Rugby league was born in 1895 from the idea that a man should be paid for his work. But in 2021, some of the game’s most prominent supporters aren’t ready to demand the same for its women.
Late last week, Queensland Rugby League (QRL) announced a plan to pay its State of Origin players equally.
The details are simple. Across three separate camps, 30 selected players will receive between $4000 and $15,000 depending on whether they make the final camp and, ultimately, the squad of 18.
In the land of the fair go – of all places! – this news was met with some, unfortunately, likely critics.
“I am a huge supporter of women’s sport in this country, but I disagree with today’s announcement from the QRL,” tweeted 2GB’s Mark Levy. “The women’s team will earn the same as the men from next year, but they don’t bring in the same revenue.”
This, from a bloke who earns his crust talking about great game, is disappointing to say the least. Huge supporter indeed.
Levy’s post attracted a slew of responses similar to his own, each one citing the discrepancy in revenue between the men’s and women’s games.
“It’s disgraceful… a free hand out and an up yours to the 110+ years of players who got the game to professionalism,” wrote one user.
“I knew this would happen,” wrote another. “A few motivated feminists… are driving this. Their professional wages shall be paid by the men’s game.”
It’s the same old argument the ‘Huge Supporters’ of women’s sport like to wheel out every time we take a step towards, you know, actually supporting women in sport.
It begs the question: are the Huge Supporters motivated by fair compensation or misogyny?
When rugby league broke away from the Union, it made no money. Its players were compensated for lost wages and injury, which is essentially all the QRL’s new women’s payment amounts to.
League’s women sacrifice so much for the game that, in truth, this payment covers little ground. Besides, the men who play Origin are already some of this country’s highest paid athletes – it’s not like they need the extra cash.
So what does it matter if the revenue from the men’s game is used to pay the women? Should the night cashier at your local servo be paid less than one who works peak hours? And what about the kid on the fryer at a rural McDonalds? Should they get less than their more profitable city counterparts?
What do the Huge Supporters think they’re protecting? The men? It’s not like Cameron Munster is being asked to reach into his own pocket to foot the bill (unless, of course, we’re talking about the push to pay female athletes with the proceeds of fines paid by men for their sex, drugs and rock’n’roll antics – but that’s another story).
Cameron Munster (Photo by Mark Kolbe/Getty Images)
This issue strikes at the very heart of the game’s identity: the relationship between labour and capital.
If, as we’re told, profit is the reward for investment and risk, and the worker bears responsibility for neither, they must be paid for their labour regardless of revenue. To criticise equal pay for women by invoking the historic push for player payment is a paradoxical misunderstanding of what those men were fighting for in the first place.
They understood the socialst ethos of “to each according to their need”, but Levy and his ilk betray the game’s roots with their rah rah neoliberalism.
Alas, what can we expect from the Huge Supporters when our dandy Prime Minister wears rugby league like blue-collar drag? Leaguies like to wear the game’s working class roots like a badge of honour, but in a country where we seem to have lost perspective of what that actually means, is it any wonder that the Huge Supporters get it so wrong on this issue?
The notion that the women’s payment is an exercise in ‘virtue signalling’ or ‘PC gone mad’ tells us just how far we’ve strayed.
With all that in mind, the women’s game doesn’t exist because feminists want it to. It exists because rugby league’s administrators hope to create a profitable business out of it.
Until they figure out how to do that, the QRL has made the correct decision to cop the short-term loss on the chin and pay the women what they’re owed.
It’s a small step in the right direction, but for the game’s women, it’s the bare minimum.
Brett Allen
Guest
The NRL didn’t throw any money at anybody, every cent the NRL generates belongs to the clubs, not the ARLC. That money the clubs get isn’t a grant the way the ARLC would tell you, it’s the clubs share of THEIR pie. It doesn’t belong to anyone else.
Otsuble
Roar Rookie
Good point Sean. Should we pay the women in pounds shillings and pence, get them to play with leather footballs and wear cotton and woollen jerseys as well?
Sean
Guest
In 1895 the players did need to be compensated. It wasn't until the mid 1990s and the Super League War that true full-time professionalism was available. So what took the men's game 100 years to achieve the women's game wants straight away? The women's game is growing and that's a good thing, but it will take time
Kent Dorfman
Roar Rookie
probably now when you add equal share of the massive TV deals & sponsorships for the top league mens games
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
@ the ROAR editors So it's OK for men to be harassed by women (danielle/Dandragon) with 37 plus abusive posts in 3-4 days but if I did that to a woman contributing to this forum I would be banned instantly? Is it really too hard to have this profile blocked from posting to my account? Also, is there anything being done to monitor accounts that do nothing but harass and abuse other accounts i.e. Dandragon and her secondary account Otsuble calling me a "Bigot" out of the blue for no relevant reason based on the thread this was posted under?
Otsuble
Roar Rookie
Yeah right
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
"we will lose Mahoney (super bad if we do)" Not just super bad, critical to the Eel's chances mate. Without Mahoney the Eels won't be a top 6 side. Wait and see. If the Eels had Mahoney playing that would have beaten the Panthers easily in their semi-final even with a trail of serial che@ting.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
So, you're danielle's secondary profile. Noted.
The Barry
Roar Guru
Fair enough mate… I get what you mean, but I don’t see it so much as box ticking as you’ve got to start somewhere Maybe the amount isn’t right but paying women more so they don’t lose them and can potentially recruit more athletes seems like a pretty reasonable strategy It’s not like with a 15k payment they’ll be full time professional players
Rossi
Roar Rookie
I suppose they'd roll your Bulldogs (and my Saints)! They are good but compared to the men they aren't top tier is what I mean, and if they played their Origin at a different time of year and got the same percentage as the men it'd be 3/10's of bugger all. I don't mind them getting a much higher comparative percentage to the men (say $8k each), but I feel it's unfair that it's a lot harder to get selected for the men's teams and they are raising all the $ and they are to be paid the same. I also understand that more ladies getting interested in League will ultimately help the men's game too, and I've been impressed with seeing girls games on locally, the whole thing just reeks of box ticking.
Dandragon
Roar Rookie
Your persistent primary response to me in identifying my gender bores me. Your persistent reference to Hollywood movies bores me. Your persistent claim that I have no life when you admit to posting here just to get a rise, like a creature living under a bridge, bores me. Your persistent demand that I find mind myself a hobby bores me, given you know nothing at all about me. Unlike you, I don’t use this place as a platform for my autobiography beginning with my birth, with repeated ad detail ad nauseum like any of us cares. Your persistent cries of my obsession with you me bore more than any other. I respond to your comments. That is all and nothing more. That you choose to believe I have any romantic fascination for you is nothing short of your magnificently misguided imagination. I think I make myself pretty clear.
Brainstrust
Roar Rookie
womens state of origin match the one womens match that does get good ratings and earns money. State of Origin makes the NRL a lot of money, three of the four highest rating matches, however it gives the TV money from Origin effectively to the clubs, the payment to the male players is not remotely close to the earnings of State or Origin.State of origin womens match was subsidising the men you could argue Does the payment of 15k for Queensland players make it go the other way, well put it this way rugby league men teams get paid about 500k a match each you would assume womens state of origin rugby league is worth about the same a single NRL match. In effect no the women are still underpaid and only Queensland women are being paid anything. Now this doesn;t take into account how much government money the women effectively bring in. Now in mens rugby league clubs apart from the Broncos they all lose money, the Broncos have the big crowds, the rest are either subsidised by a leagues club pokies, their owners in the case of South Sydney and Melbourne , some even by the NRL. If this whole principle you get paid relative to what you earn then Broncos players should be getting paid the most. The worst is Easts in terms of earnings, however their pokies earn heaps.
Otsuble
Roar Rookie
Bigot
Redcap
Roar Guru
Well said, Dandragon. :thumbup:
Dandragon
Roar Rookie
Anyone who feels the need to repeatedly refer to the Murdochism “woke” is a bigot. If you weren’t a bigot, you wouldn’t be so attracted to such a term that you seemingly expect everyone to accept. It’s not a universally accepted modern term. It is a Murdochism intended to negatively represent anyone who advocates for both change & progress. You passionately believe in environmental policy reform = woke; You advocate for rights for women and/or trans or gay people = woke; You support views which challenge ultra-right Christian values = woke; You make any comment at all that suggests you don’t vote coalition = woke; You rely on ABC news = woke; You think for yourself, rely on societal statistical data, and reject Murdoch press = woke; You resist that “woke” is a valid term = woke; You support that marginalised groups exist in our society and deserve additional support = woke; You sympathise with the views expressed by the author of this article = woke; You think Credlin, Jones, Barnardi and Bolt are miserable excuses for journalists = woke; You think our immigration policy is harsh = woke; You support policies promoting rehabilitation of any sort = woke. The list goes on. It’s not a term in my vocabulary and never will be - it’s just an umbrella Murdochism for everything that challenges conservatism. Hardly mind-blowing that it’s only the Murdoch reliant audience who uses the term…incessantly. Religiously. “Woke” = lazy BS intended to stereotype anyone & everyone with a conscience. You clearly don’t have one.
Eelsalmighty
Roar Rookie
Agreed. I was just having a dig. That said, I was trying to reply to your post on the Papali'i article and it was closed. In a nutshell, agreed. I don't trust all media, nor do I like the fact we have so many players off contract next year, but around half of those '13' off contract are not of any real concern (juniors/marginal top 30). The ones that are (of concern), well they are just that (of concern). I know we couldn't keep them all if we had to match the best price from other clubs for each, and we weren't paying enough to any/most of them to not expect them to 'at least test the market', so we got ourselves into a bad situation, even if it was for reasonable reasons. I'm not happy about losing Papali'i, expect (hope we don't but expect) we will lose Mahoney (super bad if we do), but expect to keep the others.
Glory Bound
Roar Rookie
We go way back mighty. We both took a swing, had a laugh. No harm done mate. No grudges this end. Not with you. Cheers.
The Sporacle
Roar Rookie
“You sad……” :laughing: and I don’t think I’m allowed to finish that quote
JGK
Roar Guru
Terrific first article Dmitiri. Mark Levy (aka Ray Hadley lite) reflexively objects to anything with a tinge of the "progressive" for the sake of it - of course spectacularly missing the bigger picture that the QRL is free to pay whatever it wants and is not being forced to do this by anyone. It's not Levy's money, it's not taxpayer money, it's QRL's money but instead of taking the opportunity to congratulate the QRL for spending its money in a way that is great PR for the sport and could help set up with women's game for years to come, the baser anti-left instincts have taken over. Sadly, Levy is a relatively young man so he will be around for a while longer.
JGK
Roar Guru
Fire up.