The line often used to explain why our female rugby players aren’t given an equal showing in broadcast deals, merchandise sales, membership deals, sponsorship and general exposure is that “they don’t have the same revenue power that men’s teams do”.
Once upon a time you may have been forgiven for believing this, however all the evidence is telling us exactly the opposite!
Let’s forget for a moment that rugby for men is professional across both formats of XVs and 7s, with only the Women’s Australian 7s team being fully professional and our Wallaroos able to achieve consistent match payments (as opposed to seemingly inconsistent ‘reimbursements’) for the first time in 2018.
Now, let’s consider the appeal of women’s sport to the general public and sponsors.
Chris Dutton in 2018 suggested that the Brumbies Women and in fact the SuperW in its inaugural year is [was] reminiscent of the early 90s Super rugby just prior to the professionalisation of the sport in Australia.
The players are all working outside of rugby, the raw talent shown by young and emerging athletes and by most people’s observation it seemed that the style of play was uncorrupted by the sanitation that Australian rugby has long been criticised for.
Women’s rugby union Pearls
How this piece of pure gold in journalism was not more widely shared or even spoken about is beyond comprehension.
What is even more deplorable is the fact that other sportswriters persist with the status quo, again telling all of us that “women’s sport just doesn’t sell”.
I could write a very long, wordy and colourful manifesto on why some sportswriters persist with the status quo, but that would again be bowing down to the system that has been designed without speaking to the other 50 per cent of society.
I simply cannot be apart of that conversation any longer.
The conversation I do want to be a part of is how Shaun Carney in his article Girl Power: Measuring The Rise Of Women’s Sport In Australia writes that Nielsen, an information, data and measurement company, says that TV viewership and attendance shouldn’t be the only yardstick used to ‘value’ women’s sport.
Instead their research suggests women’s sport has broader engagement, influence and value.
Managing Director of Nielsen was quoted as saying that “1 in 2 (48 per cent) of people say that they would watch more women’s sport if it was accessible on free-to-air TV or free online.”
While we’re quoting numbers the recent crowd attendance for the Women’s State of Origin for Game 1 on Friday 21st June 2019 was 10,515, that’s 2,298 more people that showed up to watch the Roosters take on the Bulldogs in the NRL five days earlier and 2,047 more people than the crowd who dragged their heels to see the Manly Sea Eagles take on the Dragons on the same day.
Yes, I understand there were larger crowds at other NRL games in 2019, but that’s not my point, my point is that the people telling us that “women’s sport doesn’t sell” are lying to themselves and trying to pull the wool over our eyes in the process.
Now, you’re probably thinking to yourself, but that’s the league figures and you’re trying to talk about rugby.
I’ll get to those figures in a moment, but can you remember what Nielsen’s research is telling us?
NSW star Maddie Studdon is swamped by Blues team-mates. (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
Women’s sport has broader engagement, that is, the same people who watched the Women’s State of Origin are more likely to engage with other women’s sports and football codes.
Now for those attendance records for Australian rugby Test matches, 28,842 people were recorded to have attended the Test match between the Wallaroos and the Black Ferns in Sydney in 2018.
Yes, it was prior to a Wallabies Test, but let’s look more closely at these attendees.
The attendees are families, friends, teammates, fans looking for something different and refreshing in the sport they love so dearly, they’re male rugby fans who saw one game of women’s rugby once and thought to themselves “s**t, these chicks can really play”, they’re partners and children of players, they’re junior clubs looking to reinvigorate their players fire for the game.
They are women, they are different!
What Carney also tells us is that Nielsen’s research has also discovered existing brand sponsors are expanding their portfolios or switching completely from men’s sport to women’s.
The research is also revealing that wider societal issues around diversity and equality are also a contributing factors in women’s sport investment decisions, but those brands who choose to invest receive positive sentiments from fans as female athletes are seen as inspirational, considered role models and positive advocates of healthy body image.
Carney goes on to say that for rights holders, brands and the media, women’s sport represents a chance to develop a new commercial proposition and engage fans in a different way.
Note: In a different way! The contribution of women in sport as players and more broadly in society as participants are different and therefore need to be valued for that difference they bring to the sport.
Daniella Di Girolamo
Guest
To all you naysayers - Return for investment can mean many things - it's not just television views or bums at seats on game day. Just look at the AFLW - they made it free to attend and people did - in droves. So much so that the grand final this year at Adelaide Oval was at capacity - far exceeding everyone's (including the league and the oval's) expectations. What has been the result of that? One result has been the massive numbers of women and girls taking up the sport. Womens AFL is going gangbusters, with ridiculous percentages of increased participation from women and girls (their number of female teams jumped 35% last year nationwide - go and have a look if you like https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-02-24/females-lead-big-rise-in-footy-participation-rate) The AFL are smart enough to realise that more people (i.e. women) playing the game means more registration fees in the short term, and ultimately more money across other areas in the long term. I should say that while I appreciate the progress, the Super W pales in comparison to what AFL is doing. Games this year were by and large televised on Foxtel during the middle of the day, in the middle of the week. Because some of the games in the inaugural season were curtain raisers for the blokes, you had to pay to attend - I think the grand final in the first year started at 4:30 on a Friday - who can even get to that? That said - I am incredibly happy to see girls coming through now given opportunities that the ones who came before them didn't have - and it IS translating to more players. Last year in my state we had a 40+% increase of women taking up the game, and the quality of the competition even at club level is really on the rise. For those complaining that women's rugby 'doesnt bring in as much as mens rugby' may I remind you of the large losses suffered by the Supre XV teams over the year - last year the Reds posted a +$1M loss (yes, you can look it up https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/rugby-union/super-rugby-reds-record-1m-loss/news-story/5657c763d3b0f9e60c9e4571585d694e) The point is the potential and availability for growth. Promoting and publicising womens rugby has a far greater potential to increase growth in the game (and revenue) then men's rugby does - not just for the reasons the writer has set out above, but because there are so many girls who we could be convincing to pick up a rugby ball rather than a footy.
Muglair
Roar Rookie
My abject apologies Anaseini, I made an auto leap to where the popular press are urging equal pay for everything. Same thing for me, coaching and watching girls is a real pleasure in several of my sports. My view is that this current generation are really loving being able to play the mainstream sports that were previously male only. They are much more attentive and diligent around understanding and mastering skills and bring a different level of respect for their team mates, opponents and the sport they are playing, from novices to Olympians.
kaiviti
Guest
Women's rugby should be encouraged and supported, not just with words but financially as well. If wealthy men can fund teams surely there are wealthy women who can take a stake in women's rugby.
Melburnian
Roar Pro
I'm not sure I follow the entire argument here but, I agree with the sentiment - Women's Rugby has the potential to grow revenues for RA and World Rugby. Consider RWC1987, hardly any TV coverage, amatuerish staging and amateur players. RWC2019 will be huge and RWC2023 even bigger. Until recently we didn't have a Women's Super Rugby competition and the women's RWC wasn't a thing. But, increased exposure leads to increased participation and increased growth ... a sort of "if you build it they will come" moment. So, well done on your first article and let's see which way the wind blows on the growth of women's sport.
jeznez
Roar Guru
Cheers Anaseini, your concise statement replying to Muglai, is clearer and I fully agree. I've helped coach the women's teams at my club and very much appreciate the value they bring to the game.
Realist271
Guest
Sorry it's all about revenue and thus what ppl choose 2 spend their money on. Is it fair that Lady Gaga earns more money than the 100 top academics in the world combined? Probably not but that's the market. Should the Wallaroos earn more than the Steelers? (Wheelchair rugger)
Anaseini
Guest
Thank you for your positive feedback. I think that perhaps my point wasn’t made clearly which is where the confusion is here in other people’s comments, I’m not suggesting that we pay the superw women, I was actually suggesting that women as player participants had the potential to value add right from grassroots rugby clubs through to our National teams.
PeterK
Roar Guru
just because they work as hard , train as hard even perform as well or better ignoring their sport doesn't bring in revenue.
Ralph
Roar Guru
Congratulations on your first article for the roar, well done you. If professional sports people want to get paid in money, they have to create an entertainment product that generates that money they desire. If they want to be inspirational, healthy and have a wider influence then they will get paid in people who are gratefully inspired, people who get healthy and enjoy a wider influence. The mistake is to think you should get paid in money because either; the world owes you a living or you feel you deserve it. It has been my general experience that the vast majority of people today feel that they 'deserve it'.
Dave
Guest
Lot of emotion into writing this article, lot of our of context facts.....not a lot of cold hard evidence that can’t be argued against. Go back and try again
Muglair
Roar Rookie
I don't if I would describe this as motherhood. Motherhood is "money chases money". At this stage RA will be substantially in the red as far as the establishment of women's rugby and there will be some way to go before it even breaks even. For its investment it will reap all of the non-financial benefits included above and probably more. Some of the reasons why I enjoy women's rugby myself were also listed. The history of well paid athletes is that the promoters risked paying the athletes a lot of money because there was the possibility of a good financial return. They won't pay when it is not financially viable. A bit before my time but the rise and fall of professional sculling would be a good example to study. Clearly the gambling interest faded as did sculling from professional back to amateur. Professional tennis started because a promoter figured he could pay a group of players and all of the travel and accommodation and still turn a profit. Rugby league is further back and appears a lot more noble, attempting to help players avoid not being paid at work because of injury. Looking at it this way there had to be a promoter there in the first place too. Super league was required to boost players salaries in the NRL and a rugby breakaway group to drive the sport into professional. At this point in time there are insufficient numbers of players and they are some way from the conditioning required to play anything like the number of games required to turn a profit. Eventually they will, and the financial returns will be there for RA, or there will be a breakaway group that ensures it happens. The current girls are just trailblazers. Even the generations of cricketers, rugby players and tennis players that drove the success that led to professionalism only got small returns at the end of their careers.
WokeWallabies
Guest
This woke nonsense is killing Australian sport.
PeterK
Roar Guru
Nice motherhood statements. Now where are the cold hard revenue figures when you factor all this in. Does women's rugby bring in as much as mens rugby? In terms of cold hard hard revenue, what sports do exceed or match men?