Dana Johannsen: Time to ditch the word WAG

The WAG tag was used on Cheryl Tweedy, later Cole (left), and Victoria Beckham during the 2006 World Cup. Photo / AP

Defining women by their relationship with sportsmen disrespectful and should be consigned to the past.

The Cricket World Cup is almost upon us and all the talk is will Kyly Clarke's husband prove his fitness in time to return to lead the Australian team, and, do they even need him back? The Australians head into the tournament as one of the favourites following their dominance in the recent Tri-Series involving England and India, led by the partner of Bollywood actress, producer and former model Anushka Sharma.

South Africa are also among the favourites, particularly with Danielle de Villiers' husband in such commanding form.

And of course we shouldn't discount the Black Caps, although there are a couple in the squad struggling for form - especially that guy married to Laura McGoldrick.

If you find it disrespectful to refer to these cricketers as nameless, bat-wielding peacocks, identifiable only by who their partner is ... that's because it is.

And yet in 2015 it is still considered acceptable to define women by their relationship with men. A ball is yet to be bowled in the World Cup and already the term WAGs - the most odious acronym in sport - is creeping into coverage of the event.

There have been stories on how the partners of the cricketers may choose to spend their time while in New Zealand, the glamorous women we can expect on our shores, and the bans some teams have placed on partners travelling with the squad.

Inevitably, once the event starts, sports websites will throw together photo galleries of the "hottest WAGs" (which is, incidentally, likely to be the only visibility females get on such websites). While cricketers will be rated on their performance on the pitch, their partners will be appraised by their glamour and how they look.

An invention of the British tabloids, the term came into common usage during the 2006 Fifa World Cup in Germany, when the so-called wives and girlfriends, including Victoria Beckham, Coleen Rooney and Cheryl Cole, were based in the spa town of Baden-Baden. Press coverage focused on their shopping excursions and socialising, which was, laughably, said to have been detrimental to England's football fortunes.

According to the British press, the players' partners were a giant distraction in oversized sunglasses.

Since then the term has become part of the sporting lexicon around the world. The women behind the biggest stars of rugby, league, cricket, motorsports, whether they want it or not, get labelled a "WAG" - immediately lumping them all in one big partner pot, where their individual achievements and personalities are irrelevant.

Ditching of this tag is long overdue.

Even Britain's Equalities and Human Rights Commission has weighed in, criticising the use of the term ahead of last year's Fifa World Cup. The authority determined the word was usually used as a "pejorative" phrase to demean a group of women, and that there were very few positive depictions of footballers' partners in the media.

Many people who use the word don't do so to be offensive, it is just that it has become normalised until we don't think about how it shapes our attitudes towards women. How about this World Cup we give it some thought?