The fact most certain of all is our sportswomen do it for love, not money. And isn’t that why anyone plays sport in the first place?

The fact most certain of all is our sportswomen do it for love, not money. And isn’t that why anyone plays sport in the first place?

For as long as I have worked at the Sydney Morning Herald – and that is quite some time – we have had complaints from readers, mostly women, that we do not cover women’s sport nearly enough, nor nearly well enough.

Daily Life allows us to change that. But it also poses quite a question: do women want to read about women or do they want to read about Roger Federer, because he’s a pleasant man who plays a pleasant sport exceptionally well; or young cricketer Pat Cummins, because he seems like a nice young man  from a nice family that we all want our boys to grow up to emulate?

Or do we want to read about sportswomen, and their achievements?

The Australian soccer captain Melissa Barbieri, who was profiled on the site on Tuesday,  puts together a normal professional wage from several jobs - one playing soccer, another working for Football Federation Australia and a third job working in a primary school.

Socceroos defender Luke Wilkshire, meantime, just a few months younger than Barbieri with a dozen or so fewer national caps, recently signed a $10m two-year contract extension with his Russian club.

It’s a disparity that is annoying but reflects market forces. More people watch the Socceroos and Dynamo Moscow than Newcastle Jets in the W-League or the Matildas on the rare occasion they might have a game in Australia.

But bums on seats and dollars in pockets do not necessarily make someone worth reading about. And it doesn’t make women less newsworthy nor their contribution to sport less valuable.

The fact most certain of all is our sportswomen do it for love, not money. And isn’t that why anyone plays sport in the first place?

What are your thoughts?