Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Women's rugby has come so far, but there's still so much further it can go

(Photo by Hannah Peters - World Rugby/World Rugby via Getty Images)

It’s nice to see that the women’s Rugby World Cup finally got there in the end.

ADVERTISEMENT

I’m not a fan of being told how to think and what to watch and was, frankly, rather turned off by the early rounds of the tournament.

The more you insist that I have to care about something, the less I will.

I argued that, rather than demand that people take an interest in the world cup – as much of the New Zealand media appeared to do – you should let the event stand on its own merits.

Video Spacer

Video Spacer

Let the teams and the players themselves compel us to care because, if the product is as good as you’re making out, our attention will be captured eventually.

The Black Ferns’ semifinal win over France did that. It was compelling viewing, as two willing, high-skilled and evenly-matched teams duked it out to the death.

This was the match the tournament needed and why, regardless of the outcome of the final between New Zealand and England, the event should be viewed as a success.

People’s appetite for women’s rugby has been whetted now. Rivalries have been established. The demand for the Black Ferns to host France and England in three-test series is now there.

ADVERTISEMENT

That’s a win for rugby and a win for the players, rather than the braying media and politicians.

Was New Zealand Rugby’s scheduling clash of a couple of Saturdays ago really the “disgrace’’ that a government minister described it as? Or merely just another day in the life of a largely inept organisation?

I understand why that storyline took hold for a day or two. This world cup had been a procession – rather than a competition – to that point, as results went with the form book.

We’ve seen much the same with the men’s Rugby League World Cup in England, where predictable pool play outcomes hardly had fans at fever pitch.

ADVERTISEMENT

That’s why last Saturday was so important.

No matter whether it was France or New Zealand who won, we needed hearts to suddenly be in mouths and for the outcome to be uncertain.

The final result said plenty about the development of this Black Ferns team since last year’s disastrous end-of-season tour and it’s given the rest of us a true incentive to now watch the final.

I won’t bemoan an England victory, if that’s what we get. Just as I won’t get carried away if it’s New Zealand who wins.

That’s because, as I argued a couple of weeks back, this isn’t the end for female test rugby. It’s effectively the start and things will only get better and better from here.

The game – both in its playing standard and appeal to the general public – has come so far so quickly, but there’s still so much further it can go.

For so long girls in this country couldn’t really dream of being a Black Fern, because they couldn’t actually see them.

The team might merit an occasional clip on the news or 300 words in the paper, but they were effectively anonymous. Not now.

A generation of future Black Ferns are being inspired as we speak, in numbers that would’ve been unimaginable only two or three years ago.

That is such a positive for rugby in this country.

So good luck England and good luck New Zealand – you are true pioneers whose excellence at this tournament will long be remembered.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 4 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC
Search