Why striking the balance between players and game is an ongoing issue for AFLW competition

And that’s part of the problem with the landmark Standard Playing Contract, which was brokered between the AFL and AFL Players Association on Thursday.

The terms and conditions have improved significantly from the AFL’s first offering, where the base wage — and the wage the majority of players will be paid — was a miserly $5000.

While the AFL initially defended its offer, the game’s governing body backflipped after the public and AFLPA took it to task.

The AFLPA wanted equality, particularly in relation to the terms and conditions of the contracts pertaining to health insurance, medical expenses and equipment.

The public wanted to know why the AFL was crying poor.

Despite this pressure, AFL General Manager Game and Market Development Simon Lethlean rebuked the premise the AFL had succumbed to public pressure in negotiating the Standard Playing Contract.

“I’m not sure what the criticism was apart from a lack of understanding as to what we need to invest in female football,” Lethlean said.

“We’ve got to spend a lot of money investing in community footy, facilities, infrastructure for a start-up eight-week comp, which is going to cost us a lot of money. We think it’s a great investment though.”

The Standard Playing Contract announcement coincided with the unveiling of the official women’s uniforms and apparel for the inaugural 2017 competition.

There was certainly an alignment in more ways than one with the announcements.

Lethlean spruiked the future development of the women’s game, while the players gushed over the thought of young girls wearing their female heroes’ numbers.

While that joy is infectious, intrinsic and wholly important to the first ever national women’s competition, it’s paramount the players protect their own interests, too.

Throughout negotiations, the AFLPA kept a constant dialogue with the players, ensuring they were happy with where the contracts were heading. And, ultimately, they helped reach a decision.

Indeed, AFLPA chief executive Paul Marsh indicated an agreement was reached with the AFL, only after the players had voted on the new deal.

“We got it to a point where we thought the deal was something we could recommend to the players,” Marsh said.

“We took it to them for a vote on Monday this week and more than 90 per cent of the players actually voted and more than 90 per cent voted to accept it so we’re happy because our players are happy.”

That the players legitimated the agreement is in itself a good thing. And for the most part, players have been widely consulted for almost every facet of the AFLW.

But with contracts still unsigned and training about to begin, it’s easy to see why so many players were keen to get the ball rolling. They need money and they need to know how much money they’re earning to budget for their day-to-day lives.

No options were put to the players. It was merely a question of whether the players thought the deal was fair. They voted via an online poll.

Carlton marquee player Lauren Arnell dodged questions regarding contracts, instead saying how “happy” she was to just be playing at the unveiling of the AFLW uniforms.

“I think it’s really exciting we found a positive agreement with the AFL and AFLPA and now we’re just really excited to start preseason as a whole group,” Arnell said.

“For myself at Carlton, I can’t wait to start November 23.

“Obviously the best detail I can give you is that there was an overwhelming majority that supported the positive agreement that we’ve reached and that’s where we’re at.”

Melbourne marquee player Daisy Pearce was more forthcoming.

“Coming from where we are, any deal is a good deal in our eyes,” Pearce said.

“But we have to set up a framework that’s fair, and terms and conditions are fair so as this game evolves, the girls that come after us have great opportunities as well.

“It is hard to strike that balance at times.”

From the responses of both players, it’s clear it’s also hard for players to strike the balance between saying what they think and towing the AFL line. Why rock the boat when your dreams are about to be realised?

While it’s likely the base wage will still be too low for some of the public to digest, the formula the AFLPA and AFL have used to calculate the contracts is sound.

The women aren’t full-time athletes and won’t be for the foreseeable future. Many work full-time and earn a proper wage in those occupations. The men, too, were once in their shoes.

Whether the pro rata rate should have been calculated with respect to a senior-listed player’s wage — or at least a third-round selection — as opposed to a rookie, is still up for debate. You’re unlikely to hear a player complain about it though.

The ball has started rolling, but it needs to keep moving for some time.

Originally published as Why timing is an issue with landmark deal