 12:35:59 PM
I think match day openers / double hearders makes sense, but I suspect it doesn't suit the AFL's political agenda, they seem to be deliberately trying to make AFLW compete head to head for resources with other sports. Using AFLW as a political tool to freeze out other sports when AFL is out of season!

The NRL play the NRLW in parallel and it works fine.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: madbluboy on October 08, 2019, 12:39:08 PM
I think match day openers / double hearders makes sense, but I suspect it doesn't suit the AFL's political agenda, they seem to be deliberately trying to make AFLW compete head to head for resources with other sports. Using AFLW as a political tool to freeze out other sports when AFL is out of season!

The NRL play the NRLW in parallel and it works fine.

Agreed.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: dodge on October 08, 2019, 11:40:42 PM
You could start the AFLW season from the bye weekend after the H&A fixture.

Showcases the competition on a dead weekend before the finals, then gives fans something to watch during the finals if their team isn't playing in AFL finals.  Effectively, finding five weekends of crossover...then AFLW continues through Spring until Xmas.

I think they want the AFLW players to be available for the VFL and other state comps, as depth is still an issue - but may not be long until depth arrives.  But wouldn't it be great one day to have all AFLW games as the curtain raiser.  Then sometime in the future have their standalone games.

Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 09, 2019, 08:22:41 AM
Then sometime in the future have their standalone games.

I don't see the need for this, I appreciate the desire but it seems completely superfluous.

For years I'd be at the ground from the U19 bounce, match the reserves until half-time, have some lunch then come back out for the seniors. Why not ride the existing pony rather than break in a new one?

And from home for TV I'd much rather be watching the AFLW / VFL curtain raisers than putting up with BT, Darcy or Ling delivering another pre-match diatribe! FFS, it's like being lectured to by Dumb and Dumber, they make The Three Stooges look like Einstein, Heisenberg and Hawking!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: madbluboy on October 09, 2019, 11:24:22 AM
Daisy Pearce on radio this morning pretty much blamed one entire team (without naming them) for the vote not getting up.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: DJC on October 09, 2019, 03:48:02 PM
Daisy Pearce on radio this morning pretty much blamed one entire team (without naming them) for the vote not getting up.

Well, she does work for CheatsTV  ::)
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 09, 2019, 05:09:50 PM
Well, she does work for CheatsTV  ::)

I'd hate to be on the inside of this debate, when it comes to bitterness, hatred and prejudice the men have nothing on the girls, and in my opinion this leaves a disaster just waiting to happen.

What they need is for some "Bastard Misogynist" to step forward and offer them a reason to unite, or else they may well rip each other apart!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 09, 2019, 07:09:57 PM
I'd hate to be on the inside of this debate, when it comes to bitterness, hatred and prejudice the men have nothing on the girls, and in my opinion this leaves a disaster just waiting to happen.

What they need is for some "Bastard Misogynist" to step forward and offer them a reason to unite, or else they may well rip each other apart!

Sorry LP, thats BS.

I think what the girls are asking for is more than fair.

They are uprooting their lives to play AFLW.....and they do not even have any dates, or length of season in front of them.

In the first year, the girls had to pay for their own boots.
AFLW exceeded all expectations, including the players and the AFL.
Now the AFL has started fasttracking the whole thing by introducing 6 new teams in 2 years and have forgotten to structure a competition that can make it all work.

Yes, the girls are kicking up a fuss....and so they should.
What do the men have to complain about? A minimum salary of 100k a year, plus perks for the worst player on the list? Meanwhile, thats more than all the girls on a list combined.
The men have certainty for years.
The girls don't even know when their next game is......or even what month it is in.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 10, 2019, 08:08:56 AM
Sorry LP, thats BS.

I think what the girls are asking for is more than fair.

What I posted has nothing to do with their claims.

It's about the internal doings exposed by Pearce on radio yesterday, they are basically pointing knives at each other already, there is an obvious cliqué or maybe more than one, and they are nowhere near united like the AFL men. The girls have fired up the whisper drive and have their rumor engine running ready to point the blame!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: madbluboy on October 10, 2019, 09:07:02 AM
Yeah a bit rich for Daisy Pearce and Erin Phillips telling the others to do as they're told and just accept what's on offer.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: Baggers on October 10, 2019, 09:25:21 AM
Sorry LP, thats BS.

I think what the girls are asking for is more than fair.

They are uprooting their lives to play AFLW.....and they do not even have any dates, or length of season in front of them.

In the first year, the girls had to pay for their own boots.
AFLW exceeded all expectations, including the players and the AFL.
Now the AFL has started fasttracking the whole thing by introducing 6 new teams in 2 years and have forgotten to structure a competition that can make it all work.

Yes, the girls are kicking up a fuss....and so they should.
What do the men have to complain about? A minimum salary of 100k a year, plus perks for the worst player on the list? Meanwhile, thats more than all the girls on a list combined.
The men have certainty for years.
The girls don't even know when their next game is......or even what month it is in.

Well said.

At best the AFL has treated the gals with a kind of reduced and limited respect. At worst the AFL has treated the gals with a kind of arrogant disregard.

It would never have come to this adversarial stage had the AFLW/VFLW been given the respect and subsequent proper planning it deserved.

Now we have policy on the run. Gil at his best.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 10, 2019, 06:33:44 PM
What I posted has nothing to do with their claims.

It's about the internal doings exposed by Pearce on radio yesterday, they are basically pointing knives at each other already, there is an obvious cliqué or maybe more than one, and they are nowhere near united like the AFL men. The girls have fired up the whisper drive and have their rumor engine running ready to point the blame!

So what your saying is most of the girls are pushovers and doing what the AFL want.
Others are fighting for whats fair in their mind.
As a result there is disagreements amongst themselves.

You have issue with that because they are not united and as a result there is fighting amongst themselves.

Sorry but thats the same as what i said before.

Some girls are just happy to be playing and will take anything they can get.
Other girls are fighting for fair, as is their right.

Again, i don't care about any infighting between factions and what not. I just want whats fair for them. If the majority of them are NOT fighting for the same, as it appears, then they should have a look at themselves.


FWIW, if the men were getting paid a pittance, they wouldn't be united at all.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 10, 2019, 09:39:25 PM
You have issue with that because they are not united and as a result there is fighting amongst themselves.

Sorry but thats the same as what i said before.

Nope you wrote nothing of the sort, you might have thought it, stated it to someone somewhere, but you didn't write it here, and now you're reversing through the debate at high speed claiming you've been there all before!

My comments were solely based on how quickly the girls started throwing rocks at each other when they didn't all agree. I never commented on whether what they had asked for was fair and reasonable, I've no position on it because no document exists to have an opinion on! I never accused them of being pawns in the AFL's game, or made any other statement deriding their situation. That's all in the Kruddler mind, not in the written words!

Over the last 48hrs all they seem to have talked about are the reasons why they didn't agree, in the media they made it an "us versus them" debate instantly, that was their first public thought, to point the finger at each other! The goose at jonts like SEN must have thought they hit the jackpot, because all they had to do was point a microphone at a AFLW player and the rocks started flying.

The bad men at the AFL and those in the rest of society, happily oppressing the girls, never even entered the debate over the last 48hrs! The girls factionalised with all wanting something different, there has hardly been a consistent message from any interviewed in the last 48hrs, despite seemingly having areas of overlap. What I found the most disappointing, was the inferences that one case or the other was coming at someones expense! They seemed unwilling to compromise, they would lose the prisoner's dilema game badly, all going for the loot!
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 13, 2019, 01:03:39 PM
https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/womens-afl/aflw-pay-dispute-afl-womens-2020-season-darcy-vescio-aflpa-legal-action/news-story/

Quote
The ring leaders inside the four clubs were Carlton’s Darcy Vescio, Geelong’s Meg McDonald, GWS’ Pepa Randall and St Kilda’s Catherine Phillips.


....


In a meeting with the AFL recently, a small section of the ‘NO VOTERS’ voiced their displeasure around several non-financial, non-communication issues.

They told league heavyweights they could not understand why the AFLW competition did not receive the same umpires as the men’s competition. The standard of umpiring is understood to have frustrated coaches and some players last season.

‘NO VOTERS’ also expressed their disappointment with the AFL’s change rooms at certain grounds. Although most facilities are acceptable, a small section of the players want to have access to the same spacious rooms as the men when available.

There is also an undercurrent of agitation towards AFLPA president Patrick Dangerfield and leading women’s player Daisy Pearce. Some players feel let down by them and have spoken out among each other in private about the lack of support they feel they have received from key figures in the game.

...


The ‘NO’ voters are adamant the season should see every team play each other once by the end of the next CBA. But the AFL and its two broadcasters — Fox Footy and Channel 7 — have resisted advances to accelerate the competition’s growth.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: Thryleon on October 13, 2019, 10:00:35 PM
Daisy's a hypocrite.

Bet you she's paid better than average for all her work in footy.

Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 14, 2019, 07:54:15 AM
Daisy's a hypocrite.

Bet you she's paid better than average for all her work in footy.

Don't know about that, but she clearly has a conflict of interest, as do most of those making critical statements about the rebels!

No surprises Dangerfield is in the gun, this bloke is the most self-serving administrator I've seen in decades, he makes Narcissus look like a teenage self-mutilator!

PS; Is that a good tactic for Carlton fans next time we play against the Handbaggers, bring a bunch of mirrors?
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: Thryleon on October 14, 2019, 10:17:42 AM
Don't know about that, but she clearly has a conflict of interest, as do most of those making critical statements about the rebels!

No surprises Dangerfield is in the gun, this bloke is the most self-serving administrator I've seen in decades, he makes Narcissus look like a teenage self-mutilator!

PS; Is that a good tactic for Carlton fans next time we play against the Handbaggers, bring a bunch of mirrors?

You wont see another female footballer commentating on men's footy (maybe Erin Phillips once).

Daisy just wants to continue building the platform to support her media work.

Don't get me wrong.  I think the girls deserve their fair share.  Where I get sketchy is whether or not they have developed the game to warrant getting a bigger piece of the pie yet.

You can take it to the bank that currently there is no one doing better out of womens footy than Daisy Pearce.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 14, 2019, 10:34:05 AM
Don't get me wrong.  I think the girls deserve their fair share.  Where I get sketchy is whether or not they have developed the game to warrant getting a bigger piece of the pie yet.

I think that is fundamentally the problem, they are doing as much hard work as any but they don't get the reward, and the game is yet to clearly deliver a positive return to base an increase on. At this stage they earn about the same as good suburban footballers, and relatively on average they attract similar crowds to VFL or SANFL.

In reality this pauper situation is the same for any and every pioneer in any field of human endeavor, which makes the current situation feel a little bit like sour grapes, the cart before the horse, and any number of other allegories!

When I posted early, about the perceived way the AFLW players turned on each other, it was partially a commentary about this very issue we write about now. There is some hypocrisy in the comments from Daisy and a couple of others who are currently indirectly on the gravy train, and they don't want it derailed, I can't blame them, but maybe they just have to suck it up and take one for the team!

As an aside, you won't see Danger doing that, taking one for the AFLPA team, not in any public or private endeavour you hear or read about. It seems to be why the girls have fired up about his comments or lack of comments and action. Which makes his own claims of personal sacrifice and pay cuts seem even more dubious! Because the very suggestion clearly flies in the face of all his other publicly exposed narcissistic behaviours. So where and how is he making up this claimed sacrificial shortfall in what he could otherwise earn?
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: kruddler on October 14, 2019, 06:12:01 PM
You won't see Danger doing that??

Didn't he sell Charlie down the river a couple of times in stead of backing him up as AFLPA pres should do?

I think there is plenty of to and fro from the men, but they are a little more 'media savvy' about it....more subtle. They've had more training.


@ Thry.....Abbie Holmes has a gig commentating as well.
Title: Re: AFLW - Contract Dispute
Post by: LP on October 15, 2019, 08:02:15 AM
You won't see Danger doing that??

Didn't he sell Charlie down the river a couple of times in stead of backing him up as AFLPA pres should do?

You need to read the whole paragraph before you post, I've re-organised it so you don't have to jump to an erroneous conclusion!