The first round of a new WXV has seen plenty of excitement, headed by that sure-fire winner, the giant-killing act.
Ireland stand in the spotlight, gaining an unforgettable victory over the world champions, the Black Ferns.
Here’s a brief summary of results:
Tier One:
USA 21 England 61
France 24 Canada 46
New Zealand 27 Ireland 29
Tier Two
South Africa 31 Japan 24
Australia 37 Wales 5
Italy 0 Scotland 19
Tier Three
Spain 83 Madagascar 0
Fiji 38 Hong Kong China 3
Netherlands 8 Samoa 8
The big shock was the defeat of the Black Ferns. It tells every team it’s possible to reach for the stars.
In the second division there was one close battle, the hosts beating the Sakura by a single score.
At the third level we had two highly contrasting results: the only wide margin of the weekend saw top-ranked Spain outplay the minnows, the Makis. At the other end of the tension range the Dutch were denied a famous debut win by a last-minute score, WXV’s first draw.
Excitement
There was passion and commitment on all sides. Squads new to WXV had the thrill of competing against sides they’d never met before, and in unfamiliar surroundings. Promotion and relegation meant that each tier had new entrants.
The analysts will have little difficulty in proving that onfield standards are rising. Some of the best plays were worthy of the largest audiences. In the nine matches completed thus far we had one win by two points and a unique draw. The average margin was 26 points; the highest total 83: both familiar figures across league tables worldwide.
Attendances
And then the telling downside. I put my point of view about gates last year @ http://4theloveofsport.co.uk/2023/10/26/wxv-crowds-what-crowds/ .
For the second year running attendances fell far below expectation. Is it simply that people aren’t willing to spend time and money going to a match (or rather, three in sequence)? Or is the organising committee not selecting the most fertile venues, or is the publicity falling short?
Two of the three countries selected were the same as last year, South Africa and the UAE. An alleged crowd of 291 at the massive DHL Stadium is a deflating statistic. Local evidence in Cape Town suggests a complete lack of publicity. How many people in UAE know or care anything about women’s rugby, except when World Series Sevens makes its annual pilgrimage?
What we don’t know is how many unions put their hand up to volunteer as hosts. If World Rugby was limited to those three (Canada the third), then that represents an insoluble problem; a black mark against women’s rugby.
The two most obvious choices, England and France, both had their hands full with Olympic Games and a World Cup to worry about.
We have yet to learn the numbers viewing at a distance; rugbypass.tv is a welcome facility, but it doesn’t own full rights. Local TV stations can claim the sole right to air games. The BBC, for one, makes locating the matches on its iPlayer quite tricky.
If venues are hard to find, is the answer to bring all three divisions together in one country? Hardly. That would involve expenses on an Olympian scale, and governments are increasingly baulking at the costs engendered. It was a relief for the French administration that France won the men’s Sevens gold; that removed a little heat from the protests.
For the more modest WXV there would be advantages in bringing everyone together. The developing rugby nations could mingle with the greats and learn on and off the field some of the tricks of the trade. But that is wishful thinking at present.
The Classic Conundrum
Big stadium, to reflect the scale of importance and ambition – empty and echoing? Or small stadium, packed to the non-existent rafters, roaring on the players?
Contrast England at Castle Park, Doncaster, or Goldington Road, Bedford (‘You breathe in, I’ll breathe out’) with WXV1’s BC Place, Vancouver, or WXV2’s DHL Stadium, Cape Town – use semaphore to communicate with the person sitting nearest to you.
Of course the aim is to have your cake and eat it; that is, choose the largest arena the country provides and fill it. As of one year and one round into WXV, it hasn’t happened.
Give-aways
The all-seeing eye of the TV camera tells you at once what sort of a crowd is present. Most ground authorities try to mask the truth by placing spectators directly opposite the main cameras.
The other give-away is how close in the subsidiary cameras zoom to get spectator reactions. The closer, the fewer. ‘Wave, please!’
Advances and Retreats
One of WXV’s main raisons d’être is to prepare for the World Cup; places are up for grabs in the current competition. Even among the nations already assured of a place, WXV is a vital means of assessing where they stand.
After a single round of WXV1 we may claim that France and New Zealand are not advancing as their managements would wish. The USA were beaten by a margin, but they put three tries on the trophy favourites, and can feel pleased with themselves. But they must take second place to the Girls in Green; a team playing in the same colours lost 88-10 to England last April.
They dented the Black Ferns’ prospects even further than last year’s two losses. Four nations have now beaten the world champions in short order: France, Canada, England and Ireland.
Like the Irish, the Maple Leafs can pat themselves on the back. Their demolition of Les Bleues sends the two coaching teams in opposite directions. Deduction: some managements are doing their job far more effectively than others.
Further down the chain: Las Leonas had the easiest task of the weekend, but they showed enough all-round skill to reawaken belief in their rights to promotion. If Ireland could leap from the third level to the top, then they can look forward to better times. But that brings us to the next dilemma, the overall structure of WXV.
Format
Sally Horrox had confirmed that her committee is examining all the possible changes to the current formula. They can be as wide as you like: the window into which the tournament is set; the number of nations to qualify; the optimum method of qualification; venues, squad numbers, and a host more.
It’s a highly complex business, and we can be grateful we don’t need to make the fateful decisions.
After this year’s tournament is complete, there will be a gap till 2026 while the RWC takes the spotlight. That allows all the stakeholders (the in-word) to add their viewpoints. They are unlikely to be of a single mind; that is where the committee’s conclusions will be put to the test.
For now, we await the unfolding of the next two rounds. Sound the trumpet.
