Who run the rugby league world? Girls

I'm always wrong Epi. That's why when I'm right I feel on top of the moon.

Do you think Castle's performance at the Bulldogs is better or worse than Greenberg's performance in the same role?

This article has gone totally off course. If I was selling a product and wanted to move into a new market I would definitely employ someone with knowledge of that new area. ie NRL wants to attract more women into the game, employ a woman . If we wanted to move the game into South Africa employ a South African . I can't see a problem. What they may lack as a CEO they more than make up for in knowledge of the new target area.

I'm not sure if tokenism is the right word. Maybe an opportunity for a different direction but with a suitably qualified applicant. Let's not dismiss the workload and pressure that comes with a CEO position of any high profile organisation. Remember the perception of the bulldogs club at the time of her appointment, it is a gutsy person to apply in the first place. She has been successful in both sporting and private corporate sector previously and I'd say most agree she's doing a better than fair job at the dogs. Therefore, her accomplishments to date would disqualify her from a Token label. I'm not sure I am reading your "discretionary lifestyle choices" in the context intended so I'll leave that alone.

"But this week, just 163,000 viewers in Melbourne tuned in to the AFL Footy show (plus 46,000 in Adelaide and 56,000 in Perth). The national overnight audience for the show was 494,000 people - but that was only because the audience for the NRL and AFL versions of the show were counted together." So does this mean with the addition of women to both programs the NRL version in the 2 northern cities only has 230 K viewers although it rates reasonably in the regions.

Gold.

I don't dispute that, but a CEO is not an owner-operator. Some CEOs could be literally asleep on the job and the company would continue to post profits and even improve. Saying that 'Castle is doing a good job because the Bulldogs haven't gone into receivership' isn't a valid argument, and doesn't refute my point about tokenism. Perhaps she is the best person for the job, perhaps there are men who would be better but didn't have the requisite genitals. We'll probably never know. However, if women are so good at being the CEOs of NRL clubs, why is the only one with, of all teams, the Bulldogs?

When Castle was hired she came with a track record as an extremely competent sporting administrator with a wealth of experience in other commercial enterprise, and the Bulldogs continue to do well commercially with her management. I couldn't tell you if the decision was "gender blind" because I'm not inside the heads of those who made it, but what I can say with confidence is that if you took each NRL club CEO and lined them up in order of track record and qualifications, she would be right near the top of that list.

And in answer to your final question: yes, there would be an NRL. The registration would be more expensive, but that could easily be covered by women replacing their discretionary lifestyle choices and volunteer work with actual paying jobs.

I'll happily give you Kasey Badger, Nat, because there is a level of objective scrutiny that comes with being a ref that gender politics can't obfuscate and I never intended to include her in my critique. Raelene Castle is an interesting case, however. Obviously she is high-functioning to be in the position that she is, but that does not invalidate questions of tokenism. Yes, she can adequately discharge the responsibilities of her position, but that doesn't mean she is the best person for the job. Given the Bulldog's history, was it gender-blind decision to appoint a female CEO or do you think there was an element of politics involved as well?

"Are you comparing women working in Rugby League to dole recipients?" Yes, I thought that was obvious. Affirmative action placements aren't 'breaking' anything except the concept of gender equality and egalitarianism. "Are you saying these women weren’t selected on merit? How were they selected then?" Again, I thought that was obvious. It's quite clear that some were selected primarily because of their gender, and this has been openly stated in some cases. The selection process seems to go something like: the female victim lobby looks around for male-dominated industries and uncritically accuses them of misogyny, terrified cucks kowtow to their demands, affirmative action policies are implemented. It's interesting that most of the women in media positions covering male sports are in compare or interview roles. No-one ever asks them any questions, because they don't have any answers. They're not experts, they're just token female faces. Now, I don't disagree with that on a commercial level because a lot of NRL fans are women, but it's a bit rich asking us to celebrate tokenism after decades of lectures about celebrating equality.

I do like what women are bringing to the game. I don't have Fox so I cannot comment ton Lara Pitt but Hanna and Yvonne do a good job at moderating a panel discussion and I would challenge any current male commentator to give a more concise review than Erin Molan. Most punters understand that the Wednesday Footy Show is an entertainment show and on Sunday A Johns seems to think that is his panel to discuss how much he drinks. At least League Nation Live is all football, male and female comp, plus a live song or two. Raelene Castle - Mike J - was a successful CEO, therefore offered the position on merit and continues to excel. However, should Kasey Badger get a continual first grade gig and perform, that would have to be the highest glass ceiling smashed in NRL. Commentators and administrators couldn't come close to the scrutiny of a 1st grade ref. All that said, would there be any NRL if every woman who washes the jumpers, tends the canteen/bar, runs the admin and the 1000 other jobs at junior footy every weekend?

"Do I ‘have to’ admire dole recipients for receiving welfare, too?" Are you comparing women working in Rugby League to dole recipients? I think someone breaking into an industry that doesn't traditionally accept them is pretty admirable. Not sure how this is connected to the unemployed. " It would have more people in positions selected on merit." Are you saying these women weren't selected on merit? How were they selected then? Who decides what "merit criteria" is required? Do you think it would be the people who already dominate that industry? I wonder what kind of people they would decide have "merit." thankfully we have 108 years of history to look at for the answer. Not sure why you're so worked up over this to be honest.

Caveat to that: It’s reasonable to expect footballers to start throwing punches to express their distaste at things EXCEPT if that thing is an equal human being who happens to have a vagina.

I'm clearly being facetious there Nat. The part where schoolkids are more accountable for their actions than adults should have made that obvious...

Seriously Epiquin? Silly to expect grown men to act like grown ups? Back to the cave with you.

"In such a male-dominated sport, you have to admire and appreciate the work that women do in the game of rugby league, whether on our TV screens, on the field or behind the scenes." No, you don't. It's not enough to have affirmative action placements in industries women have little interest working in, now we have to 'admire' them? Do I 'have to' admire dole recipients for receiving welfare, too? "The NRL wouldn’t be the same without them." You're right. It would have more people in positions selected on merit.

You're wrong Sleiman. It's reasonable to expect footballers to start throwing punches to express their distaste at things. I mean, we teach school children that violence isn't the answer and to settle disagreements with diplomacy, but it's silly to expect adult men to do the same...

Right. Fortunately there are more way of being a man than bringing back the biff exponents would have us believe. I think they call it being human.

Nah, it's just growing up and getting real. Women have learned to be tougher because they need to be - it's a tough old, unfair world out there - and men have learned to be softer because they can be - anger and aggression aren't the only ways to deal with the tough old world either.