r/rugbyunion Reds 9h ago

Hope to see some closer games in the second week of the Rugby World Cup.

Post image

Be nice to see a tight contest and some good finishes as for the most part it's been a bit boring watching 1 sided games.

154 Upvotes

140 comments sorted by

99

u/RobertSmiv Australia 8h ago

Hmmm I wonder if New Zealand or England will win this tournament.

94

u/infinitemonkeytyping Australia 6h ago

Don't write off Canada. They are No.2 in the world for a reason.

1

u/[deleted] 5h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/rugbyunion-ModTeam 5h ago

No nastiness allowed.

20

u/JColey15 Southland Stags 6h ago

I think Canada are in with a pretty good chance and I wouldn’t write off Ireland or France if other results go their way and their star players stay injury free.

England looked beatable against USA which might’ve just been the nerves but they’ll have to contend with nerves for the whole tournament.

NZ will have to hope their sevens players are going to be the difference between them and the rest because Canada, Ireland, and France are all capable of beating them. They also really need to beat Ireland in the pools or they’ll get a bad run to the final.

Canada are on fire atm and nobody should be surprised if they make the final.

The draw is stacked a bit against the Irish because they’ll probably have to beat France, then England, then Canada/NZ. Definitely the hardest route to the title for sure. Will be made a lot easier if they beat NZ in pool play which they are completely capable of doing.

France will actually be hoping that NZ win that game I would think because they’ll be fairly confident of beating Ireland and they’re more familiar with playing them. They also have to beat South Africa in pool play which they should do but that South African team have improved a heap lately. They’ll probably end up playing England in the semi-final and whoever wins the other semi will be cheering them on because it’s going to be tricky to beat England this year.

26

u/Atomicfossils Ireland 5h ago

England looked beatable against USA

Did they? The first half was a fun arm wrestle but by half time I think the arm wrestle was well and truly won

7

u/Vrakzi Leicester Tigers 2h ago

Bluntly: England outclassed the USA by miles, but there were errors in that performance that would absolutely be punished by the likes of New Zealand, Canada or France. Mind you, the same can be said about those other teams performances. Whichever of the 4 raises their game best will take the trophy.

2

u/Bfmcd10 2h ago

I agree. France spent an awful lot of time in the Italian 22 and scored only 3 tries. They will never beat any of the top teams being so clumsy

5

u/JColey15 Southland Stags 4h ago

Well I sort of meant from a NZ perspective tbh… like USA weren’t probably beating them but if they played like that against NZ or Canada then they might struggle.

4

u/Atomicfossils Ireland 4h ago

Ah gotcha, my mistake! Yeah, I think a few teams were showing some first round nerves, plus England are under a lot of pressure given that they're heavy favourites at home.

8

u/MC897 5h ago

I've never seen a 28-7 HT scoreline as an arm wrestle. USA showed you need physicality, to have even a footnote against England, but doing that for 80 mins against this juggernaut is nearly impossible.

The game was also finished by half time, so if that's an arm wrestle... yikes.

2

u/JColey15 Southland Stags 4h ago

Tbf I don’t think I said that it was an arm wrestle. I meant more that the USA pushed them at times and their goal line defence was quite hard to crack. The half time score could very easily have been closer if the USA had converted their chances. They didn’t so it’s a bit by the by but the scoreline is a bit deceiving and suggests England had it all their way which the game didn’t really feel like to me.

0

u/[deleted] 5h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/rugbyunion-ModTeam 5h ago

Take your repeated anti-Pc crusade to another subreddit.

u/SweeneyisMad France 1h ago

England looked beatable against USA

I didn't see the same match.

8

u/sunlightliquid X3 Qatar Airways cup Champs 🏆🏆🏆 7h ago

Hard to tell, always such a tight comp.....

2

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 7h ago

lolz!

-1

u/Fullback-15_ 7h ago

It was always gonna be England , New Zealand or potentially France. Does anybody has the betting odds at hand?

30

u/saviouroftheweak Premiership Women's Rugby 7h ago

France don't look anywhere near the standard of Canada right now

4

u/Fullback-15_ 6h ago

True. The semis are almost certainly gonna be NewZealand-Canada and England-France. We will see what happens. Canada has a horrendous record against NZ, only 1 win in 19 games, so my brain has a hard time picturing a win there.

7

u/saviouroftheweak Premiership Women's Rugby 6h ago

Kiwis look weaker than most world cups do far and Canada look better than usual. It'll be cracker if it happens

1

u/Fullback-15_ 6h ago

That would be an amazing achievement for Canada for sure. They never really performed against the big 3 in a world cup. In fact they only managed to get a medal once (in 9 world cups), which is really surprising. Maybe its their year :)

u/barkmutton Canada 58m ago

Yes but more importantly Canada won and drawn its last two against NZ.

u/torontojacks 50m ago

Canada drew with Black Ferns in NZ this year, so it's not that difficult a picture.

13

u/infinitemonkeytyping Australia 6h ago

You do know that Canada beat New Zealand last year, and drew with them this year, don't you?

10

u/Agreeable_Falcon1044 6h ago

Everyone forgets Canada…

3

u/Fullback-15_ 6h ago edited 5h ago

Because they never performed at the world cup... Yet! Would be amazing if they finally do it, at least reach the final, meaning beating NZ.

Edit: medaling ratios at the world cup

Canada France New Zealand England
11% 78% 78% 100%

4

u/HitchikersPie 2026 #ChampRugby or bust (again) 2h ago

I really don’t think the events of 1991-2014 have any relevance on what’s happening in 2021

0

u/Fullback-15_ 2h ago edited 1h ago

No, but people shouldn't be surprised when they are a bit forgotten compared to the other big teams.

u/Clojiroo 49m ago

They made the finals in 2014. Semis more recently. And were in the sevens gold medal game at the Olympics.

This conversation is rather contradictory and IMO speaks to how much people project mens rugby onto the women as a shortcut instead of tracking them separately.

u/MJP-67 47m ago

If you have 'forgotten' about Canada then you aren't much of a rugby fan. They are a powerhouse in 7s and a powerhouse in 15s and have been top tier for quite a while.

2

u/HitchikersPie 2026 #ChampRugby or bust (again) 2h ago

Canada shouldn't be forgotten, they're second in the world, in their last 2 games vs the Black Ferns away from home they've won and drawn, and they've probably come the closest to anyone of beating the red roses since the '21/'22 RWC final

2

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 6h ago

England are overwhelming favourites IMO. They will probably stroll it. But yeah the Kiwis are the biggest obstacle in the way, although I don't think we are as good now. Canada and France are decent too btw, but England should beat them.

2

u/kingofapache Glasgow Warriors 2h ago

If England don't win it, they've really bottled it.

u/Dr_Biggles Canada 7m ago

“Canada and France are decent too” so kind of you to say all the way back there at #3 in the world.

68

u/SignalButterscotch73 Scotland 8h ago

Scotland v Wales and France v Italy were anticipated to be much closer. We've just had some stellar performances.

I don't agree with comments calling those results bad for the game, it's literally a repeat of the mens 1999 world cup. Early professionalism, some fully professional teams, some fully amateur teams and several mash ups of both. Big margins are expected and were the norm in the mens game until fairly recently.

We're not football with thousands of fully professional teams around the world, even in the mens game We're still in the low hundreds for professional teams. The women's game doesn't even have one hundred fully professional teams globally.

You can't grow the game by not playing it at the highest level possible, only by experiences like a 145–17 loss do minnow nations grow to beating the Springboks and then no2 ranked Ireland in later world cups. Japan got good by playing against good, not from playing against crap.

17

u/TheHayvek England 7h ago

The 1999 comparison assumes that professionalism will spread through the women's game. I'm not sure if that's guaranteed.

8

u/tfrules Scarlets 5h ago

Especially in Wales, we can barely sustain professional mens’ teams, the fan base for professional women’s clubs in the country is basically non-existent.

7

u/ChiSandTwitch1 5h ago

There are more professional men's teams in Madagascar than there are in Scotland, and we don't even have professional women's teams yet.

This is why we get spanked by the top 4 and why world rugby needs to divvy up the cash better

5

u/Training-Trifle-2572 3h ago

'Non existent' right now doesn't mean non existent forever. Women's rugby has only recently been getting a lot of coverage. Heck, I'm a woman who used to play rugby in Wales and I've only recently started getting behind it, although it probably helps that I'm supporting the Red Roses because they are fabulous! I remember trying to watch an Ireland vs Scotland women's 6 nations game years ago, and it was only shown after the men's game on a facebook livestream, it looked like it was recorded on a phone and the pitch was only lit by a few floodlights so too dark to see what was going on half the time. No wonder people weren't following it. I'm loving the hype around this years' tournament. It's a shame the Welsh women aren't in good form, as it would give the fans something to cheer about again. The fan base is out there, it just wants to be rewarded for its interest with some wins.

6

u/Training-Trifle-2572 3h ago

Totally agree! The men's world cup isn't even that different now either. It's usually NZ and SA as favourites with 1 or 2 other teams who could take it, one of Australia, England, Ireland or France depending on the year. It's only the last few tournaments where we've seen a bit more individual game unpredictability with teams like Japan, Wales, Scotland and Argentina, but never to an extent where we expect they could win the whole thing.

I'm sure the women getting to play in the tournament don't think the results are bad for the game. I bet they were relishing the chance to get to represent their country on the world stage. Just look how far some of them have come in the last 10 years.

1

u/[deleted] 8h ago

[deleted]

3

u/chickenlittle668 Reds 8h ago

Yeah that's true but the cricket World Cup only has 10 teams for the men's and 8 for the women's and as a result you see a lot more closer and exciting games and some more upsets.

Different sport I know but expansion whilst can be a good thing for a sport can also lead to a lot of heavily 1 sided games.

5

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 7h ago edited 7h ago

Yeah that's true but the cricket World Cup only has 10 teams for the men's and 8 for the women's and as a result you see a lot more closer and exciting games and some more upsets.

For the ODI World Cups yes.

Although the men's ODI WC is going back to 14 teams from 2027. While, the women's event is expanding to 10 teams from 2029.

The T20 WC for men already is at 20 teams. And the women's T20 WC goes to 16 teams from 2028 or 2030.

But then again, I think that the gap between cricket teams in the shorter formats, isn't as big as the one in Rugby, which is primarily due to the physical and highly technical nature of Rugby.

2

u/No-Writing-9000 Hong Kong 4h ago

Different nature of the sport. 1 or 2 world class batsmen would change the whole team and they may beat a full member on their bad day. See the yanks and Dutch did. In rugby you put 2 Barretts with 13 amateurs will change nothing.

u/maryland_cookies Northampton Saints 1h ago

When I accepted that the scores would be white washes, I still really enjoyed watching the games, especially Japan vs Ireland I thought was fantastic! Japan were playing some really nice rugby at points, and genuinely great to watch. Score honestly didn't do them justice. I think there's alot to appreciate in the more amateur teams and they're great fun to watch and root for.

70

u/torontojacks 9h ago

It's going to be the same in the first week of the Men's World Cup too, especially now with 24 teams.

That said, some of the minnows put in amazing performances, Brazil and Spain especially, but hats off to the Welsh women too for keeping the score down.

18

u/chickenlittle668 Reds 9h ago

Yeah fair, just wish they maybe scheduled some more interesting games for week 1, similar to how they had France v New Zealand to kickoff the 2023 World Cup in France.

14

u/ShirtedRhino2 England 4h ago

Scotland v Wales and France v Italy both had the potential to be close, they just weren't.

2

u/neverbeenstardust #1 Alia Bitonci Fan 8h ago

It has always been the same in the first week of the Men's World Cup. The 2023 opening weekend featured such bangers as Italy 52-8 Namibia, Ireland 82-8 Romania, and Japan 42-12 Chile and that's the one that was tight enough they decided it was time to expand. Also France v New Zealand for some reason. I guess to have an exciting opening, but that does not feel like it should be a pool game. Then again, France's next closest competition for their opening match was Italy and they won that one 60-7.

32

u/ramaras Bokke 8h ago

The opening weekend in 2023 also featured France 27 - 13 New Zealand, England 27 - 10 Argentina, Wales 32 - 26 Fiji, Aus 35 - 15 Georgia, and RSA 18 - 3 Scotland.

It has always been the same in the first week of the Men's World Cup.

Complete false statement lol, there are certainly blow-outs in the mens too, but many more close games.

12

u/Agreeable_Falcon1044 6h ago

Give it time, there’s around 10 really competitive men’s teams, so the likelihood is one will meet another each round to give the “blockbuster” tie.

In the women’s game, we don’t have that yet. In terms of levels, Wales v Scotland or Italy v France was meant to be close. They weren’t on this occasion

5

u/ramaras Bokke 6h ago

I have no doubt that it will improve and scores will be closer I just think people should spread lies to counter criticism, even if said criticism is harsh.

Personally I enjoyed the Bok game, despite the scoreline.

-6

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 7h ago edited 7h ago

Complete false statement lol, there are certainly blow-outs in the mens too, but many more close games.

Well said, but some of the woke people here will still downvote you en masse for making an objective fact.

The simple truth is that the depth in men's Rugby is far greater compared to women's Rugby. It will get better over time, but right now the discrepancies are vast.

I fully support women's Rugby btw and hope that World Rugby increases targeted funding and introduces high performance academies for emerging teams. But just simply expanding the WC won't do much to "grow the game".

10

u/chaosarcadeV2 7h ago

I disagree with that last point a bit. I think it will help grow the game in those minnow nations that would otherwise have no reason to watch. Even if their teams get blown out at least the games that have happened have had fairly expansive and free flowing.

At least that’s what I hope anyways. Things should tighten up through the knockouts

0

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 7h ago

At least that’s what I hope anyways. Things should tighten up through the knockouts

Fingers crossed!

20

u/BurbankElephants England & Leicester Tigers 6h ago

Do you realise that, by using the word "woke" without a hint of irony, you immediately and completely discredit any point you're making, irrespective of the content or nature of that point?

-7

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 6h ago

Do you realise that, by using the word "woke" without a hint of irony, you immediately and completely discredit any point you're making, irrespective of the content or nature of that point?

I am a centre-left liberal. This is Reddit. Some progressive viewpoints are indeed insane, where obvious facts are either hidden or misrepresented to make people feel better. I am not using the word in a crazy, right wing context.

17

u/tfrules Scarlets 5h ago

It doesn’t matter where you stand politically, ‘woke’ is one of those words that will immediately put you alongside a specific camp of people. Nobody knows what the word actually means, it’s just used to denigrate anything even vaguely progressive.

5

u/ramaras Bokke 5h ago

Agree with your last point. Visibility every four years will only do so much, need a buy-in from unions to invest, like SA has finally done.

But, 16 is a fair size, and that seems to be the number for the next two tournaments as well.

10

u/icyDinosaur Ireland / Switzerland 5h ago

simply expanding the WC won't do much to "grow the game"

Why is it that we always hear this from people from countries that are already at the top (at least going by your flair)? When you're talking about sports that aren't already big in a country, taking part in international top-level is 100% the way to grow them because it gets attention. You have to give people a reason and a way to watch, and international competitions people are familiar with from other sports are a great way to do so.

We saw an example of this here in Switzerland with the men when we played in our first Rugby Europe Championship earlier this year - we may have gotten slapped around, but the opener vs Georgia was the first time ever a game of the Swiss national team was broadcast on TV. Thats what gets you attention, and attention gets you funding and sponsorships, even if you aren't competitive in the actual game.

3

u/tfrules Scarlets 5h ago

Speaking absolute truth here.

Whenever someone brings representation like this up I like to think about Cricket.

Here in Wales, we are ‘represented’ by England internationally, which means if you’re a welsh person wanting to watch cricket, you either only get to support Glamorgan, or you have to stomach cheering on for England when England is the number 1 rival for wales in the biggest sport in Wales.

If there was an international welsh cricket team, I would have considered watching them when I was growing up as a kid, and would probably be quite invested in the sport today. As it is, that is not the case. I imagine all the new teams coming into the RWC will get quite a bit of attention and following from their attendance, just look at how Chile and Portugal have come along since making an appearance.

3

u/Nounours7 Spain 3h ago

You do realise half of these blowouts have nothing to do with RWC expansion, don't you? USA and Fiji were there last time around, Ireland, Spain and Samoa have played RWC before.

5

u/chickenlittle668 Reds 8h ago

Yes but you still had bigger game to look forward too and much closer games across the board in week 1 and every week.

My post isn't to compare to the mens World Cup. Simply hoping to see some better games going forward.

1

u/Dapper-Message-2066 4h ago

No, it hasn't

1

u/StorminaHalfPint Brok the Barbarian 4h ago

It's still early days for the women's game. This will need another decade for 6-10 competitive sides. It's like the "first mover advantage" at work. Really great growth of the game!

1

u/Dapper-Message-2066 4h ago

Hats off to the Welsh women? They were absolutely dreadful.

u/maryland_cookies Northampton Saints 1h ago

Loved Japan too, some really excellent kicks from their half backs in play, and their try was fantastic showing thir potential at their best! 

4

u/BallsToTheWallNone vat net die 3 punte asb 7h ago

week 2 will probably be the same except for the SA v Italy game I suppose.

11

u/SweptFever80 Ireland, Ulster and Munster 6h ago

USA vs Australia could be close

17

u/JohnnyHovercraft Australia 8h ago

Once we get these top teams playing each other, it should even out a bit.

There’s still a big gulf between the teams playing really good professional rugby and the amateurs. Hopefully that gulf will shrink in the coming years.

To be fair, this often happens in the mens RWC too.

3

u/chickenlittle668 Reds 8h ago

Yeah I'm more pointing out this week and hoping it's a weird 1 off rather than the norm going forward.

But unfortunately I feel the second week will have games with a similar trend.

3

u/carson63000 Highlanders 5h ago

Do you think the players in the top seeded teams would prefer to have their toughest pool match early in the piece? Or last up before the knockouts?

I can see arguments for either.

4

u/tfrules Scarlets 6h ago edited 6h ago

Yes I was quite disappointed with the lopsided standard of rugby in this tournament so far, the rugby on display was often good to watch but there was a significant disparity between even teams who, in theory, aren’t a million miles between each other. It’s a bit boringly predictable unfortunately.

It’s a bit like 90s men’s rugby where the transition to professionalisation was still coming in, just massively lopsided scores all around.

Hopefully minnows in the women’s game can grow and develop so that we can get a tournament like rwc 2023 from the women in the future. Right now, we’ll probably have to wait for the knockouts before we get consistently good games.

5

u/k0bra3eak Doktor Erasmus 4h ago

You'd swear it's many people's first world cup in the men or women's game in general there's always a fee huge blowouts

3

u/Training-Trifle-2572 3h ago

I didn't find the scores reflected a lot of the matches, sure the scoring was somewhat one sided in a lot of games, but I didn't think the play/effort necessarily was. Spain had a cracking game against NZ for large parts of the game, and USA played a good game despite not turning their chances into points. The Fijians and Japanese were pretty good too. Would be nice to see Wales have a better game next week and excited to see more of the latest SA bomb squad :D

5

u/JColey15 Southland Stags 6h ago

There were some blowouts but the games were still interesting. USA did test England at points and the scoreline doesn’t really reflect their effort, especially in the first half. France v Italy and Scotland v Wales were predicted to be a bit closer as well.

I think World Rugby are hoping this tournament will get new people into watching and playing rugby rather than converting mens rugby supporters into womens rugby supporters so having a lot of teams from all over might help with that.

If they’re watching the games, not just following the scores, they’ll see some very good rugby being played by all the teams. The top teams are just exploiting space a little more with their good kickers and x-factor players, or using their power game with a bit more accuracy. It’s a bit like the 1995 mens world cup in that some teams are a lot more professional than others so there’s a bit of a gap there.

13

u/neverbeenstardust #1 Alia Bitonci Fan 8h ago

It's the first round of a pool based tournament. What did you expect? The point of pool games is to figure out which games will make for exciting quarterfinals. Every team gets a chance to put their hand up but most of them won't make the cut. It's bad tournament design to put the exciting matches up front. You want things to get more and more exciting as the tournament goes on.

7

u/TheHayvek England 7h ago

It's the first round of a pool based tournament. What did you expect?

I follow a lot of sports and of course there are always blow outs, but it's pretty rare for an entire round of games to be this one sided.

Your post baffles me.

3

u/Awktair 4h ago

I thought the wales Scotland game would be closer, but apart from that these results weren’t unexpected. Spain actually did better than I thought, England almost put 100 on them a few weeks ago. In the men’s and women’s World Cup there’s always plenty of blowouts. Same in the league World Cup and other sports like cricket. Brazil is the only country that could potentially be massively out of their depth here. All the other teams can be competitive in at least one or two games. Unfortunately NZ and England are so dominant, it doesn’t matter how small the tournament is, there will still be blowouts, as we saw with the USA who are not a bad team.

-3

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 6h ago

Women’s sport brings out this really weird thing where you cannot be critical, even of the things that deserve criticism.

1

u/icyDinosaur Ireland / Switzerland 5h ago

To me this has nothing to do with women's sports, I just think it's a silly criticism no matter what. You can't design the closeness of games (like it has been pointed out, not all of these games had to be one-sided), and the logical consequence seems to be a tiny tournament - which is really just saying you want a closed circle.

Most sports have a field that goes beyond the absolute elite in World Cups because a) this is what makes it a meaningfully global tournament, and b) it's an instrument to generate attention in smaller countries. Getting to participate in international competition is what put my national team on national TV the first time this year. It's why we are now broadcasting handball and swimming. It's how we ended up with our women's football team being stars.

This just isn't a thing that does deserve criticism imo, because it's somewhat inherent in the thing that makes a World Cup special in the first place. Plus, some of the one-sided games were fun to watch imo (I quite enjoyed SA vs Brazil and Scotland vs Wales for instance; England vs US was also fun for at least half of it)

1

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 5h ago

…you can absolutely design close games, what are you on about? It’s how people schedule up every other league and event…

It doesn’t mean those games will be tight, but will have a chance of it. Basically no game at this world Cup until the semis will have any jeopardy.

And you can build up to these events AROUND the World Cup, not at it.

3

u/icyDinosaur Ireland / Switzerland 5h ago

If no game until the semis has any jeopardy, the only way to design around it would be a 4 team WC. Which you can argue for, but as someone from a country that isn't really that level of competitive in any major sport, you'd pretty much kill professional sports here. I doubt that's the goal for rugby.

0

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 4h ago

I think 8 could maybe work?

…but also, yeah?

Maybe we should be having a conversation about having the sport be of a level is could have supported 12-teams rather than lifting it up to 16 prematurely, or have a think about how you could be inventive and adjust the tournament to mitigate for this, or what events we could be really driving between World Cups to drive attendance - what could be adjusted there from just locking 6-teams into a male run event for example and actually look at what would drive growth, and maybe there not being basically only one female domestic league worth playing in.

Just spitballing…

1

u/carson63000 Highlanders 5h ago

For sure.

The teams are grouped into four bands. Opening weekend we saw:

Pool A: 1v3, 2v4
Pool B: 1v4, 2v3
Pool C: 1v4, 2v3
Pool D: 1v2, 3v4

So in theory, one pool was scheduled to have its big game first up, pool D: but that France vs. Italy match ended up being 24-0.

The other three pools all have their top seeds playing on the third and final matchday. That seems a bit unwise, next weekend could well be even more lopsided that this weekend was.

2

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 4h ago

Bingo.

And I get this happens. We have big games not be big and games that should have been blow outs not be all the time.

But in the women’s games the gulf is just SO big. It’s like high school playing primary school for some of the matches…

7

u/chickenlittle668 Reds 8h ago

Yeah but there's probs a lot of casuals and first time viewers and if the first week was like this then unfortunately I reckon a number of people lose interest plus even for people like us who enjoy rugby as a main sport it's still a bit boring and questions why expand the World Cup. I mean the womens cricket World Cup this year is only 8 teams and there's going to probs be more interest around that.

9

u/neverbeenstardust #1 Alia Bitonci Fan 8h ago

If they expect the first week of the tournament to be all close games, then they don't understand how pool based tournaments work and the tournament does not need to be changed to fit their fundamentally incorrect expectations.

Also we did have games that were supposed to be close this weekend: The commentators really bigged up how Scotland and Wales' last six games had all finished with less than a score in them. Planners can't have known how Wales would go between the drawings and now. And France-Italy was within a score for like 77 minutes when they played in the Six Nations and then Italy gave away two easy tries right at the end. Those were very exciting to watch because they could have been close and it was shocking that they weren't.

6

u/chickenlittle668 Reds 8h ago

Hopefully there's closer games in week 2 😊

4

u/neverbeenstardust #1 Alia Bitonci Fan 8h ago

Definitely agree there. My week 2 dream is One (1) game where the team in the lead changes. That's all I ask.

2

u/draenog_ 4h ago

New rugby fan here! I only really became interested at all earlier this year.

I saw a couple of the men's six nations games on TV at the pub and was surprised that I enjoyed it. Then we got tickets to watch a couple of the Red Roses six nations games live at York and Twickenham, and then I've watched three of the world cup games so far live at Sunderland and York.

I'm really enjoying it. All three of the games I've watched were interesting and exciting to watch, even though the fight the lower ranked teams put up didn't translate to the scoreboard.

If anything, I'm getting the impression that lopsided scores are more of an issue for existing fans of men's rugby. That seems to be the direction that all the cynicism is coming from.

even for people like us who enjoy rugby as a main sport it's still a bit boring and questions why expand the World Cup

The atmosphere at York community stadium yesterday when Spain finally got a try over the line in the final minute of the game was anything but boring. I think I've lost my voice.

2

u/JColey15 Southland Stags 2h ago

That’s so awesome and I’m glad you’re on board!

2

u/KorkeBro New Zealand 8h ago

Valid point

2

u/LM285 Harlequins 3h ago

I like to think less about the scores and more about the performances. The big trend is that the basic technical skills are getting better.

You used to see a lot of handling errors, shinned kicks and other stuff which to me highlighted the difference between nations and between men and women.

You get that less now, though I thought the Japan team were sadly a bit more clearly struggling to put the ball through the hands.

3

u/Confudled_Contractor 6h ago

You can hope all you want but it’s the group stage of a Rugby World Cup. Barring an upset or a sudden upheaval in the rugby ecosphere the will always be big and small fish.

2

u/WhyIsItGlowing 5h ago

You've ignored the option of small and no fish, where the World Cup consists solely of England tours to New Zealand.

4

u/TheHayvek England 7h ago

My interest is waning already if I'm completely honest. I asked on another thread which games were likely to be competitive. I got 4-5 recommendations. Two of them have already gone and they were pretty one sided.

6

u/JColey15 Southland Stags 6h ago

The NZ v Ireland game will be a good one with a lot of quarter-final implications. USA v Australia, Canda v Scotland, and Italy v South Africa are all potentially good games to watch as well. I can’t promise that there won’t be blow outs because women’s rugby is a bit more expansive than the mens game so there is usually more points scored.

2

u/TheHayvek England 5h ago

I've definitely enjoyed the increase in ball in hand time in the women's game.

I'll definitely look to tune in for USA v Australia game next weekend.

3

u/NecessaryUsername69 New Zealand 7h ago

In fairness, this is the script for the World Cups of most sports.

3

u/TheHayvek England 5h ago

I'd go the other way and say it's pretty rare to this degree.

6

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 7h ago edited 7h ago

Nah man, not in Soccer or Basketball. You routinely have big teams get upset or knocked out in the first round in Soccer. Basketball to a lesser extent.

Even in Cricket, you have closer games and loads of upsets, especially in the T20 format.

Namibia beat Sri Lanka, Scotland beat Bangladesh, Ireland beat West Indies, Afghanistan beat Australia, Netherlands beat South Africa, USA famously beat Pakistan, just in the last two T20 World Cups.

3

u/chickenlittle668 Reds 7h ago

Even the ODI World Cup you had the reigning champions England struggle tremendously and teams like Afghanistan were very competitive across the tournament.

2

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 7h ago

Yup 100%.

2

u/NecessaryUsername69 New Zealand 5h ago

You’re right - I should have said “many” instead of “most. And you huge good examples. Just don’t think the women’s Rugby World Cup is alone when it comes to mismatches in the early stages of world championships.

1

u/HexisLeVrai France 4h ago edited 2h ago

You cannot say "many" and not give any other example.

2

u/infinitemonkeytyping Australia 6h ago

To be honest, I think WR pulled the trigger on a 16-team cup 4 years too early. Probably should have stuck with 12 teams this year, and helped expand the WXV to help more teams become competitive.

3

u/Nounours7 Spain 3h ago

12 teams format, given regional distribution of berths, was leaving a couple competitive teams out.

2

u/Tobar_the_Gypsy Rugby United NY 3h ago

At the same time, England is the perfect location for some of the matches. Even with a few weaker teams involved you are able to host them at more appropriate sized stadiums. I don’t think Australia is planning to use similar stadiums. 

2

u/GROUND45 6h ago

I wish I triple captained Ellie Kildunne.

3

u/saviouroftheweak Premiership Women's Rugby 7h ago

Forget the sledge thread we've got a big moan thread right here. Follow it or don't, we'll fill the stadiums for the red roses regardless

3

u/tfrules Scarlets 5h ago edited 4h ago

Nobody’s doubting the growing popularity of the women’s game?

It’s just when you compare this to most other World Cup tournaments in other sports, you get at least a few genuinely competitive, exciting games right from the beginning

As somebody who enjoys watching rugby, it’s best when the winner isn’t a foregone conclusion by the end of the first half

I think it’s fair to have a bit of a moan when all the scoreline are as one sided as they are, the same would happen for the men’s game too if this happened

1

u/JColey15 Southland Stags 2h ago

In 2015 NZ beat France 62-13 in a quarter final in the Mens tournament. Did we moan?

1

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 6h ago

I never really understand this - so…you think this weekend had close games do you?

It’s not allowed to point out that while women’s rugby is growing, and we all understand it’ll take time there wasn’t a hint of any of these games being at all competitive?

This wasn’t a comment on attendance - people will come for the spectacle of a World Cup…but without good games they won’t stick around. You get that right? We watch sport for drama, not just to blindly cheer on progress

2

u/saviouroftheweak Premiership Women's Rugby 6h ago

You're allowed to point it out and I simply do not care. I'm attending and I'm enjoying it. Trust me the newbies to this in England are loving it too.

Rugby has a limited number of nations. When the men's teams in Chile, Uruguay, Namibia, Romania, Spain, even Georgia get blown out by the major 6-8 teams did that make you switch off? Or are you on the sub to moan about that too?

Edit: The major narrative in England is, can the red roses finally lift this world cup curse? That's all the drama I need

3

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 5h ago

It got pointed out and you just had to jump into the “moan thread” to share your opinion 🤔

…and, yeah? I think the expansion of the men’s World Cup is a massive massive mistake. No one wants “more games” we want more competitive games.

There’s routes to that, and showcasing trash on rugby’s biggest stage isn’t that.

-2

u/saviouroftheweak Premiership Women's Rugby 5h ago edited 5h ago

I don't think you understand what World Cups are. The world gets invited.

Stick to NFL 👍

2

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 5h ago

Lol.

Sounds good buddy - enjoy watching nothing.

Hope Canada smash you in the final 😘

0

u/saviouroftheweak Premiership Women's Rugby 5h ago

That would be good

Edit: outing yourself as a non fan with this though

0

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 4h ago

…sure 😂😂😂

2

u/saviouroftheweak Premiership Women's Rugby 4h ago

Enjoy watching nothing said by an apparent rugby fan. Nah

1

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 4h ago edited 4h ago

It’s not about blindly watching rugby. I said that - it’s about watching GOOD rugby.

I can be a fan, and have better things to do than watch one dominant team put 90 on another. I’ll watch the highlights of that.

If the Prem ousted half the teams, and replaced them with primary school children…would you be berating me not watching?

No - you’d ask where the competition was. You are rugby’s problem in a nutshell. The sport isn’t OWED viewers, it needs to earn them.

This event so far…isn’t.

Wake me up for the semis. Probably only the final.

🤐

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Sammy296296 Ireland 4h ago

Yeah it's the one problem with the women's game that hopefully gets better over the next decade.

Amazing how good womens rugby has become but the disparity is quality/skill between teams is massive.

1

u/MC897 3h ago

The major disappointments came from Italy and from Wales.

Wales particularly. They are a side full of names, and a lot of connections to gloucester hartpury, the best club side probably in womens rugby. If I was welsh and a welsh women's rugby fan, I'd be miffed a bit. You turned professional a few years ago and slightly earlier than Scotland, certainly earlier than Ireland. You're not even in the same league as them. As soon as Scotland were 10+ points ahead the game was done.

Wales find it ridiculously hard to score any try at all, let alone make a fight of a game. There are no backs moves at all, most of those girls wouldn't make Fiji's backline with how limp and stodgy they were or Samoa's. How they play for Gloucester Hartpury I've no idea and I do wonder if the coach is coasting off of that reputation as well.

I was angry watching wales and I'm an england fan. The regression we've seen from that side since professionalism has been nuts. Scotland have a competent, won't compete with the best teams but there's a clear structure. Decent defence, good kicking game with options for the boot who can make metres, accurate or not. They've sound basics. Just can't mix it with the best right now.

Wales don't have any of that, I mean other than against Australia I can't even remember one backs try in 5 years. It's essentially up the jumper stuff from the pack, a maul try or their stuffed and that's from a team loaded with well known rated players which I now debate.

Surprised more wasn't made of it.

1

u/KroxhKanible Harlequins 2h ago

Yeah, the rwc always has blowouts the first couple weeks.

1

u/Awhyte1983 2h ago

As a Scotland fan, I'm glad the girls got the job done against Wales with relative ease.

Really did expect it to be a tight one though.

u/barkmutton Canada 1h ago

Scotland Wales surprised me tbh. I expected a tight fight there.

-2

u/phoneix150 New Zealand 9h ago edited 7h ago

The average margin of defeat across the opening weekend was a whopping 48 points!

I am sorry but that is dreadful. As it is, there are only three or four realistic contenders for a World Cup win and repeated defeats by large margins like this significantly reduces the value proposition and attractiveness of the WC package.

World Rugby needs to do targeted investments into regional events and build the sport's depth, before we consider expansion. I suspect that these one-sided defeats will continue until we get to the knockout stage. And even there, we probably have to wait until the semis.


Now I understand why the WC was expanded to 16 teams for this edition. 12 teams make for an awkward group qualification, with basically most third placed finishers going through and making the group stage largely a formality. However, the (4 * 4) 16 team WC has hardly changed that reality, as the depth and strength of teams beyond the top 6 is just not there.

How is this good for the game? I reckon, lets go back to the 12 team World Cup and make qualification more stringent, so only the table toppers and 1 second placed team go directly into the semi-finals. Let's take a sensible approach.

I am ONLY willing to entertain a 16 team WC if ONLY the group leaders qualify for knockouts. So direct to semis with no quarter-finals. At least, that would bring some jeopardy back into the flagship event.

3

u/Beautiful-Cow4521 6h ago

To be honest 8 and a pre-tourney qualifying event would probably be better.

Not sure how you’d make that 8-work as an event - maybe 2 groups, everyone plays twice and 1st plays 2nd three times like a lions tour for the World Cup honours?

But yeah. I have no interest in watching these games until we get really to the SF.

2

u/SweptFever80 Ireland, Ulster and Munster 5h ago

There were really only 3 or 4 contenders for the last men's world cup as well and it also had crazy blowout scores. Scotland vs Romania 84-0, France vs Namibia 96-0. You even had NZ vs Italy 96-17 and Italy is a tier 1 side.

2

u/tfrules Scarlets 4h ago

Whilst that’s true, in the first weekend of that tournament we got an absolute banger right from the start in France NZ, we expect to see some blowouts no matter what, but not for every game on a given weekend

2

u/SweptFever80 Ireland, Ulster and Munster 3h ago

Yeah but you have the host start the first game and England are unbeaten since the last women's world cup final; there's no one in their group who has a real chance of beating them.

In the women's game there's a huge disparity caused by the different levels of funding and professionalism in each team, there's nothing the organisers can do with that and you can't force teams to be better or worse than they are for the sake of entertainment.

Scotland vs Wales should have been competitive but it was the biggest score difference in a fixture between the two in 10 years because Scotland were good and Wales were very poor. That's an entertaining result in itself but if you want to blame someone for the lack of competitive game this weekend you can blame Wales. Likewise Italy didn't show up against France.

You could even argue that having NZ and France in the same group in the men's was a bit of a disaster caused by the seedings being done too early, because they really should have met in the knockouts, could have even been the final, good opening game but maybe not good for the tournament as a whole.

u/TourDuhFrance Canada 1h ago

I reckon, let’s go back to the 12 team World Cup and make qualification more stringent, so only the table toppers and 1 second placed team go directly into the semi-finals. Let's take a sensible approach.

Absolutely not. That format was terrible and usually meant that the semi final berth for the best second place team was based on who could run up the score the most against the 3rd and 4th place teams in their pool. Even the slightest imbalance in pool depth meant the fate of a contender was no longer in their own hands.

0

u/Agreeable_Falcon1044 6h ago

Nobody got truly thumped. Looking at some of those ties, I was expecting several to go 100+. It’s a credit everyone kept going. I was at the Brazil game yesterday and loved it. I saw the Spain game later and thought they really shone against much better opposition.

Let’s be honest, in the men’s game, New Zealand v Spain, South Africa v Brazil or England v USA would get far bigger scorelines.

1

u/ShaneQful Ireland/Leinster 4h ago

Think Ireland vs Japan was a good game till Eve Higgins went the length of the pitch with that intercept

u/TheHayvek England 1h ago

Went from game on to game over in 30 seconds that one.

0

u/Particular_Safety569 New Zealand 6h ago

You wont