How do we stand after two rounds
This is the multi-nation tournament like no other, not even the World Cup. Only the top five were invited along. Is it proving to answer all the claims made for it?
Questions have been asked about the facilities provided at the event, for players, support staff and even spectators. The venue could scarcely be more splendid, the USA’s very own Olympic Training Centre in Chula Vista, inland from San Diego. Yet disturbing stories abound of changing facilities being provided in tents and spectators invited to bring their own seating accommodation.
The pitch used for the first round games bore only a distant resemblance to Twickenham. The size of the crowd indicated that pre-tournament publicity failed to reach large swathes of the local populace.
The story goes that World Rugby decided the only feasible venue for the event – bearing in mind time zones and such things – was the west coast of the USA. Fair enough, but when we compare that pitch with recent venues for test matches in the States, it comes a poor second. The Centre has several more likely-looking arenas left unused.
Then the rugby itself: the five nations had no doubts about the value of the concept. It would be the ideal preparation for the next World Cup in two years’ time. New Zealand may be able to provide temperatures to match Southern California’s, but it’s unlikely drinks intervals will be needed every quarter.
There has been a lot of fine rugby on view. The Maple Leafs, the Red Roses and the Black Ferns have shown flashes of the high standards that will be needed at the next World Cup.
But every head coach has introduced players with little or no international experience, to give them a grounding in the demanding levels of skill and endurance to be expected.
It was France who showed the most worrying shortcomings. Canada’s win over them (36-19) brought them level, 7 wins all, in the 14 matches they have played together. And the last two contests add up to a mountainous disparity (65-29) in the Maple Leafs’ favour.
France’s plight isn’t eased by the schedule they face. Next up are the Black Ferns. That great win they achieved last year in Grenoble may prove a far distant memory. After that, England. And they finish with the only game they were confident of winning, against the hosts.
England have found Canada a real handful in recent encounters. They won 27-19 in Doncaster last November and 27-20 in Christchurch in 2017. Yes, they had three easy home wins in between, but the Maple Leafs were well short of full strength. Despite losing some of their most experienced players to retirement, they proved far too strong and accurate for France.
So before the two big match-ups against France and New Zealand, England will have to see off this resilient side. But they can now introduce players who really matter. Zoe Harrison’s handling proved faulty on occasions against the USA, but with Leanne Riley back at No 9 she should find life a shade easier.
Vickii Cornborough, Cath O’Donnell and Sarah Hunter (if decreed fit) will provide extra ballast and skill up front. It would be nice to see the wingers given the space to return to the glut of tries they’ve scored in recent months. They’ve managed two in the last two games. Lydia Thompson is still waiting patiently.
Results to date:
USA 5 England 38
New Zealand 35 Canada 20
USA 0 New Zealand 33
Canada 36 France 19
Coming Fixtures on Saturday, 6 July:
France v New Zealand
Canada v England
