It's the fourth in a series of annual events organised by the Sport Australia Hall of Fame and Victoria University.

"The Rise of Athlete Rights: The Fair Play aGENDER" will bring together some of this sporting nation's brightest minds and thinkers to mull over many of the topics this column has considered over the past 12 months.

It does so because on many of those issues there is no consensus - and on some no resolution in sight.

Better pay for women at the top level may be one on which there is some agreement but apart from the odd sport here and there - there's absolutely no idea of how to deal with it.

There was no more poignant a reminder than the success of the United States team in the recent FIFA Women's World Cup. They were brash, outspoken and very good at what they did on the field.

But both on and off it they had no hesitation in making political and economic statements that they are undervalued. They have a good point - not just because they do better than their US male counterparts.

While the men's team's best result was to reach the quarter-finals in 2002 having only progressed from the group stage three more times and failed to qualify from 1954 to 1986, the women have won the World Cup four times and medalled in all eight tournaments while also winning four golds from six Olympic tournaments.

They have profile, personality and marketability. But therein lies the problem. Just who is it that is going to make the decision that they should be paid better or as well as the men? The funds are not going to magically fall out of the sky.

And then there's the issue that has actually nothing to do with treating the sexes differently - the International Olympic Committee's unreasonable restriction on any athlete's capacity to market themselves at the height of their profile and success during an Olympic Games.

There the German courts have intervened to say IOC Rule 40 is more than a tad restricting.

But where does that leave athletes from the rest of the world?

But there are two other issues that affect sport from the grassroots to the very top. Both have had profile in the media - too much of it through misunderstanding or misinformation, blurring a clear and concise path to a resolution.

World Athletics has done the heavy lifting in trying to find an acceptable compromise around the participation in women's event of athletes with differences of sex development through its controversial DSD regulations.

Olympic and world 800 metres champion Caster Semenya is the highest profile athlete affected - but not the only one. The challenge has been to find an acceptable solution for females who naturally produced high levels of testosterone to be able to compete in women's events.

Quite separately but often incorrectly confused with this issue has been consideration of the desire of transgender athletes to continue to participate in sport.

Resolution has proven complex. For a female transitioning to or wishing to identify as male there is a clear path - almost always a matter of personal decision. Although there have been some issues in grappling and combat sports.

In the reverse case it's not so simple. While in non-contact sports at participation and recreational level there is limited resistance, at professional and elite levels in most sports and at any level in contact activities there is debate and concern.

While the separation of men's and women's sport might originally have been for social or cultural reasons, as the latter matured it became more about a level playing field.

And this is largely once again - like it or not - about testosterone.

Let's hope that Tuesday's gathering can be a starting point in building a fair and meaningful consensus on at least some of these issues.

Subscriptions are available here.

Sign up to our Sport email here.

Know a junior sport star? Make a nomination for our 2019 Junior Sports Awards here.