(10-22-2018, 06:13 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:I am 179 cm or about 5 foot 10-11.

I saw Daisy Pearce here at the hospital last week.  She would have been lucky to be standing at my armpit.  Daisy is probably typical of most AFL w sized players, and I think in a one on one contest, I would have been carrying about 30 cm, and probably another 30 kegs on top.

Anyone who thinks Hannah doesn't have a significant advantage is kidding themselves.

She finished up runner up in the VFLW goal kickers award, and was only beaten by Vescio on the last match day of the season, and part of me thinks that her opponents let her kick a ridiculous number of goals to secure the win on the final round of the season.

Some will argue not, but thats not the point.  Think about it.

(10-22-2018, 06:13 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:I am 179 cm or about 5 foot 10-11.

I saw Daisy Pearce here at the hospital last week.  She would have been lucky to be standing at my armpit.  Daisy is probably typical of most AFL w sized players, and I think in a one on one contest, I would have been carrying about 30 cm, and probably another 30 kegs on top.

Anyone who thinks Hannah doesn't have a significant advantage is kidding themselves.

She finished up runner up in the VFLW goal kickers award, and was only beaten by Vescio on the last match day of the season, and part of me thinks that her opponents let her kick a ridiculous number of goals to secure the win on the final round of the season.

Some will argue not, but thats not the point.  Think about it.

(10-22-2018, 06:45 AM)PaulP link Wrote:But is her size the critical issue, or the fact that she used to be a male ? If it's the former, what about Shane Mumford v Marc Murphy ? You can't discriminate in the men's game because someone is too big, or too strong. The fact that Daisy Pearce may be a typical size female AFL footballer and Murphy an atypically small male player is not the issue IMO.

(10-22-2018, 06:45 AM)PaulP link Wrote:But is her size the critical issue, or the fact that she used to be a male ?

(10-22-2018, 07:03 AM)cookie2 link Wrote:So the biggest and strongest people who identify as female will be the more successful in the AFLW?

(10-22-2018, 07:11 AM)Lods link Wrote:It has to be the fact that Hannah used to be a male

(10-22-2018, 07:15 AM)PaulP link Wrote:Maybe. I guess the point I was trying to make is that you can't object to her because she's too big. I would assume that her unfair advantage arises from some remnant, leftover vestiges of masculinity, e.g muscle mass, size etc., that hormone therapy, gender reassignment etc. can't completely remove, and this is the real issue.

What about 2 females, one a bodybuilder, the other a basket baller - both born female, one significantly taller, the other significantly stronger than most female players - should they be refused permission to play AFL/VFLW ?

(10-22-2018, 07:33 AM)kruddler link Wrote:I think its been mentioned earlier in this thread. But if you go through puberty as a male without taking any hormone blockers, you get all the advantages of that. Eg excess testosterone/growth as a result. THEN you transition.

So you 100% get an advantage if you are a 'later' transition by comparison to if you transition before puberty.

(10-22-2018, 07:34 AM)Lods link Wrote:I guess the key is the muscular development.
Compare the basketballer to Hannah and you can see the difference in definition.
A female body wont achieve that naturally.
Once again compare female bodybuilders in "Natural" competitions with those in "Free for all, not tested strictly" and you can see it's not the same.