Every Kiwi is telling us that an England-New Zealand final is the perfect fit for the last day of the ninth World Cup. I beg to differ.
Yes, it’s perfect for the administrators, media moguls and money-minders. Only this way could the organising committee fulfil its stated wish to sell every seat for the occasion. It would give women’s rugby another timely boost.
Does New Zealand Rugby deserve to be represented here at the pinnacle, after the unholy schemozzle of events that followed last autumn’s European tour? It’s CE, Mark Robinson, actually confirmed Glenn Moore in post, in the face of the damning evidence presented in the meticulous review called to investigate Te Kura Ngata-Aerengamate’s heartrending complaints.
All those smiling faces now on view in Auckland help prove the notion that human beings have a short memory.
Do we really want to see yet another final between the same two teams? Is that inevitable in the world of sport? I offer Celtic v Rangers as but one blatant example. Only three nations have ever won the trophy in eight attempts: the USA at the first gathering – they had taken the lead in developing the game, so deserved every credit for that win in 1991; England twice only, and New Zealand all the rest.
My own preference would have been another England-France crunch, the first ever at the exalted level of an RWC final. New Zealand spectators were able to see for themselves what underlies every crunch when they met in the pool-stages; games of the highest intensity, no quarter given, close results guaranteed almost every time.
As an aside: it was upsetting in the extreme to read conspiracy theories running riot on social media pages. Evidently the referees and the TMOs were under orders to ensure that the Black Ferns made it through to the final.
But an all-European match-up would not have filled the stadium. The most fervent rugby-playing nation on earth (pace the Pacific Islanders) was proved unwilling to turn up to games unless their own side was on show.
That is one giant step the 2025 RWC has to make: to fill stadiums across the country when the Red Roses aren’t themselves involved.
Why do we hear that the upper tier of the stadium will not be open? That runs counter to the phrase ‘ticket-frenzy’ the BBC headlined. Perhaps the ground authorities will offer the same flexibility as The Stoop a year or two go when it allowed an overflow of attenders into a section of the south stand, under the watchful gaze of extra stewards of course. But the stated aim was to sell every seat. Is it possible that, even with the ‘ideal’ final guaranteed, Eden Park will still not be full?
I’ll leave a look-back at the tournament as a whole for a later occasion. It has already set new records for attendance, media coverage and world-wide public attention but the overall picture is far less satisfying.
It would have been a huge blow for the organising committee if its home team had not been present on the final day, but the events leading up to it leave us wondering whether a national union that neglected its women’s team so badly for so long should be able to fill the executive boxes smugly on the Big Day.
