Abstract
Commentators are reported to describe male and female players in different ways across a range of sports. The present study examines televised commentary on men's and women's games in the Australian Football League during the inaugural season of the women's professional competition. A two-phase thematic analysis was applied to television commentary on 10 men's and 10 women's Australian Rules football games. Semantic thematic analysis of the broad descriptive categories used by commentators for men's and women's matches indicated greater similarity than had been reported for televised commentary of other sports like tennis, in line with recent reports of progress towards greater gender equality in sports media reporting. Although technical descriptors were used slightly more frequently in describing men's play, there were no major differences in frequency for a number of other descriptive categories (mental, physical, personal or tactical) that have previously been observed as discriminating commentary on men's and women's sport. More in-depth, discursive thematic analysis did indicate some specific patterns of difference: terms, features and details used in commentary resulted in a greater focus on women's athletic weaknesses, and negative aspects of their skills and mentality. Identification of subtle linguistic features that minimise the athleticism and accomplishments of female players suggests that continued examination of media reporting on women's increasing involvement in traditional male sports can contribute important insights for promoting gender equality.
Keywords
As more women participate in what were previously regarded as masculine sports, the nature and form of sports reporting has been seen to change (Biscomb and Matheson, 2019; Lumby et al., 2010; Musto et al., 2017; Petty and Pope, 2019). However, evidence also suggests that gender-stereotyped patterns of reporting persist, albeit in shifting forms (Angelini and Billings, 2010; Bissell and Duke, 2007; Coche and Tuggle, 2016; Kian et al., 2008; Stone and Horne, 2008). Continuing study of such gendered representations is argued to provide insight into the ways in which privilege and power are produced within the sports arena (Bruce, 2016) and in male-dominated settings more broadly (Musto et al., 2017). In this paper, we focus on a key moment in the history of a male-dominated sport in Australia, with the aim of adding to the body of evidence about how gendered discourses are produced in contemporary sports reporting. Our analysis focuses on televised commentary at a much-anticipated and highly scrutinized time in the history of Australian Rules football: the inaugural season of a women's professional league.
Australian Rules football, a high-speed contact sport, considered ‘one of the most physically demanding codes of football that is played anywhere in the world,” is regarded as the premier form of sports entertainment in Australia (Kelly and Hickey, 2006: 3). The game has been played in organised competitions by men in state-based leagues since the 1870s, with only occasional women's matches taking place until the establishment of a state-based, Victorian Women's Football League in 1981. A report commissioned in 2010 by the Australian Football League (AFL) into the state of women’s football recommended the establishment of a national women's league based on the resources and branding of the existing AFL (men’s) clubs. By 2013, the first women's draft was held, and exhibition matches began to be played. Eight AFL clubs were eventually granted licenses to field a women's team, and a national competition – the Australian Football League Women's (AFLW) – was launched in 2017. Public and media interest in this elite-level women's competition was considerable from the outset, with the venue for the inaugural game having to be changed to accommodate the crowd of 24,568 spectators who arrived before an official lockout was called. The first game also attracted a national TV audience of 896,000 that was described as ‘a TV ratings Bonanza’ (AFL, 2017). The broad goal of our investigation was to determine whether similar patterns of reporting to those observed for other sports that have a longer history of high-level female participation were evident in commentators’ descriptions of men's and women's Australian Rules football.
Literature review
Media representation of sport and gender
Across a range of sports, and over a number of years, media commentary about athletes’ actions and characteristics has been shown to draw on gender stereotypes (e.g. Billings et al., 2009; Bissell, 2006; Koivula, 1999; Musto et al., 2017; Ponterotto, 2014; Quayle et al., 2019; Yip, 2016). Although a decline in overtly sexist representation has been observed in recent years (Lumby et al., 2010; MacArthur et al., 2016; Paterson and Matzelle, 2014; Petty and Pope, 2019; Wolter, 2020), male and female athletes continue to be described in different ways. Reviewing the research on media coverage of sportswomen, Bruce (2016: 372) identified ‘a diversity of representations’, that draw on ‘contradictory discourses’. Her conclusion is consistent with earlier findings that media coverage of female athletes tends to be ‘ambivalent’, containing a variety of descriptions and narratives that both conform to, and contradict, gender stereotypes (Hellborg and Hedenborg, 2015; Wensing and Bruce, 2003). Female athletes are now less frequently represented as sexual objects for example, but there is evidence that they continue to be described in terms of conventional roles as wives, girlfriends and mothers (Biscomb and Matheson, 2019; Cooky et al., 2013; Cooky et al., 2015; Jones, 2013). Female athletes are also reported to be more likely to be described in terms of their appearance whereas for male athletes, the descriptive emphasis is on physicality and athletic ability (Kian et al., 2013). More broadly, Musto et al. (2017) proposed the concept of ‘gender-bland sexism’ to describe patterns in media representation that have emerged with women's increasing movement into previously male-dominated sports. They argued that women's sporting achievements are typically described in ways that are lacking in the ‘action-packed, humorous language, lavish compliments, and dominant descriptors routinely found in men's sports commentary’ (Musto et al. 2017: 590). This more subtle form of gendered description in sport is argued to marginalize women, serving to normalize the idea of men's sport as inherently superior, and promoting male hegemony in the sports arena (Bruce, 2016).
A substantial number of studies on media representation of men's and women's sport have focused on the Olympic Games, where female athletes typically receive significantly more exposure than in other mainstream sports media presentations, and traditional gender framings are argued to be less likely to occur (Angelini et al., 2012; Godoy-Pressland, 2014; Kian et al., 2013). Xu et al.’s (2020) content analysis of Chinese TV broadcasting of the 2018 Winter Olympics supported this claim, identifying few differences in descriptions of male and female athletes. Moreover, analysis of the Australian TV broadcast of the 2016 Summer Olympic Games (Xu et al., 2019) also reported differences that were somewhat inconsistent with previously described gender stereotypes. Here, women were more likely to be described as succeeding because of their athletic skill; and men because of their experience. Men's failures were more likely than those of women to be described as due to lack of athletic skill or consonance (i.e. good luck, or things ‘coming together’). Male athletes were also more likely to be described in terms of their personality (as outgoing/extroverted), whereas female Olympic competitors received proportionately more comments about their emotions and background.
Patterns reported in analyses of earlier Olympic competitions are also somewhat inconsistent. MacArthur et al.’s (2016) examination of the American (NBC) 2014 Sochi Winter Olympic broadcast, for example, also reported that women were more likely than men to have their emotions described; however, women's successes were more frequently attributed to factors like experience, concentration and composure. Similar patterns were not reported by Angelini et al. (2012) in their analysis of NBC's broadcast of the 2010 Winter Games, however. Here, men were more likely than women to be portrayed as succeeding because of their experience (in line with Xu et al.’s 2019 finding), whereas courage was more often described as the reason for women's success, and lack of commitment for their failures. Likewise, Jones (2013) reported that women's failures were more often attributed, in online coverage of the 2000 and 2008 Summer Olympic Games by national public broadcasters in Australia, Great Britain, Canada and New Zealand, to lack of commitment and lack of courage, or poor judgment, than were men's failures, which were attributed to lack of athletic skill. In the American (NBC) telecast of the 2000 Games, Billings and Eastman (2002) also reported that male competitors were much more likely than female to have their successes attributed to athletic skill and commitment.
In summary, findings for media reporting on women and men competing in the Olympic Games are somewhat inconsistent, most likely as a result of the range of different sports involved, as well as because of the specific nature of the Olympic competition, in which issues of national identity are typically highlighted, and may take precedence in reporting, over gender. Ravel and Gareau’s (2016) analysis of online coverage of the French women's national football (soccer) team across two major global competitions provides some insight in this regard. They noted a shift from more (2011 World Cup) to less (2012 Olympic Games) gendered reporting. Citing Gee (2009: 53), who argued that contact sports such as rugby, football and boxing are regarded as masculine and as ‘aesthetically unpleasing’ when played by women, they argued that it was only when the women's team succeeded in the World Cup that its coverage as a potential medal-contender in the subsequent Olympics became more football-centred than concerned with the gender/femininity of the players.
Analyses of media reporting on women playing traditionally male sports have also produced somewhat inconsistent findings. For example, a content analysis of American newspaper reporting on the 1999 Women’s World Cup Soccer Championship (Christopherson et al., 2002) reported that female players were described in terms of their athleticism, but also in terms of their femininity and heterosexual appeal. Likewise, a more recent analysis by Pfister (2015) of German newspaper coverage of the 2011 FIFA Women's World Cup demonstrated evidence of feminizing and sexualising descriptive frames. By contrast, a content analysis of British print media representations of England's performance at the 2009 Women's Cricket World Cup (Biscomb and Griggs, 2013) showed no particular emphasis on female stereotypes or on players’ heterosexuality, nor was there evidence of infantilisation of female players, or a focus on non-sports-related aspects of their lives. Comparisons with male cricket performance were common, however. This aspect was also noted by Black and Fielding-Lloyd (2019) who examined English press coverage of the English team in the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup. They argued that the women's team, and the game, were repeatedly represented in terms of a male standard in ways that served to position men's football as superior. Caple et al.’s (2011) study of the TV broadcast of the Australian national soccer team in the 2010 Women's Asian Cup concluded somewhat differently, in line with Briscomb and Griggs’ (2013) findings for cricket, that gender stereotyping in descriptions of the women's team was rare.
Media commentary has also been examined in sports for which there is a long history of participation by women at both community and professional levels. Initial studies of Professional Golf Association (PGA) and Ladies PGA telecasts, for example, reported marked differences in the way male and female golfers were portrayed. In a content analysis of 2003 televised tournaments, Billings et al. (2005) reported that female golfers were more likely to be portrayed as succeeding because of their strength, and as failing because they lacked athletic ability. By contrast, male golfers received more comments about their concentration and commitment in explanations for both their success and failure. Male golfers were also more likely to be described in terms of their personality (i.e. as extroverted or introverted), as well as receiving more comments about their physical appearance. In a subsequent content analysis of American (CBS) TV coverage of Annika Sorenstam's performance in a men's 2003 PGA event in which she had been invited to play (Billings et al., 2006), findings were more consistent with previous research that showed stereotyped depictions. Sorenstam was described as succeeding for reasons other than her athletic skills; she received more comments about her composure and courage, while male professionals received more comments about their touch or finesse, particularly in descriptions of their failures. A related study by Bowes and Kitching (2020), involving thematic analysis of British and Irish print media representations of five female professional golfers competing in a men's 2018 tour event, showed a different pattern of results, however. Here, female golfers were typically represented as legitimate, skilful, successful athletes. This finding for a mixed-sex competition is in line with recent studies of British and Australian media reporting of female athletes (Biscomb and Matheson, 2019; Lumby et al., 2010) and for English print media coverage of the national women's soccer team (Petty and Pope, 2019), that have all noted a shift away from reporting on the appearance of female athletes to a concern with skill and performance.
Studies focussing on tennis, another individual sport that has a long history of women's involvement, have, however, produced less support for the notion of change in media representations. Vincent’s (2004) content analysis of British newspaper coverage of players in the 2000 Wimbledon Champion-ships found evidence of trivialization and sexual innuendo in descriptions of female players, in comparison to an emphasis on athleticism for male players. Extending this study of British newspaper coverage, Crossman et al. (2007) compared how selected broadsheet newspapers from the UK, the US and Canada covered female and male tennis players in the 2004 Wimbledon Championships. Male players were found to receive significantly more total coverage than female players. Ponterotto’s (2014) discourse analysis of English and Italian press reporting of tennis player, Maria Sharapova found similar patterns to Vincent (2004), describing evidence of consistent trivialising and eroticising descriptive tropes. Yip’s (2016) content analysis of online media representations of the 2015 Australian Open tennis tournament showed how female players were portrayed more negatively than male, with descriptions focusing on women's athletic weaknesses, negative aspects of their skills, and features such as appearance and personal relationships. Male players, by comparison, were more often described in ways that focused on positive features of their athleticism, power and skill.
A study of televised commentary during the finals of the 2015 Australian Open tournament (Quayle, et al., 2019) likewise reported that commentary on men's play typically involved reference to players’ physical characteristics, and also routinely drew on metaphors of combat and mythical contest. An absence of talk about male tennis players’ interpersonal relationships and off-court interests contrasted with commentary for women that involved frequent reference to off-court relationships and interests. Description of women's play that focused on aesthetic qualities (e.g. ‘lovely’, ‘beautiful’) was also noted, as was an absence of talk about female players’ bodies or physicality. Quayle et al. argued that the omission or repression of specific talk by commentators in relation to female players’ bodies or physical characteristics, in combination with a focus on aesthetic descriptions, could be explained by invoking Billig’s (1998) concept of ‘stereotyping by omission’. In discursive terms, gender difference can be seen as being produced and reinforced, in commentary, as much by what is not said about female athletes in comparison to male athletes (and vice-versa). In the words of Quayle et al. (2019: 6): ‘If announcers consistently speak about male athletes’ physical strength and athletic ability, and then omit these dimensions when speaking about women, audiences can infer that women do not possess these traits, or that they are not important to women's sports’.
In this paper, we draw on the qualitative approach to coding and thematic analysis of televised commentary used by Quayle et al. (2019) in order to catalogue forms of representation applied to men's and women's Australian Rules football. Unlike football, tennis is a sport in which men and women compete in the same tournaments, and for which there have been well-publicised measures to ensure equality at the highest levels (similar prize money and broadcast media time). Despite such efforts, according to Quayle et al. (2019: 3), ‘discourse surrounding professional tennis remains substantially gendered’. The question of whether similar gendered patterns of media reporting would be seen in relation to the team sport of Australian Rules football – that, traditionally, has been played only by men – was the point of departure for the present comparison of televised commentary in men's and women's matches. Related questions concerned the extent to which commentary about men's and women's football showed similarity to patterns identified for other traditionally masculine team sports, as well as to media reporting of male and female Olympic competitors.
Australian Rules football has a history that is deeply connected to ideals of hegemonic masculinity in Australia. The physical aggression and toughness that are the hallmarks of the code are argued to be culturally sedimented and normalized as key aspects of masculine self-identity (Burgess et al., 2003; Krane, 2001; Messner, 1988). A range of negative social consequences associated with the reproduction of these hegemonic norms in Australian Rules football have been investigated: alcohol consumption (Hart, 2016; Nicholson et al., 2014), domestic and sexual violence (Corboz et al., 2016; Kearney, 2012), mental and physical strain relating to an idealised form of masculine ‘mental toughness’ (Coulter et al., 2016), and the association of shame with failure to comply with norms of football masculinity (Waitt and Clifton, 2015). Furthermore, the predominance of retired male players in commentator positions, and a television focus on broadcasting men's athletic competitions, have been argued to result in the cyclical reinforcing of a masculine subculture that disenfranchises women (Litchfield and Redhead, 2015). The emergence of female players at professional level in a previously male-dominated sport like Australian Rules football thus presents an important opportunity for further investigation.
The present study
Television commentary on men's and women's Australian Rules football matches played during the 2017 season (the inaugural season of the women's game in the professional Australian Football League) was examined along similar semantic and discursive dimensions to those identified by Quayle et al. (2019). The men's and women's games played in the AFL that were under analysis were essentially the same in terms of rules and general play, with only a few minor differences: women used a slightly smaller ball; played shorter quarters (15 min instead of 20), and had 16 players on the field instead of 18.
Method
Sample
The data for this study consisted of Fox Sports televised coverage of the first 10 matches of the 2017 AFL seasons for men (1280 min) and women (726 min). Data were transcribed using notation that excluded idiosyncratic elements of speech (e.g. stutters, pauses and involuntary vocalizations) so as to maintain a focus on descriptive statements (Azevedo et al., 2017). In the extracts presented in the following analysis, commentators are distinguished as male (M) or female (F), and talk by different commentators (C) in a single extract is identified by number: C1(M), C2(M) and so on. The extracts are labelled according to the men's (AFLM) or women's (AFLW) league, and the round and game number (e.g. Round 1, Game 1 = R1G1). Two distinct sets of commentators were involved in the men's and women's telecasts, and commentary team members differed across individual matches within the AFL and AFLW broadcasts, being drawn from different pools of both male and female sports broadcasters and journalists, as well as current (male and female) or past players (male). Male commentators were in the majority and accounted for the majority of commentary. Commentary teams for AFLW telecasts contained more women than those for AFL telecasts, where one prominent current female player was involved as a field commentator.
Analysis
Semantic thematic analysis was first used to identify broad descriptive patterns across the dataset, and discursive thematic analysis was subsequently applied to explore the function of recurring discursive elements and practices in the televised commentary. The form of semantic thematic analysis used here involved a ‘code book approach’ (Braun and Clarke, 2006: 84), and Quayle et al. (2019) code book, detailing how semantic content descriptions of athletes’ performance should be categorized, was used.
This semantic level of coding involves reporting on explicitly-stated ideas and concepts that recur in the dataset with the aim of providing a descriptive overview of the key features of the semantic content.
Quayle et al. (2019) five descriptive dimensions of player performance were initially used for the purposes of semantic coding:
Personal (individual attributes, interests and relationships, e.g. ‘That's terrific respect, isn't it’) Technical (skill-related aspects of players or play, e.g. ‘Probably one of the best vertical leaps in the competition’) Tactical (players’ tactical ability, e.g. ‘Good defensive set up by the West Coast players’) Physical (physical aspects of players or play, e.g. ‘Those bigger-bodied mid-fielders’) Mental (emotional or mental component of performance, e.g. ‘He's frustrated there’) During analysis, which involves ‘a recursive, reflexive process’ of moving backwards and forwards through data familiarization, coding, and subsequent theme development (Braun et al., 2016: 7), it was found useful to include two additional categories to cover the types of description that occurred regularly in broadcast commentary: Match (pace, atmosphere or overall style of play, e.g. ‘What a high-quality start to this contest’) Player history (referencing demographics, a previous game, or team affiliation, e.g. ‘Wearing the helmet after some concussion issues last year’).
Discursive thematic analysis was subsequently used to examine recurring thematic patterns of gender representation in the data, with the aim of exploring the broader meanings, assumptions and conceptualisations that shaped or informed the semantic content (Braun and Clarke, 2006: 84). This discursive analysis involved organizing coded data into candidate themes, then reviewing and revising those candidate themes in order to develop a rich description that focused on identifying higher-level patterns of gender representation in the dataset. Such discursive analysis enables consideration of the implications and social consequences of particular representations and descriptive practices.
Procedure
Before commencing the semantic thematic analysis, a sample of the first 10 min of commentary from the first broadcast games of both AFL and AFLW seasons was transcribed in order to build a draft code ‘rulebook’. Two coders coded each 10 min segment for the purpose of establishing inter-rater reliability. Where differences in coding occurred, the researchers discussed each case, and adjusted the written coding rules for clarity, to ensure that final coding was consistent across coders. The process involved instances being repeatedly coded by the two researchers following written changes to the code book until agreement was reached by consistent application of the coding rules. Once such agreement had been achieved for each of the coding categories, coding of the full dataset commenced. Discursive thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was then used to examine specific features of the broad themes that were identified in the semantic analysis.
Results
Semantic thematic analysis
In total, there were 6194 statements coded in the dataset that described male players (whose games were 5-min-per-quarter longer than those of women), and 4611 that described female players. Statements ranged from one-word comments like ‘beautiful’ or ‘great’, to adverbial and adjectival phrases such as ‘good kicking’ or ‘clean hands’, to full sentence formulations, and in each case, one code was assigned. Instances in which individual players were separately referred to, as in ‘Grant goes in hard, Perkins as well’, were coded as two separate descriptor statements.
The most common descriptors for both male and female players involved ‘technical’ aspects of performance (46% male, 37% female), as shown in Table 1. This pattern of technical descriptions of performance being the most common in Australian Rules football commentary mirrored that reported by Quayle et al. (2019) who developed the codebook to describe commentary on men's and women's games in the individual sport of tennis. However, in other respects, the distribution of descriptor types in televised commentary for the team sport of Australian Rules did not coincide with that reported for male and female tennis players. Quayle et al. identified ‘physical’ and ‘personal’ descriptors as key to the production of gendered commentary in tennis; with female players receiving more ‘personal’ descriptions concerning their individual attributes, interests and relationships, and male players being described more often in terms of ‘physical’ characteristics. Quayle et al. drew particular attention to the relative absence of ‘body’, or ‘physical’, descriptors for female players in the tennis commentary they examined. In this regard, it should be noted that Australian Rules football is a full-contact sport and its inherently physical nature is likely to have resulted in frequent use of ‘physical’ descriptors across both men's and women's games. Indeed, in the Australian Rules football commentary that we sampled, there appeared to be greater similarity between the commentators’ talk about the men's and women's games than was reported by Quayle et al. for tennis. The greatest difference that emerged in the Australian Rules commentary descriptors concerned those in the ‘technical’ category – where male players received more than female (46% vs. 37%). For all other categories of descriptors, only small or no differences between commentary in men's and women's games was observed (Table 1).
Descriptors for male and female players in televised commentary of Australian Rules football.
Discursive thematic analysis
The next stage of analysis involved more detailed consideration of the types of description that were used by commentators in each of the broad semantic categories applied by Quayle et al. (2019). Particular linguistic choices, metaphors and idioms were examined, with the aim of exploring the discursive nature and function of recurring patterns of representation of male and female Australian Rules players. This was achieved in the following way. Consistent with Quayle et al. (2019: 8) analytic approach, the semantic categories that were coded for initially were inductively condensed into ‘maximally descriptive themes’. For commentary on Australian Rules football, three such themes were identified: Performance (involving physical and technical features), Mentality (mental and tactical features), and Personal (player personal/dispositional features and relationships).
Performance
Physical aspects of performance. Although physical descriptions were used with similar frequency in commentary on both men's and women's games, differences could be seen in the way the physical descriptions were routinely worked up. In commentary on men's games, masculine-denoting terms like ‘power’, ‘force’, ‘strong’ were frequently used. The bodily movements of male players were routinely described using language that emphasized physicality (e.g. ‘muscled his way in there’, ‘crushed in a tackle’, ‘he worked back and then led hard’). Commentary also regularly involved description of male players’ physical attributes in specific detail (e.g. ‘big, strong, powerful quads’), with particular emphasis on male players’ bodily size (‘big’, ‘huge’, ‘massive’). Extract 1, below, provides an illustration of this typical style of bodily description: AFLM R1G8 He's a big man, Jack Zeibel, 6’2”. A big boy. He's got a good leg, we know that.
In contrast, physical descriptions of female players tended to be non-specific, and only referred indirectly to physicality. For example, although female players were described as being ‘tough’ or ‘athletic’, commentators rarely described women's body parts, as was common in descriptions of male players (e.g. ‘he's so strong in the leg’). Similarly, female players’ height and weight were rarely referred to directly, whereas specific measurements were regularly discussed in relation to male players, as the following examples illustrate: AFLM R1G1 Looks like he's put on a little bit of weight. I think since he first arrived at the club, he's put about 8 or 9 kilos on. AFLM R1G3 Most of these midfielders are 6’3”, 6’4”, so they should be key position players anyway. AFLM R1G1 He's listed at 191 but claims to be 193. He's taller than he looks to the untrained eye, or to me anyway.
When female players’ bodies were mentioned, broad descriptors were used that did not specify detail; for example, body size would be described as ‘small’ or ‘little’. Often, smaller female body size was discussed as a technical disadvantage that was contrasted to some positive internal attribute, such as ‘toughness’ or ‘great vision’ (‘She's small but tough as nails’). These differences in descriptions of male and female players’ bodies mirrored those reported by Quayle et al. (2019) for tennis. Other observed differences in the use of physical descriptors in Australian Rules football commentary involved metaphors of heightened physicality in relation to male players’ bodies. The extracts below provide examples of these forms of description of men's play: AFLM R1G7 A mountain of a man. AFLM R1G9 He is a bullocking, rampaging bull at the moment.
Technical aspects of performance. In describing women's Australian Rules football, commentators frequently made note of the technical disadvantages and mistakes made by players, typically explaining them in terms of the inexperience of the female players: AFLW R2G3 The feeling was that their relatively inexperienced forward line just kept getting sucked up the ground against the Lions. AFLW R2G2 These Giants girls, they’ve come off the soccer pitch, they’ve come off school grounds, they’ve come out of the Under 18 National Championships and they’ve never played in such a competition like this before.
By comparison, commentary on men's games involved more frequent praise of male players for their exceptional skills. As was the case for physical descriptions, commentary on the technical aspects of the men's game also often involved hyperbole, for example: ‘one of the great people in football’ or ‘one of the absolute best’. The extracts below provide further illustrations of this pattern: AFLM R1G1 The best one-on-one player in the comp. You wouldn't want to be playing on him right now. AFLM R1G1 He's a player full of confidence. You get to a point in your career where you know you’re one of the best He knows. He's elite. AFLM R1G1 Clearly a talented footballer; does some really special things. AFLM R1G6 He's a talent, he's a super talent, that kid. AFLM R1G1 He's a natural forward. He just finds gaps; he finds them spaces inside forward fifty.
Where instances of poor execution by male players were described, these were typically framed as understandable exceptions from otherwise skillful practitioners, or they were framed as resulting from the superior skill level of the opposition: AFLM R1G2 It was a poor kick. There's going to be plenty of mistakes early on. You’re just feeling your way into the game a bit. The legs are feeling very heavy right now. AFLM R3G1 Poor play from Fremantle. They weren't ready for the combination of these two men.
The use of hyperbole in describing the game itself (e.g. as ‘remarkable’, ‘amazing’, or ‘spectacular’) was common in commentary on both the men's and women's games, as were metaphors associated with battle or combat (e.g. ‘battle’, ‘spear’, ‘wrestle’, ‘hunt’). This pattern for Australian Rules football commentary does not coincide with Quayle et al.'s findings for tennis – where commentary on female players omitted descriptions of physicality or aggression, and instead drew on aesthetic evaluations involving notions of ‘beauty’ and ‘grace’. Indeed, in commentary on the women's game, and in descriptions of female footballers, language that referenced strength and aggression was common, as illustrated by the extracts below: AFLW R1G3 We expected a tight, tough, ferocious contest, and that's what we’ve got. AFLW R1G2 She is in everything, fighting and scrapping and wrestling at ground level.
Furthermore, in the commentary on Australian Rules football, instances involving traditionally feminine, aesthetic descriptions (Quayle et al., 2019) such as ‘beautiful’, ‘lovely’, ‘dainty’, were observed to be used in describing the play of men: AFLM R1G1 Rowe moving with a lovely first touch. AFLM R1G7 Nice dainty kick around the corner from Turner.
Mentality. Although the semantic thematic analysis demonstrated that ‘mental’ descriptors occurred with similar frequency in commentary about male and female players, there was a noticeable difference in the way such references to mentality were routinely worked up. In commentary on the men's game, the pattern involved orientation to positive mental and emotional experiences: AFLM R1G1 I reckon Jack Riewoldt, and Dusty and a few others in that forward line will enjoy his delivery over the years. AFLM R1G2 He sees grass in front of it and thinks I can take that. That is confidence in your leg speed, confidence in your ability. AFLM R1G7 He doesn't lead too early, he's patient.
Commentary on women's matches, however, typically referenced mental and emotional descriptors to describe negative events and outcomes, as the various examples below illustrate: AFLW R2G1 They’ll be disappointed they didn't hit that easy target inside forward fifty. AFLW R3G2 Actually, I think they might be, I think they might be a little disappointed by that. When Carlton put the pressure on, yes, they hung on and hung on, but that, their style of play was, was affected by the pressure from Carlton, so. They’ll be, I reckon they’ll be disappointed with that. AFLW R2G1 It just takes away a little bit of thinking about the game so much, you’ve got other things you need to be worrying about. AFLW R2G1 Do you think the fifties are being given out because the girls aren't switched on or they’re not aware of the rules? What, why have we seen so many tonight?
It must be noted that such a pattern may reflect the fact that female players, being relatively new to competing in a professional-level league, may have exhibited higher frequencies of technical and tactical errors, such as missing goals or losing possession of the ball, and negative mental/emotional descriptions may have oriented to their displayed or inferred reactions to such instances.
Personal
Players’ dispositions. For both women's and men's games, commentators frequently described specific instances of play by referring to players’ personalities. The following examples demonstrate how players’ dispositions were characterized through their actions: AFLW R1G6 Talk about brave and gutsy. AFLM R1G7 The players have been smart enough to lift their eyes, look at the best option.
Both male and female players’ actions were primarily described in terms of positive personal trait descriptors (e.g. ‘courageous’, ‘brave’, ‘smart’, ‘unselfish’). However, male players were more frequently positioned as being ‘naturally’ skilled or ‘talented’: AFLM R1G1 Clearly a talented footballer; does some really special things. AFLM R1G6 He's a talent, he's a super talent, that kid. AFLM R1G1 He's a natural forward. He just finds gaps; he finds them spaces inside forward fifty.
In comparison, female players were more frequently positioned as lacking ‘discipline’: AFLW R2G1 And the Dogs are starting to give away undisciplined free kicks They’re behind the play. An Adelaide player down. They must be getting under their skin because the Dogs looked so structured and disciplined last week and not so much tonight. AFLW R2G1 Do you think the fifties are being given out because the girls aren't switched on or they’re not aware of the rules? What, why have we seen so many tonight? I think a couple, well, a couple have been undisciplined. I think that the ones from Adelaide in this quarter were undisciplined. That one there was just not responding to the uh umpire's direction. AFLW R2G1 Is discipline a bit of an issue at the moment?
Players’ relationships. Talk about players’ personal relationships occurred infrequently in commentary on men's and women's games. When relationships were occasionally mentioned in relation to female players, typically, commentators described their general popularity or likeability, as in the examples below: AFLW R2G1 Very popular young lady. Everyone loves her whether they’re teammates or opponents. AFLW R2G1 Geez, these girls love you. Yeah, I think we all love each other.
Female players’ relationships with family members or partners were also occasionally mentioned. An illustrative example is shown in the extract below: AFLW R1G4 Grew up in Ireland, came out here for holiday, met her husband and she's been here for 9 years and fell in love with AFL.
Occasional commentary that involved orientation to the personal relationships of male players more often included reference to physical and technical aspects of performance, as illustrated below: AFLM R1G9 Obviously trying to do the right thing for his teammates. AFLM R1G1 That's what Richmond love about Nankervis, he takes marks around the ground. AFLM R1G1 They’re flatmates. He and Castagna have played table tennis in the house 210 times. It's 105 all.
Discussion and conclusion
The inaugural season of the Australian Football League's Women's competition presented an important opportunity to compare how men's and women's versions of this traditionally masculine team sport were represented in television commentary. Our analysis shows that commentary on professional Australian Rules football did not always display the same patterns of difference for men's and women's games as had been observed for other sports. Unlike recent studies of commentary on individual sports like tennis (Quayle et al., 2019; Yip, 2016), there appeared to be greater similarity between commentators’ talk about the men's and women's Australian Rules football games. Our findings thus aligned with those for media coverage of other traditionally ‘male’ sports like women's golf, football (soccer) and cricket in the UK (Bowes and Kitching, 2020; Petty and Pope, 2019; Biscomb and Griggs, 2013), and were also consistent with broader analyses of Australian print and broadcast sports reporting that have shown an absence of gender stereotyping (Caple et al., 2011; Lumby et al., 2010; Paterson and Matzelle, 2014).
The semantic component of our analysis indicated that the types of topics spoken about, as well as the proportion of game commentary dedicated to describing players or play in terms of those topics, were similar across commentary on men's and women's games. This was unexpected given that previous research has demonstrated a tendency for more frequent description of male athletes in terms of detailed comments about their physical characteristics, and of female athletes in terms of personal characteristics and appearance (Kian et al., 2013; Quayle et al., 2019). The only noticeable difference in the sematic analysis of commentary about Australian Rules football concerned the topic of technical aspects of play – with men's play being described more often in these terms than women's (46% vs. 37%).
The discursive thematic component of our analysis, involving more detailed consideration of the types of description used by commentators in each of the broad semantic category topics, did demonstrate some similar patterns of gendered description to what has been reported for other sports. We found that in commentary on both men's and women's Australian Rules football, although physical descriptions were used with similar frequency, there were differences in the way in which such descriptions were formulated. For the men's games, masculine-denoting terms (e.g. ‘power’, ‘force’, ‘strong’) were more frequent, and the bodily movements of male players were described with language that emphasized physicality (e.g. ‘muscled’, ‘crushed’, ‘worked …hard’). Commentary also regularly involved description of male players’ bodies and physical attributes in specific detail (e.g. ‘big, strong, powerful quads’, ‘big, imposing body’), and metaphors of heightened physicality were routinely used, with particular emphasis on male players’ bodily size (‘mountain of a man’, ‘rampaging bull’). By contrast, physical descriptions of female players tended to be non-specific (e.g. ‘athletic’), and commentators rarely described women's body parts, height or weight. These patterns of commentary on physical performance were consistent with Quayle et al.’s (2019) findings for tennis commentary. They speculated that the relative scarcity of direct descriptions of female players’ body parts worked to bolster hetero-normative gender categories by dissociating notions of ‘exceptional physicality, strength, speed, aggression’ from depictions of ‘ordinary femininity’ (p. 9).
Quayle et al. also noted that commentators often referred to men's tennis matches using ‘metaphoric hyperbole’. In our Australian Rules commentary data, the use of hyperbole to describe the game itself (e.g. as ‘remarkable’, ‘amazing’, or ‘spectacular’) was common for both the men's and women's games, as were metaphors associated with battle or combat (e.g. ‘battle’, ‘spear’, ‘wrestle’, ‘hunt’). This pattern for Australian Rules football commentary is different from Quayle et al.'s findings for tennis – where commentary on female players omitted descriptions of physicality or aggression, and instead drew on aesthetic evaluations involving notions of ‘beauty’ and ‘grace’. As tennis is traditionally seen as a feminine-appropriate sport that women have been playing professionally for decades, this difference is perhaps not surprising. It is of interest, however, that in the Australian Rules’ commentary, instances involving aesthetic descriptions such as ‘beautiful’, ‘lovely’, ‘dainty’, were observed in describing the play of men rather than women, unlike in tennis. This aesthetic orientation in some descriptions of men's Australian Rules warrants further investigation in relation to claims that hegemonic masculinity privileges, and is primarily produced through ‘heroic’ depictions grounded in notions of aggression, strength and power (Wolter, 2020). It may be that the specific context of the commentary analysed here – describing the inaugural games of a women's professional league in a sport that has previously been the preserve of men – meant that aesthetic orientations to women's skill and finesse, as players, were less likely to occur. The functions of such aesthetic descriptions in sports commentary, and possible theoretical implications, await further investigation.
Another broad similarity in commentary on both women's and men's games involved personal descriptors, for example, the use of positive personal traits to describe players (e.g. ‘courageous’, ‘brave’, ‘smart’, ‘unselfish’). However, male players were more frequently positioned as being ‘naturally’ skilled or ‘talented’ than were female players. Talk about players’ personal relationships occurred infrequently in commentary on Australian Rules games. When players’ personal relationships were occasionally mentioned, commentators described female players’ general popularity or likeability, or made mention of their family members or partners. Occasional commentary about the personal relationships of male players, by contrast, tended to focus on team-based aspects of performance (e.g. ‘trying to do the right thing for his teammates’).
In short, although commentary constructed Australian Rules football as a physically intense and battle-like endeavour for both men and women, commentators did create a somewhat more detailed, embellished and amplified spectacle of physicality for the men's games. The relatively infrequent talk about specific bodily characteristics, and lack of metaphors and descriptors that emphasized and heightened physicality in commentary on women's games, was consistent with the type of ‘gender-bland sexism’ that Musto et al. (2017) proposed to describe patterns in media representation that have emerged with women's increasing movement into male-dominated sports. Likewise, commentary specifically on the technical aspects of men's Australian Rules typically involved descriptions that praised their skill, again often involving hyperbole (e.g. ‘one of the absolute best’, ‘a super talent’). This greater emphasis, in descriptions, on men's athletic skill compared to women's mirrors that found by Billings and Eastman (2002) for coverage of the 2000 Olympic Games. In Australian Rules football commentary descriptions of the technical aspects of women's play typically focused on players’ mistakes, rather than their skillful execution. A similar pattern was evident in the use of mental descriptors in the commentary – for the men's game, there was an orientation to positive mental and emotional experiences (e.g. enjoyment, patience, confidence), whereas commentary on women's matches more typically used mental and emotional descriptors in relation to negative events and outcomes (disappointment, worry, lack of discipline).
These patterns of difference observed for men's and women's Australian Rules commentary may have reflected the fact that female players were relatively new to high-level competition and thus exhibited lower skill levels. The negative technical and mental/emotional descriptions may have oriented to more frequent occurrence of technical and tactical errors, and to female players’ displayed or inferred reactions to these, and this is an additional empirical question that future researchers may wish to address. However, the descriptive patterns observed here for Australian Rules football are consistent with those reported by Yip (2016) for online media representations of the 2015 Australian Open tennis tournament, where female players were portrayed more negatively than male, with descriptions focusing on women's athletic weaknesses, and negative aspects of their skills. Our findings in this regard are also consistent with the conclusion of Quayle et al. (2019) who argued that the omission of specific talk by commentators involved ‘stereotyping by omission’ (Billig, 1998), where gender difference can be seen as produced and reinforced as much by what is not said about female athletes in comparison to male athletes (and vice-versa). In commentary on Australian Rules, emphasis on male players’ physical strength and athletic ability, and the omission or minimization of these descriptive dimensions in reporting on the women's game, could arguably lead audiences to ‘infer that women do not possess these traits, or that they are not important to women's sports’. (Quayle et al., 2019: 6).
The question as to whether the gender of broadcasters may influence the style of commentary is not one that can be addressed by the type of qualitative analysis undertaken here, where commentary teams also involved more male announcers, particularly for broadcasts of the men's game. This remains an issue for future, quantitative investigation. It may also be the case that the coding taxonomy or categorisation scheme selected for study of media commentary and reporting also influences the specific nature of the patterns identified. Related to this analytic consideration is the suggestion that the depth of analysis undertaken is key to interpreting the diversity of findings that have emerged around media reporting of men's and women's sport (Billings et al., 2005). There is evidence to support this suggestion in the different patterns generated for the semantic and discursive thematic analyses in the current findings.
This issue, likewise, awaits continuing investigation. What might be said in summary of the extant body of literature to date, as Billings et al. (2005: 168) concluded, is that gendered reporting persists, ‘although its nature twists and turns’.
The inaugural season of the Women's Australian Football League afforded an opportunity to compare televised commentary on men's and women's matches to examine whether findings from other sports, like tennis, golf, cricket and football (soccer), and for coverage of the Olympic Games, for which specific patterns of difference had been noted, were reproduced. Our findings suggest that commentators may construct gendered aspects of players’ identities somewhat differently for sports that are traditionally viewed as masculine or feminine pursuits. For Australian Rules football, some previously observed, gendered, stereotypes in media coverage: a focus on female players’ appearance, and on aesthetic judgements traditionally associated with femininity, were noticeably absent from the television commentary on the women's league examined here. Thus, some changes to stereotypical gendered representation appear to have occurred. However, examination of television commentary on women's inaugural involvement in the Australian Football League showed how subtle framings that minimised the athleticism and accomplishments of female players seemed to persist. As women's involvement in Australian Rules football at professional level develops, it will be useful to continue to monitor how the sport and its players are represented in media forums. Australian Rules football is a sport that has been a particularly male terrain; in Australia, it thus represents what Messner (2002) referred to as a ‘cultural center of masculinity’. Women's increasing involvement and achievement in this traditionally male-dominated cultural territory is thus an important site for the investigation of socio-cultural change – and even, perhaps, for documenting the over-turning of gender stereotypes, and the promotion of equity. As Messner argued, sport is a site where the meanings of masculinity (and, now, femininity) are played out and contested. In particular, it is regularly argued that the media play a major role in influencing societal views of female athletes, and of women's involvement in sport more generally (see, e.g. Villalon and Weiller-Abels, 2018; Kane et al., 2013; Kian and Clavio, 2011). Beyond the sports arena, investigation of media representations can also provide insight into the ways in which privilege and power are produced in male-dominated settings more broadly. As tolerance of gender discrimination in society continues to decline, ongoing scrutiny of mass media representations of sport is one way in which subtle, taken-for-granted and normalizing constructions of men's sports/male athletes as inherently superior may be identified and challenged.
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
