Pay should be equal if you are generating the same type of income otherwise it is a dead end road giving hope when there is none. If the sport falls into a financial crisis the women's game will be axed first so take it slow and build on what you have.
Over the last few weeks we have seen India first and now England announce that they are increasing the funding for women's cricket. India went further than England by making the match fees the same for females and males. This is ok if you have the funds available, but it is still not equal pay.
The England Cricket Board announced an extra £3.5million to be added to the kitty. This will allow another 40 women cricketers to turn professional doubling the current pool size from 40 to 80. A minimum yearly salary of around $30K per player. This would not include match fees so this would be the basic pay being earned if you never played for your country or another team.
The Indian women's deal is far more lucrative as just 1 test match would net a player $18K. The women play more white ball cricket as the following is just not there for test cricket and a venue would lose money for hosting an event. I just don't see the money being the same as the men's game ever and this is the reality of sports.
The ladies cricket has had a major boost especially in England where matches are played before the men's game in a sort of curtain raiser. This is how the ECB introduced women's cricket to the masses as they made no extra from this. Can the women's game survive on it's own is the $1 million dollar question.
India, Australia and England dictate the cricketing finances globally as they choose their itinerary matching where the money is. Playing five 5 day tests against each other knowing these are bankers and only playing three 5 day tests against everyone else is very unfair. This is the control these countries have over cricket currently and the smaller playing nations which is everyone else lost the control they had. This is what happens when you have people running the game not understanding what is at stake when voting takes place. South Africa had a government official back then who has probably never held a cricket bat in his life voting.
Australia may copy England and India by offering their ladies more than they currently do but all the other nations who play the sport cannot afford to take this step up. The money is tied up in the big 3 and everyone else is struggling to make ends meet. Will the women's game be bigger than it is today in 10 years time and I somehow doubt it as how can they make the game more popular if all the other countries cannot be on an equal footing.
In most sports we have seen the emergence of the women's game whether it is football or rugby and now cricket. There is definitely an appeal and it is definitely marketable but the numbers financially don't always add up. Filling stadiums consistently and not for one off games like World Cup finals is the problem as the fan base is not always there like with the men's sports. Over time this may change with loads more marketing and an improvement in the skills on offer.
Personally myself as a sports fan would probably watch the highlights on television but would not pay to attend one of these events as it is just not the same. If my daughter wanted to go then I would go along, but begrudgingly as the passion for watching the other sex play sport is just not there.
I have been turned off by the way the broadcasters have pushed the equal gender down the viewers throats as we even have female commentators involved within the men's sports now. I say stick to your own gender sport and leave the men's sport out of the equation as it is unfair on the viewer. I would rather have no sound than listen to someone who has limited knowledge of the sport trying to tell me what is going on as that is exactly what is currently happening.