Sally Horrox gave her usual upbeat address at BC Place, Vancouver. She could point to exciting rugby, new nations finding their footing and worldwide interest.
It was indeed heartening to see eighteen squads meet up at three venues to enjoy more competition, increase the number of test matchers played, and inspire more youngsters to take up the game.
Then come the difficulties.
The most striking is the lack of large attendances. The trend was countered only on the last day at Vancouver, where a crowd claimed to be 5,000 turned out to watch two enthralling matches. But there are still only two countries where big gates for women’s matches can confidently be expected. They do not include Canada, South Africa or the UAE.
The findings of the WXV review committee will be of profound importance. They will sift through every scrap of evidence available, then have the challenge of deciding the optimum structures for the third WXV, due in two years’ time.
Venues
It’s hard to find a reason for supporting South Africa and the UAE as venues for a third time. The suspicion is that alternatives were impossible to find, if not England and France; they would be close to ideal. The three Celtic nations might lke a piece of the action too, but costs are always a stumbling-block.
Nothing is more numbing for test players than performing in front of more stewards than spectators.
Financing
Can World Rugby be sure of continuing to attract the monies it needs to support all the national unions that need its help? Sponsorship and media involvement are key indicators of future prosperity.
Qualifiers
It’s hard to see a way round the difficulty of ill-matched teams in WXV3. A central pillar of WXV is to encourage emerging nations to prove their worth. Spain had a very tight game against Fiji in Round 3 (10-8), but those eight points were the only ones they conceded. At the other end of the table the Makis of Madagascar leaked 167 points in their three games, a fate similar to Colombia’s last year.
But nations like them simply must find their place in this competition. My worry is: what happens to a team like them, when they fail to qualify second time round? Is there a safety-net to save them from disappearing without trace?
The Three Divisions
As WXV was being constructed, arbitrary decisions had to be made about the composition of the three tiers. World rankings were a sensible place to start. And then?
It remains to be seen whether the committee will make major or minor structural changes. The first big decision was to open WXV1 to ten possible contenders only: the Six Nations and a newly formed quartet, the Pacific Four. Only the top three from each would make this top tier.
That appeared a sensible starting-point, but after two years there are loud calls for a new system to be instituted.
The division of the three sets of six nations into two pools worked well for Tier One; much less so for Tiers 2 and 3. Can the circle be squared?
A word of warning about the final 2024 positions: they mean little when only three matches each have been played.
WXV1
1 England
2 Ireland
3 Canada
4 New Zealand
5 France
6 USA
The two newcomers were Ireland and USA. The Irish surpassed themselves in finishing as runners-up. They contributed the biggest giant-killing act of the tournament beating the world champions, the Black Ferns. Now come renewed calls for a proper pathway scheme.
The chancy nature of the table is shown in Canada’s third place. They gave England a hard fight in Round Three. It’s doubtful Ireland could have kept the margin to 12 points.
For the second year running two leading contenders for top spot failed to achieve their ambitions. France and New Zealand again filled fourth and fifth position. We must expect strenuous reviews, but it’s doubtful any conclusions will be made public unless heads fall. That is not beyond possibility.
More predictably, the Eagles finished winless and last.
WXV2
1 Australia
2 Scotland
3 Italy
4 South Africa
5 Wales
6 Japan
Once more this division proved by far the most competitive. The highest total attained was a modest 37. Every point was hard earned.
Australia were the only nation of the eighteen to gain full points – a great achievement.
Scotland were the proud holders with ambitions to make WXV1, but the Wallaroos proved their ability to overcome domestic weaknesses when they enter international competiton. They go on being beaten near neighbours New Zealand, but on the world stage they can hit the heights.
They beat the Scots 31-22 in the needle match.
Italy scored only 31 points in their three games, 45 fewer than the Boks. But they played Scotland and Wales, not Madagascar! They missed Alyssa D’Incà more than I had imagined.
The women’s game must hope that the Boks stop depending so heavily on forward power. That has been the approach of the men’s team in recent years, arousing widespread criticism.
Seven forwards on the bench? The women’s team has some talented backs, but they need a bigger say in events.
Wales reached Round 3 fighting the ghastly prospect of dropping from Division 1 to 3 in successive outings. The authorities have tough decisions to make.
Japan play a brave and enterprising game, but it isn’t enough to win the biggest contests. Lesley McKenzie and Simon Middleton have a real challenge to find solutions to a persistent problem.
WXV3
1 Spain
2 Samoa
3 Netherlands
4 Fiji
5 Hong Kong China
6 Madagascar
Spain were expected to triumph, but they had a tense struggle in Round 3, defeating Fiji only 10-8. The weakness of the tables is highlighted here. Only two on-pitch points separated the two teams placed first and fourth.
Samoa proved their right to finish two places higher than close rivals Fiji. The Dutch were delighted to come third; can they possibly advance further in the short term? Hockey takes first place in young athletes’ aspirations.
HKC and the Makis show the need to strengthen rugby in Asia and Africa by all means possible.
New(ish) Names
You will have your own choices of outstanding performances by lesser known players. There were plenty, but here are my four (strictly alphabetical order!):
Bo Westcombe-Evans (England)
Erin King (Ireland)
Faitala Moleka (Australia)
Hannah King (New Zealand)
