was to get women into unassailable positions of power within NRL clubs. So far we have had Cronulla and Manly announce women as CEOs and there has been a huge push to get clubs to appoint women as trainers, administrators, lawyers and "counsellors" to ensure the boys get properly indoctrinated.

Strangely, however, there don't seem to be any female players? Come on girls, surely some of the "ten ton Tesses" from the Women's Studies Department could fund their "education" with a contract to play front-row for one of these clubs?

Yes, I'm being facetious, but surely the point of football is that it is a MASCULINE endeavour - archetypally so. By all means lets make sure the players don't get too big for their boots and the groupies that follow them around don't bite off more than they can chew, but if we allow the sport to become a sanitised, soulless creation of corporate Feminism we will have lost what makes the sport great.

It is a game of character - showing one has the guts and the self-discipline to continue to function at a high level while in pain, fear, fatigue and under pressure. To treat one's opponent with respect, especially if one is on the winning side. to value the contributions of one's teammates and to help where one is able.

I suspect that if we were to check the backgrounds of all the boards of Australian companies we'd find that most, if not all, the high flyers played football at a high level.

Is introducing women into the game's administration going to damage all of that? I suspect it will, because the women who will be chosen will not have earnt their role against all comers. They'll be selected as the best WOMAN who applies, not the best PERSON for the role. Any opposition to their policies will be steamrolled as a "backlash" and the game (and the footballers) will be diminished.

What good, apart from some kudos from feminists, is likely to come of it and will it outweigh the bad?

the purpose is to diminish misogyny
through familiarity with female competence and authority,
not to diminish masculinity.

misogyny is not a trait of masculinity,
it's the resort of cowards.

Whistler, I don't think it'll get you very far by treating this so called topic seriously. The dude who started it is obviously totally off the planet. Let's look at what the moron claims as fact,

1 the "reason" for sex scandals is to get women into power

2 all members (who are "high flyers") of all boards of all Australian companies played football at a high level

3 he states that this "claimed" dominance of ex football players on "all" company boards will be damaged, if women are appointed to administrative positions within football clubs

4 football, and also it's players, are "diminished" when women are appointed to administrative rolls

5 the appointment of women as trainers, administrators and lawyers within football clubs happens for the following purpose only, "to ensure the boys get properly indoctrinated".

The antiseptic dude who started the topic is seriously deluded. In fact, he's utterly hilarious because it seems he actually believes his delusions. He probably has some serious "history" regarding women in order to have reached his current state of mind. It's very funny, but in a way also sad, that someone actually believes that stuff as "fact". Sad.

Hey antiseptic dude, maybe you should just stay within your little mens collective, all talking about feminist conspiracies and those nasty, nasty bull dykes that are out to get "you". Yep, you'd feel safer amongst your own kind.

I wish I understood what Whistler was on about half the time Master, nice name.

But I think Antiseptic just reeled you in and will probably throw you back overboard for being undersized.

Where is Col? He thought a women could run an entire country perfectly well so a few footy louts shouldn’t be a problem for your average CEO in skirts.

Antiseptic, don't companies develop a way they do things over time or from the beginning of time? Boys in the NRL; probably needed a forced change as often I bet the best person for the job was in fact a women who didn’t get in because they were a bit entrenched in their view of things?

DoCS needs a forced change to hire more men (I can’t help myself!).

High flyers played NRL; I thought they went to uni or something instead.

"Pain, Fear, Fatigue"... pffft like in child birth?[smile]

My gymnastics coach was a bloke, wasn't even gay. Hockey coach was a dude as well. I do know I wouldn't want to take on one of those Maori girls that plays rugby without my hockey stick in hand.

But where did it make sense that a sex scandel encouraged more women to hang out with the meat heads?

Unfortunately the State education departments have witnessed a great decline in behaviour and education standards since by being feminist dominated. It certainly has created a lack of male role models and caused many fatherless kids to be confused about their identity. League has traditionally been for boof heads anyway so not much will be lost.

Choosing Directors who have the capability
to look outside the square and offer a
diverse point of view takes a very brave Board.
And of course anyone who hasn't been immersed in
the culture of the organisation is more likely
to identify opportunities to do things differently.
They're also going to be looked at with suspicion
at first - by a few of the 'old guard.' But that's
natural and normal. Change is difficult for most
people. Although its one of the constants of life.

The NRL's reputation has taken a beating in recent
times. If it wants to change the way the sport is
perceived by its fans (and their parents), the players,
and the executive, it's got to look beyond
its circle of supporters and friends and appoint
Directors who can change the current perception - and
upgrade (elevate) its reputation.

After all Reputation is a Board responsibility!