Page 3 of 77
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 12:16 am
by eldanielfire
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:49 pm
by eldanielfire
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41995732
England women now will be paid for their Autumn Internationals. They will get around £5K for all 3 matches. Pay will be in place for all future test periods as well:
England women's players have secured a pay deal with the Rugby Football Union (RFU) before the autumn internationals.
For the first time, the RFU will pay a match fee, while all players in the Elite Player Squad (EPS) will receive a squad training fee.
The figures are confidential, although the BBC understands a player involved in all matches will make between £4,000 and £5,000 in total this autumn.
England face Canada in a three-Test series, with the opener on Friday.
Last month, the RFU said they would introduce training fees and match fees, and an agreement was reached earlier this week.
While the women's XV-a-side contracts were controversially not renewed following the Rugby World Cup, it's hoped the new payment plan will represent a milestone in the women's game.
Under the terms of the new deal, the women's players will not be salaried employees of the RFU, but will be paid when on England duty in the autumn, Six Nations, and summer tour.
The match fee for the women's players is vastly lower than that received by their male counterparts, which can be explained by a variety of factors such as attendances and commercial reach.
While Twickenham regularly reaches its 82,000 capacity for a men's international, the women's opener with Canada has, in comparison, sold 1,500 tickets.
A senior men's international can make in excess of £22,000 per match, a bundle that also includes training fees and lucrative image rights.
England's men have collectively licensed their image rights because of commercial demand, which isn't the case with the women.
However, it's believed the RFU is considering introducing a rate card for commercial appearances for the women's players, which would be separate from training and match fees, although that will not come into play this autumn.
Experienced women's internationals Tamara Taylor, Danielle Waterman and Vicky Cornborough have been negotiating on behalf of the players, alongside the Rugby Players' Association (RPA).
"We have been working with the RPA and a representative group of players to agree a pay structure for the Women's XVs squad," an RFU spokeswoman told the BBC.
"The pay deal includes a squad fee and a match fee and is another step forward in our drive to professionalise the women's game in England."
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:53 pm
by le chat
eldanielfire wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41995732
England women now will be paid for their Autumn Internationals. They will get around £5 for all 3 matches. Pay will be in place for all future test periods as well:
England women's players have secured a pay deal with the Rugby Football Union (RFU) before the autumn internationals.
For the first time, the RFU will pay a match fee, while all players in the Elite Player Squad (EPS) will receive a squad training fee.
The figures are confidential, although the BBC understands a player involved in all matches will make between £4,000 and £5,000 in total this autumn.
England face Canada in a three-Test series, with the opener on Friday.
Last month, the RFU said they would introduce training fees and match fees, and an agreement was reached earlier this week.
While the women's XV-a-side contracts were controversially not renewed following the Rugby World Cup, it's hoped the new payment plan will represent a milestone in the women's game.
Under the terms of the new deal, the women's players will not be salaried employees of the RFU, but will be paid when on England duty in the autumn, Six Nations, and summer tour.
The match fee for the women's players is vastly lower than that received by their male counterparts, which can be explained by a variety of factors such as attendances and commercial reach.
While Twickenham regularly reaches its 82,000 capacity for a men's international, the women's opener with Canada has, in comparison, sold 1,500 tickets.
A senior men's international can make in excess of £22,000 per match, a bundle that also includes training fees and lucrative image rights.
England's men have collectively licensed their image rights because of commercial demand, which isn't the case with the women.
However, it's believed the RFU is considering introducing a rate card for commercial appearances for the women's players, which would be separate from training and match fees, although that will not come into play this autumn.
Experienced women's internationals Tamara Taylor, Danielle Waterman and Vicky Cornborough have been negotiating on behalf of the players, alongside the Rugby Players' Association (RPA).
"We have been working with the RPA and a representative group of players to agree a pay structure for the Women's XVs squad," an RFU spokeswoman told the BBC.
"The pay deal includes a squad fee and a match fee and is another step forward in our drive to professionalise the women's game in England."
they can't grumble at that
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 1:55 pm
by eldanielfire
It's a starting point. Hopefully the pay and conditions will continue to evolve upwards.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:12 pm
by le chat
eldanielfire wrote:It's a starting point. Hopefully the pay and conditions will continue to evolve upwards.
They should be paid the exact same as the male players for equality
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:44 pm
by happyhooker
eldanielfire wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41995732
England women now will be paid for their Autumn Internationals.
They will get around £5 for all 3 matches. Pay will be in place for all future test periods as well:
[quote]
England women's players have secured a pay deal with the Rugby Football Union (RFU) before the autumn internationals.
For the first time, the RFU will pay a match fee, while all players in the Elite Player Squad (EPS) will receive a squad training fee.
The figures are confidential, although the BBC understands a player involved in all matches will make between £4,000 and £5,000 in total this autumn.
England face Canada in a three-Test series, with the opener on Friday.
Last month, the RFU said they would introduce training fees and match fees, and an agreement was reached earlier this week.
While the women's XV-a-side contracts were controversially not renewed following the Rugby World Cup, it's hoped the new payment plan will represent a milestone in the women's game.
Under the terms of the new deal, the women's players will not be salaried employees of the RFU, but will be paid when on England duty in the autumn, Six Nations, and summer tour.
The match fee for the women's players is vastly lower than that received by their male counterparts, which can be explained by a variety of factors such as attendances and commercial reach.
While Twickenham regularly reaches its 82,000 capacity for a men's international, the women's opener with Canada has, in comparison, sold 1,500 tickets.
A senior men's international can make in excess of £22,000 per match, a bundle that also includes training fees and lucrative image rights.
England's men have collectively licensed their image rights because of commercial demand, which isn't the case with the women.
However, it's believed the RFU is considering introducing a rate card for commercial appearances for the women's players, which would be separate from training and match fees, although that will not come into play this autumn.
Experienced women's internationals Tamara Taylor, Danielle Waterman and Vicky Cornborough have been negotiating on behalf of the players, alongside the Rugby Players' Association (RPA).
"We have been working with the RPA and a representative group of players to agree a pay structure for the Women's XVs squad," an RFU spokeswoman told the BBC.
"The pay deal includes a squad fee and a match fee and is another step forward in our drive to professionalise the women's game in England."
[/quote][/spoiler]
Golly.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:49 pm
by eldanielfire
le chat wrote:eldanielfire wrote:It's a starting point. Hopefully the pay and conditions will continue to evolve upwards.
They should be paid the exact same as the male players for equality
I would love that, but's not realistic right now but it should be a goal to aim towards as the women's game grows.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:49 pm
by eldanielfire
happyhooker wrote:eldanielfire wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/41995732
England women now will be paid for their Autumn Internationals.
They will get around £5 for all 3 matches. Pay will be in place for all future test periods as well:
[quote]
England women's players have secured a pay deal with the Rugby Football Union (RFU) before the autumn internationals.
For the first time, the RFU will pay a match fee, while all players in the Elite Player Squad (EPS) will receive a squad training fee.
The figures are confidential, although the BBC understands a player involved in all matches will make between £4,000 and £5,000 in total this autumn.
England face Canada in a three-Test series, with the opener on Friday.
Last month, the RFU said they would introduce training fees and match fees, and an agreement was reached earlier this week.
While the women's XV-a-side contracts were controversially not renewed following the Rugby World Cup, it's hoped the new payment plan will represent a milestone in the women's game.
Under the terms of the new deal, the women's players will not be salaried employees of the RFU, but will be paid when on England duty in the autumn, Six Nations, and summer tour.
The match fee for the women's players is vastly lower than that received by their male counterparts, which can be explained by a variety of factors such as attendances and commercial reach.
While Twickenham regularly reaches its 82,000 capacity for a men's international, the women's opener with Canada has, in comparison, sold 1,500 tickets.
A senior men's international can make in excess of £22,000 per match, a bundle that also includes training fees and lucrative image rights.
England's men have collectively licensed their image rights because of commercial demand, which isn't the case with the women.
However, it's believed the RFU is considering introducing a rate card for commercial appearances for the women's players, which would be separate from training and match fees, although that will not come into play this autumn.
Experienced women's internationals Tamara Taylor, Danielle Waterman and Vicky Cornborough have been negotiating on behalf of the players, alongside the Rugby Players' Association (RPA).
"We have been working with the RPA and a representative group of players to agree a pay structure for the Women's XVs squad," an RFU spokeswoman told the BBC.
"The pay deal includes a squad fee and a match fee and is another step forward in our drive to professionalise the women's game in England."
[/spoiler]
Golly.[/quote]
I spotted the error
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:56 pm
by le chat
eldanielfire wrote:le chat wrote:eldanielfire wrote:It's a starting point. Hopefully the pay and conditions will continue to evolve upwards.
They should be paid the exact same as the male players for equality
I would love that, but's not realistic right now but it should be a goal to aim towards as the women's game grows.
why isn't it realistic?
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:27 pm
by eldanielfire
le chat wrote:eldanielfire wrote:le chat wrote:eldanielfire wrote:It's a starting point. Hopefully the pay and conditions will continue to evolve upwards.
They should be paid the exact same as the male players for equality
I would love that, but's not realistic right now but it should be a goal to aim towards as the women's game grows.
why isn't it realistic?
The women's game is not professional yet. Right now having an England squad paid and the players from the 10 Premiership teams still amateur it would give lost of talent no change to develop in they aren't in the England set-up. There is also the income. If the RFU paid the women the same rate as the men they would be paying out £200,000k-£300,000k a game. For 2016 that would mean some nearly 3 million pounds in wages which they don't have. In perspective that is nearly 4 times the amount all 10 teams in the entire elite women's league gets each year. Just throwing it in straight away, if they had it, would fracture the game, damage progression and not help increase the quality of the game to make it of greater interest to punters and sponsors.
They need to evolve the game to professional status to be able to make equal pay in a healthy system. I hope they do it quickly, the RFU is certainly committed now to growing the women's game so it does become sustainable and more popular. They are plowing £10 million with the objective to double the number of women playing each week, doubling the number of players and adding 350 new teams to the women's game. One step at a time. It's evolution not revolution that's needed for success and sustainability.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:41 pm
by le chat
eldanielfire wrote:le chat wrote:eldanielfire wrote:le chat wrote:eldanielfire wrote:It's a starting point. Hopefully the pay and conditions will continue to evolve upwards.
They should be paid the exact same as the male players for equality
I would love that, but's not realistic right now but it should be a goal to aim towards as the women's game grows.
why isn't it realistic?
The women's game is not professional yet. Right now having an England squad paid and the players from the 10 Premiership teams still amateur it would give lost of talent no change to develop in they aren't in the England set-up. There is also the income. If the RFU paid the women the same rate as the men they would be paying out £200,000k-£300,000k a game. For 2016 that would mean some nearly 3 million pounds in wages which they don't have. In perspective that is nearly 4 times the amount all 10 teams in the entire elite women's league gets each year. Just throwing it in straight away, if they had it, would fracture the game, damage progression and not help increase the quality of the game to make it of greater interest to punters and sponsors.
They need to evolve the game to professional status to be able to make equal pay in a healthy system. I hope they do it quickly, the RFU is certainly committed now to growing the women's game so it does become sustainable and more popular. They are plowing £10 million with the objective to double the number of women playing each week, doubling the number of players and adding 350 new teams to the women's game. One step at a time. It's evolution not revolution that's needed for success and sustainability.
if they paid the same as men the women who are still amateur would be incentivized to make it to the England side, regardless of how it would affect the league anyway, it's not right that they don't get paid the same as the male players, RFU can do something about that, the league is a different matter
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:18 pm
by eldanielfire
le chat wrote:
if they paid the same as men the women who are still amateur would be incentivized to make it to the England side, regardless of how it would affect the league anyway, it's not right that they don't get paid the same as the male players, RFU can do something about that, the league is a different matter
Incentisized how? When I hear "Incentivised" points in a debate it is usually by somebody who can't explain how when you have 2 equally motivated and hardworking people how the one with fewer resources or none can be incentivised to do better then the one with all the resources.
Someone working full time can't train as much or as hard, nor get as much rest as a full time athlete or a rich athlete who doesn't need to work, especially when rest periods are as vital to recovery, growing muscle and being recovered for the next session. They can try, but they will not be able to keep up but it will only create a social divide, not open it up to greater talent. No incentive is going to change this unless there is a base higher with certain physiological, social and economic requirements are met that all athletes start from. Incentivise does nothing from the bottom.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:45 pm
by Lobby
le chat wrote:
if they paid the same as men the women who are still amateur would be incentivized to make it to the England side, regardless of how it would affect the league anyway, it's not right that they don't get paid the same as the male players, RFU can do something about that, the league is a different matter
Rugby is hardly unusual in not paying its women players comparable salaries to the men. Tennis is probably the only sport where men and women receive the same or comparable remuneration.
Football is much richer than rugby, and the women's game is now starting to attract more money and TV exposure, but the 'gender pay gap' in football is even greater than in rugby.
In England there are now 30 women football players who are paid a minimum of £25,000 per year on the central contracts, rising to around £30,000 with appearance bonuses.
Even a top bracket earner in women’s football such as Steph Houghton, is likely only getting around £70,000 per year including income from sponsors. In contrast, the best players in the US can earn about $3M, although most will come from sponsorship deals and advertising.
It is good news that the RFU will be paying the England 15s players, as well as the 7s players, but we are long way from being able pay them even close to what the men get paid. In most other countries, the women get paid nothing, or just expenses.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 2:27 pm
by eldanielfire
I believe the RFU are streaming the England-Canada game tomorrow on YouTube
England team for tomorrow:
An interesting mix of the estabslih team and new players.
Sarah Hunter moves to 6 for Poppy Cleall. Leanne Riley is hugely deserved at 9. But Rachel Burford at 13 is unusual, she's and excellent 12 and has been an excellent 10 for Quins. She's also the best defender, bets creative mind and passer of the ball. It seems to be done to bring reed in and keep Mclean at 10. IMO McLean should be dropped, Burford at 10 (she has been stunning this season), Reed at 12 and maybe Lagi at 13. Or have Mclean and Burford at their usual 10-12 spot and add a 13. I tend to find players being moved to put in players of the same position isn't a winning game plan.
Breech and Dow on the wings is ace though. Looking forward to that and the bench looks great.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:40 pm
by Nieghorn
The Canucks are in for a hiding ... potentially. I don't know a lot about our team because it's full of so many new names. Our U20s haven't inspired in the last few years, the university circuit doesn't have the quality it used to have, and I fear the the leaders will pull away from us over the next few years.
1-4 were in the WRWC, and I think 9 (though both 9s were sub-par for me), 12 was playing 10. I know 10, and she's not a strong defender, but has a good boot. Nelles at 8 is highly touted, though.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:51 pm
by eldanielfire
Nieghorn wrote:The Canucks are in for a hiding ... potentially. I don't know a lot about our team because it's full of so many new names. Our U20s haven't inspired in the last few years, the university circuit doesn't have the quality it used to have, and I fear the the leaders will pull away from us over the next few years.
1-4 were in the WRWC, and I think 9 (though both 9s were sub-par for me), 12 was playing 10. I know 10, and she's not a strong defender, but has a good boot. Nelles at 8 is highly touted, though.
This England team, despite a fair few familiar faces is quite experimental. It will be interesting. I'd be gutted if Canada falls away at a time women's rugby is starting to build momentum. Next week I'm taking a trip to one of the tests, 50 mostly girls going and very few of them have ever seen a rugby match. I'm quite proud of that.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:40 pm
by Nieghorn
Nice one!
We may drop off the front runners a bit but we'll certainly still be in the chasing pack with the US. What annoys me most about it, is something I've probably mentioned on here before... I'm willing to bet that we have more girls playing than any other nation. The quality needs a huge kick, though.
I might be getting a girls' team off the ground at my new school and am trying to spread the word that I'm willing to share all I know in hopes that we can make this a stronger area.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:17 am
by eldanielfire
Nieghorn wrote:Nice one!
We may drop off the front runners a bit but we'll certainly still be in the chasing pack with the US. What annoys me most about it, is something I've probably mentioned on here before... I'm willing to bet that we have more girls playing than any other nation. The quality needs a huge kick, though.
I might be getting a girls' team off the ground at my new school and am trying to spread the word that I'm willing to share all I know in hopes that we can make this a stronger area.
Cheers.
I'm sure you'll be successful with your team. It's hard stuff establishing girl's sport so best of luck with the great work.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:25 am
by Nieghorn
Was just looking at some women's league world cup highlights ... wondering if Honey Hireme could be the only rugby player to win World Cups in both codes? But noticed she'd already won a League World Cup in 2008, then sevens in 2013, but joined union late and missed out on the 2010 win (finished low with them in 2014).
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:05 pm
by eldanielfire
Nieghorn wrote:Nice one!
We may drop off the front runners a bit but we'll certainly still be in the chasing pack with the US. What annoys me most about it, is something I've probably mentioned on here before... I'm willing to bet that we have more girls playing than any other nation. The quality needs a huge kick, though.
Interestingly I'm taking this trip with two Canadian teachers. The female one does seem to talk about Rugby is if it's just normal for all sporty girls to do at college/university, like netball is for school girls in England. That of course does mean Canada has so much potential. It will be interesting to see England's quality as the RFU is planing to double the women's base again to 100k over 4 or 5 years.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:14 pm
by Nieghorn
To give you an idea I was going post Ottawa Ontario's school sports website, but the XVs rugby is down for the season and will be back up in spring with the new league tables. I remember there being over 30 schools in the region having girls rugby.
What is on the site, is the fall sevens series and there are 25 schools that participated in that. Now this is fairly new and not all schools will participate because tradition (and I thought rules) didn't allow one sport to have training / games outside of it's normal season - prevented football (fall) from making boys do spring training camp instead of the spring sports. I guess they'e argued that 7s is different if rules still are in place, but clearly some teams use it as prep because they'll start light training in January (during girls volleyball season) in the buildup to spring.
I wouldn't do it because I think kids should play a variety of sports and not get into this all-year intense training for just one. But it shows how popular the game is here (and Ottawa hasn't produced as many champions as some of the smaller cities in the province).
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:58 pm
by eldanielfire
I'm so glad Shaungh Brown made the England squad match day, she should get her first cap off the bench. If you recall I stated I felt she should deffo be called up by England when she was leftout of the original squad. She seems so chuffed that she is in there. She just reported on Instagram:
Look. I’m in the same posts as these legends #humble #womensrugby #harlequins #harlequinsladies #harlequinswomen #rugby #premier15s #repost @harlequins (@get_repost) ・・・
Congratulations to the nine Harlequins set to represent their country this weekend #coyq
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:18 pm
by eldanielfire
I should add the RFU are screening the England Canada game tonight. Hopefully it will be better then their last women's stream which crashed.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 5:50 pm
by Snooze
Nieghorn wrote:To give you an idea I was going post Ottawa Ontario's school sports website, but the XVs rugby is down for the season and will be back up in spring with the new league tables. I remember there being over 30 schools in the region having girls rugby.
What is on the site, is the fall sevens series and there are 25 schools that participated in that. Now this is fairly new and not all schools will participate because tradition (and I thought rules) didn't allow one sport to have training / games outside of it's normal season - prevented football (fall) from making boys do spring training camp instead of the spring sports. I guess they'e argued that 7s is different if rules still are in place, but clearly some teams use it as prep because they'll start light training in January (during girls volleyball season) in the buildup to spring.
I wouldn't do it because I think kids should play a variety of sports and not get into this all-year intense training for just one. But it shows how popular the game is here (and Ottawa hasn't produced as many champions as some of the smaller cities in the province).
Good on you Neigs, for even thinking of trying this.
I can tell you my daughters school got a team together pretty quick, and by the 3rd year they were challenging for the provincial title. And I think I mentioned before, that the girls themselves decided on sevens and became one of the better teams - played at the Womens 7's in Langford.
Good luck and hopefully it'll get off the ground next spring.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:49 pm
by Nieghorn
Cheers, Snooze. I think the girls team will get off the ground here no problem. I had an email today from the former coach who took another job elsewhere, saying I'm in luck because the school is supportive and the kids are really a treat to work with (funny, that their reputation in class isn't, but that's the same as my high school growing up / my first coaching gig ... many who'd rather be outside and give you their all when they're out of the class doing something 'fun').
The boys could be trickier, though, because there were no schools playing last year. I put to the convenor, why not try 10s? XVs in spring, 7s in fall, but we all could probably get 15 committed kids together for 10s (whereas you typically need 25-30 for XVs). He said he'd spread it around and minutes later said the high school up the road is in. We're going to at least give it a shot. I was just saying to the boy who asked me to coach that I imagine all they care about is playing a significant amount of games, regardless of whether it was a 'proper' league, or if we played the same two or three teams over and over. He agreed.
I think sometimes we try and make everything serious with league tables, regional championships, etc. when, really, it's just about having fun. (Now if people would only listen to me when I say the developing schools might be better off playing 7s half field instead of full ... I know from helping girls in Victoria that a few teams that have the less-than-athletic girls get run around relentlessly, and that's not fun. Victoria's also seeing next to know tight five players come out of high school into women's club because those sort of girls will not play, or not stick with, sevens.)
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:38 pm
by eldanielfire
Games on. Streamed on YouTube. Jess breech scores a debut try. She is so rapid and has a bit Shane Williams with her quick footwork.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:03 pm
by eldanielfire
Jess Breech is burning everyone for pace. Hattrick in 30 minutes on debute. Ridiculous!
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:13 pm
by eldanielfire
Now Abby Dow gets a debute try. All from Canada attacking our tryline and and brilliant counter attack giving ur speed girls space.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:34 pm
by Anonymous 1
eldanielfire wrote:Games on. Streamed on YouTube. Jess breech scores a debut try. She is so rapid and has a bit Shane Williams with her quick footwork.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u93sssNGEZs
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:14 pm
by Anonymous 1
6 TRYs on debut and can't get player of the match
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:23 pm
by eldanielfire
Anonymous. wrote:6 TRYs on debut and can't get player of the match
Marley Packer was everywhere though. Making Canada's ball her own. Turnover, turnover. Made it easy for Breech who just had to apply the gas. I seems all the new England girl's fitted straight in with good games, including those off the bench.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:42 pm
by Nieghorn
I thought we'd lose, but not by that much!
I'll have to track down a vid of the match.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:06 am
by eldanielfire
Nieghorn wrote:I thought we'd lose, but not by that much!
I'll have to track down a vid of the match.
the live feed has been left up to rewatch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u93sssNGEZs
A few try clips are in this write-up if you want a quick snapshot of a few the tries:
http://www.englandrugby.com/news/featur ... roses-win/
England played better, far better then they did in the whole world cup. I wonder if they both"over trained" and "over coached" for it.
the newbies all had storming games. To be fair Canada wasn't much interested in passing the ball and I doon't thin they knew about England's new backs who are way, way pacier then most of the ones we had before bar Lydia Thompson. Jess Breech just burnt your wingers, centres and fullbacks for pace on the left wing. Amber Reed was great from 12 and Burford was just supreme in delivering bullet passes to thw wings. Marley Packer was in top form and Poppy Cleall just sucked your defenders in everytime to create overlaps from rucks. England's bench was devestating as well. England were determined to make a statement here.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:28 am
by Nieghorn
Cheers! Will watch.
... apart from these players, the coaches are nothing special either.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:55 am
by eldanielfire
Nieghorn wrote:Cheers! Will watch.
... apart from these players, the coaches are nothing special either.
Fair play to Canada, their heads never went down and their scrum was mostly stronger than England's. Your forwards are still good but Canada really needs some backs with skill.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:47 am
by Nieghorn
As mentioned, our 10 was a complete liability on defence. A few forwards did some fine individual work, and I have to be fair about their lack of time together, but they did look a bit directionless. Time together this week should help them a bit, but there are some clear liabilities in the wings. Centres caught flat footed / pinching a bit as well. SH couldn't get any tempo in the phases.
In addition to the try scorers for England, I was pleasantly surprised by Reed. Great passing and link play. Two unheralded stars for me with the locks, Scott and Burnfield (nice to see her back with England, remember her from years ago). They were all over the place, with great hands and strong carries. Arguably better in the loose than your skipper and 8.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:57 am
by eldanielfire
Nieghorn wrote:As mentioned, our 10 was a complete liability on defence. A few forwards did some fine individual work, and I have to be fair about their lack of time together, but they did look a bit directionless. Time together this week should help them a bit, but there are some clear liabilities in the wings. Centres caught flat footed / pinching a bit as well. SH couldn't get any tempo in the phases.
In addition to the try scorers for England, I was pleasantly surprised by Reed. Great passing and link play. Two unheralded stars for me with the locks, Scott and Burnfield (nice to see her back with England, remember her from years ago). They were all over the place, with great hands and strong carries. Arguably better in the loose than your skipper and 8.
yeah, I've felt Reed has massively stepped up this season. 12 is certainly her position (we botha gree she sin't a 10 now) and her passing was superb at times. Burnfield was superb, especially in the first half and Abby Scott has been getting betetr and better for a year or two now. Poppy Cleall sucked in defenders but didn't rampage and did great with a scrumm coming backwards to her. When Brown came on at 6 and Hunter was moved to 8, Borwn was distructive, making yards all over the place with power and pace. England might be coming to a position where the skipper is the 4th best backrower right now. She was best player in the world only last year.
I'd say unlucky to Canada, I think ENgland had a point to prove after the world cup loss and Canada, especially the backs were obviously not spent time together and new. There is also the factor the new League has basically ensured each f the 10 clubs trains their women professionally. Quins I know actually train with the men and I suspect that's the same for other clubs. The quality of player has jumped up everywhere and competition for places is higher. That is coupled that the England playing base exploded after 2010 and double int he past 3 years alone. Just look how many of this England team is around 20 years old? Almost all the first caps were around 20 or under. England have had 3 steller U20 sides since 2015 all filtering into the elite level now. There is suddenly more talent then ever in England right now, all being trained to a professional level, I'd argue only 3 months on the quality England get to pick from is way high then what the world cup final team had. Canada has literally picked the worst time to come to ENgland, though I expect tuesdays match to be much closer now Canada have time together.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:43 am
by Wendigo7
le chat wrote:eldanielfire wrote:It's a starting point. Hopefully the pay and conditions will continue to evolve upwards.
They should be paid the exact same as the male players for equality
Being paid the same simply for the sake of it, whilst the infrastructure and league are decades behind would be insulting.
Bit of a catch 22 though as a question, do you fund a market possibility so longer term it turns into a profitable investment or do you wait for the league to go full professional and well paid, then start to give match fees.
I get the feeling that's a sport in general question but I'm not sure how you answer it.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:34 am
by Wendigo7
So just catching up on the game, England playing much more enterprising rugby here in the first 10 mins, the left winger looks excellent.
Re: Women's Rugby thread
Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 10:52 am
by Wendigo7
Wendigo7 wrote:So just catching up on the game, England playing much more enterprising rugby here in the first 10 mins, the left winger looks excellent.
26 mins in, Canada's scrum causing England real problems but otherwise they don't have much. Canada ginger winger had a nice break.
England are playing fantastic rugby, the 2 tries they scored were brilliant.
Burford and Packer are great players. Packer's amazing.
EDIT: Abbie Dow looks another very good winger, classy finish but was McLean's pass forward?
Congratulations to the nine Harlequins set to represent their country this weekend #coyq