Jump to content

The Importance of the Players vs CSA Pay Dispute


Shway

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Ansem said:

This is fun

 

 

 

 

So I understand that the optics are not great for the timing of the release, however doesn't the CSA have a right to defend their image? Every narrative is that they are the villians and making the CBA proposal public will prevent any possible misinformation from being said during the womens testifying. If the womens team are so upset about the proposed CBA and fully believe that its unequitable, then shouldn't making it public just enhance their arguments? If making it public hurts their case, then surely something is off if the women need to keep the CBA private in order to "win". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bigandy said:
  • Winner – $4 million
  • Runner-up – $2.6 million
  • Third place – $2 million
  • Fourth place – $1.6 million
  • Quarter-finalists – $1.45 million each
  • Round of 16 – $1 million each
  • Group stage – $750,000 each

    Thats the womens prize money. Unless they win the tournament, they will substantially be benefitng from the mens team. This feels like the sharing of prize money favours the women.

    The women were also compensated about 400k more than the men from 2012-2019. 

    The women get equal pay and bonus per game as the men. 

    CSA commits to providing equal resources at high level tournaments. 

    From what I gather, the women are not getting equal, but rather more than the men. Am I missing something or does it feel like the narrative of unequal pay is highly flawed?

One thing's for sure - making publicly known that the CanWNT will be the 2nd best paid team in the world adds another level of expectations and pressure on them. Playing like it will be vital because I saw the backlash of the USWNT getting eliminated in the last Olympics over there by sport commentators - ouch, they weren't really for the equal pay argument

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bigandy said:

So I understand that the optics are not great for the timing of the release, however doesn't the CSA have a right to defend their image? Every narrative is that they are the villians and making the CBA proposal public will prevent any possible misinformation from being said during the womens testifying. If the womens team are so upset about the proposed CBA and fully believe that its unequitable, then shouldn't making it public just enhance their arguments? If making it public hurts their case, then surely something is off if the women need to keep the CBA private in order to "win". 

I guess they didn't anticipate the CSA to finally get some PR advice and flip the script on them. Not surprised about the "transparency aside, the timing sucks" new narrative. The casual fan just sees

  • "2nd highest paid team in the world"
  • Single room occupancy
  • Chartered flights
  • A Chef

I see why they aren't happy with this, they had complete control over the narrative and they just lost it hours before the hearing. Quite the savage move 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ansem said:

One thing's for sure - making publicly known that the CanWNT will be the 2nd best paid team in the world adds another level of expectations and pressure on them. Playing like it will be vital because I saw the backlash of the USWNT getting eliminated in the last Olympics over there by sport commentators - ouch, they weren't really for the equal pay argument

I wonder if that includes the WC money, or do you think any other countries give the women 30-40% of the mens WC payment??  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ansem said:

I guess they didn't anticipate the CSA to finally get some PR advice and flip the script on them. Not surprised about the "transparency aside, the timing sucks" new narrative. The casual fan just sees

  • "2nd highest paid team in the world"
  • Single room occupancy
  • Chartered flights
  • A Chef

I see why they aren't happy with this, they had complete control over the narrative and they just lost it hours before the hearing. Quite the savage move 🤣

So savage! Is it a matter of you can dish it but you cant take it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bigandy said:

So I understand that the optics are not great for the timing of the release, however doesn't the CSA have a right to defend their image? Every narrative is that they are the villians and making the CBA proposal public will prevent any possible misinformation from being said during the womens testifying. If the womens team are so upset about the proposed CBA and fully believe that its unequitable, then shouldn't making it public just enhance their arguments? If making it public hurts their case, then surely something is off if the women need to keep the CBA private in order to "win". 

The players have had no problem airing their issues to the press.  I don't begrudge the CSA for defending itself publicly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bison44 said:

I wonder if that includes the WC money, or do you think any other countries give the women 30-40% of the mens WC payment??  

I don't think it's a common practice, lots of NT are currently fighting for what the women are about to receive. It does include the WC money according to the statement.

Also, the CSA was subsidizing the pay of some of the NWSL players - not a word on that...

Edited by Ansem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CanSoccfan11 said:

The players have had no problem airing their issues to the press.  I don't begrudge the CSA for defending itself publicly.  

It also allow us to make our own opinions since we get the full picture ahead of the hearing. We'll be better equipped to agree and/or disagree with all participants

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, N1ckbr0wn said:

im starting think this isnt going to go over as well for the women then they originally thought it as going to.. They've seemingly been backed into a corner

Nothing wrong to point out what was/is wrong with their treatment by the CSA, but I'm watching this so far and a lot of their complains are being addressed with what the CSA just made public.

The sympathy level is being tempered for sure...

Edited by Ansem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a very first glance, only reading what's been posted...things are quickly getting addressed, cleaned up, equalized, all the good phrases.  I no longer expect actual blood to be shed, and I think going forward all parties will have better knowledge and understanding of each other's hopes and dreams and resources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, scooterlawrence5 said:

FACT: Each team gets $3.8m in WC pooled prize money. Do the math. $3.8m divided by 26. Each rostered player whether they play in the WC or not will receive at least:

$146,154 per player

This number will rise significantly with each round the WNT advances in Australia this summer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

by my math, and the CSA press release, the $7.6m total you used as a starting point requires the women to win the World Cup?  The phrase you wanted was the number will significantly drop with every round the women fail to advance in Australia.

Not that I care about the amounts proposed, nor do I have much opinion on their "goodness".  But if we can't have the correct info here, who will have it? 

If I am wrong, happy to hear about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, eramosat said:

From a very first glance, only reading what's been posted...things are quickly getting addressed, cleaned up, equalized, all the good phrases.  I no longer expect actual blood to be shed, and I think going forward all parties will have better knowledge and understanding of each other's hopes and dreams and resources.

And for the CSB deal, while I don't think Beckie understands it fully - Sinclair clarified that it helps set up CPL which was a prerequisite for hosting the world cup. The problem is there's no plans for a women's league --> valid point although context of the pandemic has been left out

This is my issue with Project 8, at the light of this hearing - they should be working with CSB to make it happen, not go their separate ways

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Ansem said:

I guess they didn't anticipate the CSA to finally get some PR advice and flip the script on them. Not surprised about the "transparency aside, the timing sucks" new narrative. The casual fan just sees

  • "2nd highest paid team in the world"
  • Single room occupancy
  • Chartered flights
  • A Chef

I see why they aren't happy with this, they had complete control over the narrative and they just lost it hours before the hearing. Quite the savage move 🤣

I don’t think they are unhappy the deal, just wondering why the CSA couldn’t have done this months ago when the players asked. Nothing wrong with them pointing out the timing of it. 
You got what you needed now go out and perform to the level of the second highest paid squad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ottawafan said:

I don’t think they are unhappy the deal, just wondering why the CSA couldn’t have done this months ago when the players asked. Nothing wrong with them pointing out the timing of it. 
You got what you needed now go out and perform to the level of the second highest paid squad. 

I think they already agreed to most of the elements of the deal.  Just the CBA parts to be sorted out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ansem said:

And for the CSB deal, while I don't think Beckie understands it fully - Sinclair clarified that it helps set up CPL which was a prerequisite for hosting the world cup. The problem is there's no plans for a women's league --> valid point although context of the pandemic has been left out

This is my issue with Project 8, at the light of this hearing - they should be working with CSB to make it happen, not go their separate ways

whatever the outcome, the actual agreement between the parties...there has been a significant balancing of the public narrative, at least as far as I can see.  which I thought was hugely lacking, right back to page 1 of this thread

which may force them all to continue to work together, with their own interests in hand, as opposed to one or more parties seeing their hand greatly reduced.  which was my worry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...