Tosh
-
Posts
851 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by Tosh
-
-
5 minutes ago, Dunbar said:
You're not exactly playing 4D chess here are you.
You raised the point once today and it got locked and you raise it again.
Just give it a rest.
I’m not trying to play 4D chess here mate. I’m Just trying to have a debate surrounding the NRLW salary cap rise.
-
19 minutes ago, Dunbar said:
Nah. I'm not playing your games today.
Merry Christmas.
What games are they mate. Commenting on an article?
-
1 minute ago, Barley Mow said:
I think it's a decent increase.
It should be seen as part of a long term, multi-stage process. If the women's game continues to grow and gain larger amounts of TV rights money and sponsorship, I'm sure further increases will deservedly follow.
Exactly, it’s great news all around and don’t see the need to sh#t all over the mens game by certain people.
-
4 minutes ago, Dunbar said:
It's fantastic to see how well the women's game is developing. I am really looking forward to this year's NRLW and the new season of Women's Super League.
Good for you mate.
Anything about the salary cap rise and the criticism surrounding it not being enough compared to the mens game?
-
Is the criticism from certain sections about the increase not being enough compared to the NRL valid?
-
15 minutes ago, Damien said:
They do seem to have been a basket case for years.
Both on and off the field.
It was a ridiculous merger to begin with but that’s for another discussion thread completely.
-
9 minutes ago, Pulga said:
More evidence.
NRLW TV ratings smoke all of those mentioned.
The NRLW salary cap is $884k and yet the minimum wage of a player is $10k?
How big is a NRLW squad?
-
45 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:
Do you seriously think a women's league could be a like for like swap? (At this point in time)
You don't harm your premium product in order boost others. Or at least, you shouldn't
I personally don’t think any womens game will ever replace the man’s game be it the NRL or super league or the premier league etc and that for some is totally unacceptable to say and triggers them no end.
-
32 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:
Are we arguing there’s no money in Australian rugby league then?
Think he’s talking about the British game.
-
50 minutes ago, thebrewxi said:
Merry Christmas, dude
Huh?
-
28 minutes ago, thebrewxi said:
Why do you need a word for it? That just creates a confrontational, them and us landscape where you are already accepting you will never find a ground you agree on in the debate. It's cheap an the lowest form of debate. Remoaner, Brexiteer, boomer, woke. Lazy.
I find if you replace "woke" with "not right wing" the context remains exactly the same.
Because that’s that the whole woke movement is about unless you think that woke and wokeism are dirty words or something to be ashamed of?
Plus I personally don’t think that wokeism is a left-wing movement. I believe it to be more a liberal movement on the whole.
-
26 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:
The brexit campaign?
Oh, you mean a political campaign in a democratic referendum.
which btw the brexiteers won fair and square
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:
So is this really about you only conceiving that men’s rugby league can be a commercially successful entity?
Is that why you are against enhanced pay for female athletes?
Is it a form of protectionism for the men then?
Who said anything about womens RL not being a commercially successful entity?
I’m sure I read in the article that the NRLW had increased its salary cap by 153%. That sounds like a success in my book.
where did I say that I’m against enhanced pay for female athletes?
I support the 153% increase on the NRLW salary cap.
how can protectionism for the mens game be helpful for the mens game and game of RL in general?
Its really a simple concept in that market forces determine an athlete’s salary and not someone’s social agenda.
-
7 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:
There was a big increase in Gridiron participation in the UK in the early 80's due to the TV coverage. It didn't last so we need to be careful and ensure it's not just a fad before we throw the family silver at it.
Exactly.
I was one of those watching on channel 4 supporting the Chicago bears and later the London monarchs before losing interest.
-
Just now, Gerrumonside ref said:
In the real world you speculate to accumulate on whatever is going to bring the greatest return on investment with a calculation on risk.
Do you have a particular preference for whether Rugby League is ultimately played by a man or a woman?
Yes.
my preference for spending my money to attend a RL game or watch on TV or buy a replica jersey is on the man’s game.
As for having a preference on who plays the game, I support all sexes and all ages of all abilities playing all formats of RL.
How about yourself?
-
5 minutes ago, thebrewxi said:
Fair play.
I am definitely an old man and the world is mad. Instantly if you say something it gets blindsided by judgements on your character of politics it seems. I justbthink grenade words like woke are awful for this.
Like I said previously if anyone can provide another word to better describe people who hide behind highly exaggerated perceived social injustices to further their agenda I’m all ears.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, thebrewxi said:
I think the debate is what is the right amount. The trick is sustainable growth. There are obviously lots if informed people that have different views on what this means.
As a comparison look at women's football in England. It barely registered 10 years ago. It had a lot of investment and this summer I watched a major women's final in a field with 3000 other people.
However, as I understand it, the women's top flight competition is still unsustainable and making a loss.
What was the major womens final?
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:
The question is can we afford not to do that?
The question in the real world is where does the money come from?
Do you slash the mens salary cap even further?
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, thebrewxi said:
A realist brexiteer. Now there's an oxymoron.
I'm sure I'll get cancelled for this post in the name of free speech.
You won’t be cancelled or reported by me because I’m all for free speech whether I agree with your views or not.
-
2
-
-
7 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:
I'm not sure it has to match the men's game completely, that might be a tall order. But certainly it might need to prove it's here to stay and generate more business before the game gives it almost parity pay wise.
Exactly.
At the current moment $800k sounds about right to me. Maybe even $1 million at a push.
-
9 minutes ago, Pulga said:
11,000 attended the one Origin game. A record. I don't have crowd figures for the regular season.
Interesting set of questions. Almost like you've already taken a side.
How about "where is the greatest growth in revenue, viewership and participation?".
But let me guess, those things probably don't matter for some reason but some other arbitrary figure does.
So that’s 11k compared to the 64k average for the mens series and yet so think the women deserve not only parity for the match fees but nearly half the salary cap of the mens game even though you don’t have any numbers for their average attendances.
I’ll go out on a limb here and say that they reason why you can’t quote me any average attendance figures for the NRLW is because they aren’t that great?
As for picking a side you are absolutely 100% correct mate. I’ve picked the side of reality in that market forces have determined the salary caps of both the NRL and the NRLW and I’m ok with that.
how about you?
-
5 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:
I'm definitely all of those things
But seriously, I'm just a realist and it's not fair to turn this into some sort of battle of the sexes when it's purely a financial thing. Like asking who gets paid more Daniel Craig or an actress from Coronation Street? He doesn't earn more than her 'cos he's a guy, no more than Sandra Bullock earns more than Ken Barlow. (Apologies if you have no idea what Coronation Street is)
Well I’m a brexiteer and in the eyes of the woke mob I’m by extension all of those I listed
I like you am also a realist and until the womens game in Australia starts getting regular 25k-30k for the games of the round in the NRLW like the NRL does, 70k-80k for state of origin games like the men do , similar TV figures, similar sponsorship deals and similar merchandise sales etc then they expect a bigger salary cap.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Pulga said:
I've quoted the NRL men's game figures too but apparently you don't have a comment on that.
The NRL's TV deal is over 80% of their entire income.
The game here doesn't rely on pie and beer sales.
Maybe you missed the part where I said the NRLW figures are impressive.
The TV figures for super rugby or the A-league or basketball etc are irrelevant because they aren’t paying the salaries of the NRLW.
so I’ll ask my questions again what’s the average attendance of a NRLW game? How many people attended the womens state of origin series? What’s the radio figures like? How many shirts does the NRLW sell? What kind of sponsorship are the NRLW pulling in?
-
4 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:
But they obviously get paid less and rightly so. It's not an issue until the competitions have equal value, which as yet, they obviously don't. So why even mention it?
It would be rather like an article stating that Harry Kane gets paid more than (insert player in Div 4) - blindingly obvious.
Women's RL is in my opinion, excellent and whilst I'm biased, the best version of a traditional men's sport. But until the income generated is equal on both sides, it's a no brainer that women won't get the same financial rewards. Not because they are women though.
No…..no…..no.
you’re obviously a sexist, nazi, trump loving brexiteer for even thinking that way.
we can’t allow market forces to determine womens sport because well that’s not woke is it.
153% NRLW salary cap rise
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
Exactly and more growth will lead to another increase to the salary cap and maybe more teams.