Excitement about the inaugural season of the AFL’s National Women’s League (NWL) in 2017 has taken a pretty significant hit this week with the news coming through that female footballers will be paid a pittance for their services and given no insurance cover.
The vast majority of players in the league will be paid just $5000 for their services across an eight-week season – a pay rate of about $625 a week, not accounting for pre-season training in the lead up to the season.
» Women’s AFL league on The Roar
» All the teams and squad lists for the women’s AFL
» Complete 2017 women’s AFL fixtures
By comparison, male AFL players qualify for an automatic $3605 bonus on top of their existing base salary for every senior match they play. The lowest-paid male AFL players still make more than $50,000 each year before any of these bonuses come into play.
The combined salary of the entire 25-person list of each women’s team will be about $190,000 – that’s less than two-thirds of what the average individual male player makes each year.
Simply put, that’s rubbish. We’re talking about women who are giving up significant portions of their life to play football – taking big chunks of time out from their families and their other employment or studies, only to be paid less than they would if they were flipping burgers instead.
However what’s even more concerning is that the AFL will not be providing NWL players with private health insurance.
That means it will be up to these women to either provide their own cover – which could cost as much as half of what they make from playing – or go without.
Any significant injury could then mean serious financial jeopardy for the player involved – but they’ll be left out in the cold if they expect the AFL to help, it seems.
It’s true what they say, actions speak louder than words. The AFL talks a good line about promoting equality and supporting the women’s game but it’s pretty clear from their actions that they have little interest in either.
So why not speak their language and ask them why they’re making such a poor business decision by failing to invest in women’s footy?
Let’s get one thing straight here – this is not an organisation that is by any means struggling to pay the bills.
Just last year the AFL signed a six-year broadcast agreement worth the handy sum of $2.5 billion. The combined salaries of all female players over that six-year period currently adds up to 0.36 per cent of that.
The League has sunk millions upon millions of dollars into the creation of two expansion teams among the largely uninterested Gold Coast and Western Sydney populations.
Remember the dollar bills that were flushed down the toilet on the doomed-to-fail signings of Karmichael Hunt and Israel Folau? Those blokes made more dollars off the AFL each year than the entire combined women’s league will.
The NWL has the potential to be immensely more successful than those ventures are ever likely to be.
If the AFL can afford to splash its cash on those kind of moves, surely it can afford to pay its female footballers a living wage and provide appropriate health cover.
After all, where’s the logic in fronting up the big bucks to try and convert more followers in the northern states, only to suddenly become stingy when literally half the population of the country is on the line?
That is just bad business from the AFL. If they don’t come to their senses, the NWL may prove to be nothing more than a missed opportunity.
Maxiruis
Guest
If by "largest one" you are referring to soccer you are way off. The W-League salary cap is $150,000 which most clubs apparently don't reach In terms of player payments, soccer is already losing
I love the pies
Guest
Whether or not an "average country bloke" can beat them is completely irrelevant as Giovanni pointed out. If you are fixated on that you are missing the point.
Maxirius
Guest
Wow. What has this got to do with the article? Where is the "cheer leading" So typical....the AFL does something and some footy hater starts hyperventilating. Apparently there is something wrong with the AFL engaging in PR because someone jaded by its continuous dominance might get offended To get it back on topic, the pay rates being condemned in this article equate to a larger salary cap than the W-League. It is about 35-40% of the entire women's cricket payment pool - including internationals, big bash league, state league. Given this is an 8 week season we are talking about in a competition that has not started, I think you'll find it is a very big thing.
Maxirius
Guest
You make an interesting analogy in your "contrary argument" - eg teachers and lawyers. Teachers salaries are ultimately determined by government who is the "price maker". Ultimately, teacher's salaries are determined by the value society puts on the role and education more generally. To a large extent this value (and teachers salaries particularly) is path dependent - that is, people consider what teachers should be paid in relation to what they are currently paid and public budget constraints will limit the amount this can change by. This, I suspect is the real issue here. Even though a ball hasn't been kicked yet, this negotiation is about setting a baseline from which future deals will be based. Though "incremental revenue" should be a (minor) factor really this more a value judgement about the moral obligation of the AFL to finance pathways to a professional career for the gender that provides 50% of the games spectators and volunteers. While I think this article has done a pretty poor job at analysing this issue, I suspect these starting salaries are too low
Ian G
Guest
I knew I should have hit the 'sarc' button.
Sydneysider
Guest
Great ratings for Sydney. Huge.
Glenn
Guest
Err... Yep, that example brings Penster's argument crashing down like a half kilo of horse crap.
Stevo
Roar Rookie
Correct. the AFL is simply playing catch up because it got caught with its pants down and other sporting codes were well into having women's competitions. Living in Melbourne you'd think with all the media hysteria going on that the AFL were world leaders in bringing on a women's sporting competition. Such is life in the sporting capital of the world lolz.
clipper
Guest
It seems they jumped on my comment when I thought it was pretty obvious that I meant overall, not in the women's game - Netball, Cricket, Rugby etc are well ahead in that regard and supporters of those codes could easily take the AFL to task, not so much supporters of codes who don't even have plans for a women's comp.
clipper
Guest
Thanks for the eloquent reply, care to address the point?
Ian G
Guest
'Have you worked out that men and women don’t play against each other in professional sport?' Errrrr...... horse racing and some equestrian events.
Ian G
Guest
The Matildas were beaten 7-0 by an under-15 boys team (admittedly some players were rested). Make of that what you will.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
I would agree that Netball is the market leader, and that is definitely the benchmark the National Womens League should be aiming for, but I think the NWL will easily surpass all other sports in a relatively short amount of time. Already all 8 womens teams have sponsorship deals sorted out for the new season, and how about these ratings for last night's game: Sat TV #AFLWomensGame #WhittenOval Seven 465k (Mel 387k Ade 78k) 7mate 78k (Syd 17k Bri 21k Per 40k) Total ratings: 523k. I don't think I need to remind you that that's double what the A-League gets in ratings for a whole round of matches on Fox and FTA combined. Little wonder all 8 clubs have tidy sponsorships already signed, sealed and delivered.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
I would have thought we would both agree that Netball is the biggest, followed by cricket. I mentioned Basketball because it's national comp is now long-running, quite possible the longest running national womens competition in any sport.
Post_hoc
Guest
Your failure to include the largest one is rather obvious.
Post_hoc
Guest
I give it 4 years before it folds.
Post_hoc
Guest
Market Leader? The comp hasn't started yet, already cracks are showing. Football is light years ahead in the women sport, and netball is so far ahead of AFL they are about to be lapped
Internal Fixation
Guest
Hi Brad. Most of the clubs have arrangements with the private radiology practices for after-hours imaging. It is "prestigious" as an organization to look after the AFL teams and is used in advertising to GPs, patients etc. I therefore doubt the club pays much at all for the Sunday morning scan as many private scanners are open on Sunday anyway (at least in backwards old Adelaide they are :)
TWLS
Guest
Another ill informed comment on the Womens game. It is obvious the Author has little knowledge of the back ground to the new trial league in early next year. The AFL is heading into new territory with this venture, which may or may not take off. Nobody knows how it will go. This is the reason for the current wages policy - $5000 for 8 weeks for the non marquees.
Shane
Guest
How? They are comparing apples to oranges. How much is the total budget of mens teams, by comparison? Dumb argument for the gullible.