I haven't seen England ladies play for a little while, and it looked like they'd gone up a notch in the 20 minutes I watched at the end of the NZ game. High quality, well organised, committed, and bright.
Niegs wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 5:38 pm
Canada's maul defence should be better. Lots of big bodies in our pack. Backs are weaker than NZ’s though.
Yeah, I do think in terms of the physicality Canada has the physicality and mass to match England and plenty of Canadian players excel in the English league. I noticed in both USA vs Canada games that it's those in or have been in the English league to seems to doing the best things. Scrum will be interesting given Canada has generally got on top of English scrum in recent history.
The scrums will be interesting. The forwards coach Louis Deacon was brought in after the 6 nations with a brief to improve that part of their game, and they have apparently done a lot of work on set pieces this year. Let’s see how they go against Canada, and particularly France, to see if there has been real progress.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Mon Nov 08, 2021 1:09 am
by Niegs
JM2K6 wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 6:59 pm
I haven't seen England ladies play for a little while, and it looked like they'd gone up a notch in the 20 minutes I watched at the end of the NZ game. High quality, well organised, committed, and bright.
I still believe they aren’t great at getting the ball to their deadly outside backs as much as they should, but now that the pack is so dominant it’s not as necessary as when NZ was their match in both pack and backs. The Ferns will be back, I think, come RWC and France will be a challenger too so I hope they sort it out. And there are a few individuals with some tweaks needed (Kildunne’s pass selection in particular).
JM2K6 wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 6:59 pm
I haven't seen England ladies play for a little while, and it looked like they'd gone up a notch in the 20 minutes I watched at the end of the NZ game. High quality, well organised, committed, and bright.
I still believe they aren’t great at getting the ball to their deadly outside backs as much as they should, but now that the pack is so dominant it’s not as necessary as when NZ was their match in both pack and backs. The Ferns will be back, I think, come RWC and France will be a challenger too so I hope they sort it out. And there are a few individuals with some tweaks needed (Kildunne’s pass selection in particular).
Yeah I'm not reading too much into the result given that NZ have been dormant for 18 months or whatever, just remarking on the quality of the rugby on display from England.
JM2K6 wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 6:59 pm
I haven't seen England ladies play for a little while, and it looked like they'd gone up a notch in the 20 minutes I watched at the end of the NZ game. High quality, well organised, committed, and bright.
I still believe they aren’t great at getting the ball to their deadly outside backs as much as they should, but now that the pack is so dominant it’s not as necessary as when NZ was their match in both pack and backs. The Ferns will be back, I think, come RWC and France will be a challenger too so I hope they sort it out. And there are a few individuals with some tweaks needed (Kildunne’s pass selection in particular).
I agree. I'm still frustrated at Zoe Harrison's tendency to throw long, slow loopy passes that kill some attacks. The slowness of it allowed the BF defense to drift in plenty of time to get over to cover the outside. Killdunne made it work with her flick-on in the first game but it's generally not. Harrison has some way before she can execute it at speed like Rachel Burford does. Meanwhile a few draw and passes would work.
JM2K6 wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 6:59 pm
I haven't seen England ladies play for a little while, and it looked like they'd gone up a notch in the 20 minutes I watched at the end of the NZ game. High quality, well organised, committed, and bright.
I still believe they aren’t great at getting the ball to their deadly outside backs as much as they should, but now that the pack is so dominant it’s not as necessary as when NZ was their match in both pack and backs. The Ferns will be back, I think, come RWC and France will be a challenger too so I hope they sort it out. And there are a few individuals with some tweaks needed (Kildunne’s pass selection in particular).
French have been on a bit of a "decline". Hard to pinpoint why. Maybe a bit of stagnation in the squad. Or the players have reached their limit. Or the coaches. Eng have obviously moved the game on so it's partly a relative thing too. But IMHO their play has been less cohesive then it was a year or so ago.
JM2K6 wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 6:59 pm
I haven't seen England ladies play for a little while, and it looked like they'd gone up a notch in the 20 minutes I watched at the end of the NZ game. High quality, well organised, committed, and bright.
I still believe they aren’t great at getting the ball to their deadly outside backs as much as they should, but now that the pack is so dominant it’s not as necessary as when NZ was their match in both pack and backs. The Ferns will be back, I think, come RWC and France will be a challenger too so I hope they sort it out. And there are a few individuals with some tweaks needed (Kildunne’s pass selection in particular).
French have been on a bit of a "decline". Hard to pinpoint why. Maybe a bit of stagnation in the squad. Or the players have reached their limit. Or the coaches. Eng have obviously moved the game on so it's partly a relative thing too. But IMHO their play has been less cohesive then it was a year or so ago.
a lot of chopping and changes (the centre partnership had no caps)
Also, 8/8 conversions from England vs 0/4 from NZ.
0/3 for NZ
Back to back record scores for England, and the first time the Black Ferns have ever conceded 50+ points.
Canada and USA to come for England. If what Niegs says is true about the current state of Canada and USA, I doubt they will relish games against England in this form.
Sounds like England may try out a few players for those. Though they seem to have so much depth right now. If I was coach I'd be looking at the openside though. Create a back-up for Packer who I've said is one of the England players whose skillset isn't full replicated in anyone else as a world class jackal. IMO England have solid to great players in every other position.
Packer reminds me very much of Moody, completely fearless and a bit mental.
JM2K6 wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 6:59 pm
I haven't seen England ladies play for a little while, and it looked like they'd gone up a notch in the 20 minutes I watched at the end of the NZ game. High quality, well organised, committed, and bright.
I still believe they aren’t great at getting the ball to their deadly outside backs as much as they should, but now that the pack is so dominant it’s not as necessary as when NZ was their match in both pack and backs. The Ferns will be back, I think, come RWC and France will be a challenger too so I hope they sort it out. And there are a few individuals with some tweaks needed (Kildunne’s pass selection in particular).
French have been on a bit of a "decline". Hard to pinpoint why. Maybe a bit of stagnation in the squad. Or the players have reached their limit. Or the coaches. Eng have obviously moved the game on so it's partly a relative thing too. But IMHO their play has been less cohesive then it was a year or so ago.
I think it was partly due to an eye for the Olympics as many of your best players go there. Still I think England beat France by a total of only 8 points in the past 3 games. IMO there is only a slither of quality between either side. A bad bounce or pass or missed tackle in each game is basically the whole difference.
Back to back record scores for England, and the first time the Black Ferns have ever conceded 50+ points.
Canada and USA to come for England. If what Niegs says is true about the current state of Canada and USA, I doubt they will relish games against England in this form.
Sounds like England may try out a few players for those. Though they seem to have so much depth right now. If I was coach I'd be looking at the openside though. Create a back-up for Packer who I've said is one of the England players whose skillset isn't full replicated in anyone else as a world class jackal. IMO England have solid to great players in every other position.
Packer reminds me very much of Moody, completely fearless and a bit mental.
I get that. Though packers style might be more Pocock than Moody as she is by far England's best turnover machine at the top level.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2021 2:20 pm
by eldanielfire
Wales vs Sprinbok Women:
No Jas Joyce. I wonder if that is work related?
The pack looks closer to what I imagine the first choice pack would be. Butchers has weird power at 6 where she is much more powerful then her frame suggests. Really hard to guess about the backs though. Seems they have attempted to get young backs in in recent years. Bevan and Snowsil are the best half back pairing I believe and Hannah Jones always puts in a shift at center, Joyce goes without saying. But the other positions have been swapped so often it's hard to know who is the best. jess Kavanagh is rapid at wing but I'm not so sure Wales have yet to embed a quality fullback or settled 12 yet.
Interesting the Cleall at 8/Hunter at 6 is the line-up. Has Middleton decided that Cleall is just to good there? Be interesting to see how Kabeya goes in test rugby. Looks like they are taking Canada seriously though.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 1:12 pm
by eldanielfire
Wales playing really well despite some bad composure at the try line. It seems the new investment with contracts for players, U20 and U18 side support has given the players a huge lift and confidence. They are playing their best for 2 years.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 1:22 pm
by eldanielfire
Ref seems to be misjudging some weird errors, player flying off their feet in the most obvious away and taking a player in the air not cared or looked at by South Africa.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 1:58 pm
by eldanielfire
Carys Phillips with the hattrick. What a return for her first start in 2 years.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 2:15 pm
by eldanielfire
Saffer women have some gas and showed it at the end there. Wales was well organised and have good skill. But their decision making and execution in the final 22 was shocking. Knock-ons, taking ball into contact against 3 players in isolation, lots of dithering for IMO some obvious situations and taking slow ball flat. All work-on's that can be improved and hopefully the new set-up will mean they do improve in those areas.
But IMO Wales should be targeting top 5 at the world cup given everything.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 8:52 pm
by laurent
French ladies thumped the silver Ferns this was a bit of a one way game.
Hoping they do the same next week.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 9:27 pm
by Torquemada 1420
laurent wrote: Sat Nov 13, 2021 8:52 pm
French ladies thumped the silver Ferns this was a bit of a one way game.
Hoping they do the same next week.
Wonder when the last time was that both NZ sides were hammered on the same day?
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:29 pm
by Lobby
England struggling to put any phases together at the moment.
Canada have been very clever in disrupting the scrum half’s channel, but MacDonald has also been very poor; too slow and inaccurate. Getting Infante on should make a difference there. Canada are also defending England’s maul very well, and Botterman has (again) been found out in the scrum. She really shouldn’t be picked if the opposition have an even half way decent scrum.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2021 7:54 pm
by eldanielfire
Lobby wrote: Sun Nov 14, 2021 3:29 pm
England struggling to put any phases together at the moment.
Canada have been very clever in disrupting the scrum half’s channel, but MacDonald has also been very poor; too slow and inaccurate. Getting Infante on should make a difference there. Canada are also defending England’s maul very well, and Botterman has (again) been found out in the scrum. She really shouldn’t be picked if the opposition have an even half way decent scrum.
Infante is a cut above all other 9s right now. Her delivery is crisp and rapid and she gets the ball out fast and thinks and reacts quickly. I said before her Cleall and Packer are essential for England.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Mon Nov 15, 2021 12:56 pm
by eldanielfire
The England-Canada game got a million viewers on BBC2.
More than the Black Ferns game. Which I wouldn't expect. I wonder if the results form the New Zealand games drew in more hype, excitement and therefore viewers?
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2021 6:36 pm
by eldanielfire
Try of the year list from World Rugby:
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:43 am
by Niegs
I love a team try (and wish they'd give it to the team, not the individual who happened to dot it down) but those aren't as good as Dow's, imo!
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 11:06 am
by eldanielfire
Niegs wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:43 am
I love a team try (and wish they'd give it to the team, not the individual who happened to dot it down) but those aren't as good as Dow's, imo!
I'm the same. As I said at PR France actually scored a cracker against the Black Ferns, but they don't appear to be using last weeks tries.
I also think Abby Dow's try against Scotland last year was just as good, perhaps better, at 45 secs in this highlights video:
What I'm reminded of here, is looking at the France BFs game, how similar the fundamental games are of England and France women in recent years. Strengths peak in different places but the same sort forward domination, of decision making in certain situations, dangerous backs, kick to corner/maul strength and style. France have the larger pack and better scrum, England the more mobile one and better lineout and maul. France will run it form 10/midfield more, but England have more potent kickers to get into attacking spaces. Both have devastating wingers and fullbacks who can create their own tries and rip open a gap. France more power and danger in attack but England more fitness and better defense.
Niegs wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:43 am
I love a team try (and wish they'd give it to the team, not the individual who happened to dot it down) but those aren't as good as Dow's, imo!
I'm the same. As I said at PR France actually scored a cracker against the Black Ferns, but they don't appear to be using last weeks tries.
I also think Abby Dow's try against Scotland last year was just as good, perhaps better, at 45 secs in this highlights video:
What I'm reminded of here, is looking at the France BFs game, how similar the fundamental games are of England and France women in recent years. Strengths peak in different places but the same sort forward domination, of decision making in certain situations, dangerous backs, kick to corner/maul strength and style. France have the larger pack and better scrum, England the more mobile one and better lineout and maul. France will run it form 10/midfield more, but England have more potent kickers to get into attacking spaces. Both have devastating wingers and fullbacks who can create their own tries and rip open a gap. France more power and danger in attack but England more fitness and better defense.
While I agree with most of this, at their best England are potentially much better than France in both attack and defence. In the 6N in 2019 England played one of their best and most cohesive games, and tore the French defence to pieces, scoring 4 tries in the first half (as well as having a couple more denied) to lead 24 - 0. The final result was 41 -26. I don't think France has come close to managing such a comprehensive victory against England in recent years.
To my mind one of the reasons England fail to reach these heights consistently is that Middleton is forever tinkering with the team, bringing new players in, and trying out new combinations in almost every match. I understand why he does it, but it is often difficult to work out what his best team is. His propensity for picking recently-converted props who can't scrum doesn't help matters either.
Its pretty clear though that, whatever the rankings say, England and France are currently some way ahead of any of the other international teams.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:22 pm
by eldanielfire
Lobby wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 11:38 am
While I agree with most of this, at their best England are potentially much better than France in both attack and defence. In the 6N in 2019 England played one of their best and most cohesive games, and tore the French defence to pieces, scoring 4 tries in the first half (as well as having a couple more denied) to lead 24 - 0. The final result was 41 -26. I don't think France has come close to managing such a comprehensive victory against England in recent years.
True. but didn't France have a few players in the Sevens then. Likewise the games since then have mostly been so close affairs. I think at least's 2 of them France maybe should have won. Come the world cup next year, France will close that cohesive and fitness gap. England may well need to play better and find more ways to add poinst to beat them
To my mind one of the reasons England fail to reach these heights consistently is that Middleton is forever tinkering with the team, bringing new players in, and trying out new combinations in almost every match. I understand why he does it, but it is often difficult to work out what his best team is. His propensity for picking recently-converted props who can't scrum doesn't help matters either.
Its pretty clear though that, whatever the rankings say, England and France are currently some way ahead of any of the other international teams.
I partly agree, but I do think Middleton has created a first team. I think with all the tinkering we can work out a definite first team and squad of 30 at least:
Front row, Cornborough and Bern as props. Debate between Cockayne and Davies.
2nd Row, Ward and Aldcroft
Backrow, Packer, Cleall and Hunter.
Half backs: Infante and Harrison
Midfield: Scarrett and the other place is likely Reed or Rowland.
Back 3: Thompson, Dow and Breech in the 2 wings. Killdunne at Fullback.
That's a mostly set side. I suspect 12, hooker and the back 3 combo will be dependent on who the opposition is and the alternatives and coin flips are pretty embedded in. McKenna, Claudia Macdonald, Botterman, Tuilagi, O'Donnell, S. Brown, B.Cleall, Miller-Mills.
That's 26 players who are pretty set for the world cup squad, and 12/13 of the starting team set and the alternatives are well embedded in as it is. I'd argue only Botterman's scrummaging and work rate is the question mark I have but she has nous in the loose and good skills. I suspect Detysha Harper might be taken as the back-up loosie and Nat Hunt as the 3rd scrumhalf. Emily Scott and Meg Jones being the other big considerations. Alex Matthews would certainly be the remaining forward.
That would be a squad of 28 I believe and it's pretty set I'd say so 2 more bolters could be added to make it 30 . That leave Sarah Beckett (most likely if uninjured and in form) Sadia, Rosie Gallaghan, Heather Kerr. I think Kerr may be taken as 3rd hooker (can play as prop too) and of course the newbies in the squad this year are considerations. Oh and I forgot Fleetwood. Deffo in the squad.
Reviewing they might make a 16-14 split in the squad some an extra backrower (ignoring that Brown and Bryony were superb backrowers only 3 years ago) Possibility of a fringe player or bolter from the list coming in and an out of form player moving out. I'd call that surprisingly a settled team and likely mostly set squad.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:30 am
by eldanielfire
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:42 am
by eldanielfire
Black Ferns for France 2:
Also lovely moment showing the reaction to a first cap:
France
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2021 7:47 am
by laurent
A few changes Hopefully for a similar result
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 10:41 am
by eldanielfire
Zoe Aldcroft is named captain for England tomorrow. Good to see Beckett at 8 And Abby Dow be given a spot at full back for |England. Connie Powell was a powerful and physical carrier at U20 level so I'm interested in seeing how she does at test level.
Watching Ireland-Japan.
Japan pretty good value for their lead and playing good rugby.
Pretty sad to see how far backwards Ireland have gone. Aside from set piece, they just don't seem to be able to execute basic rugby skills.
The state of the domestic league has to be the primary cause. There's 4 "superstar" teams completely walloping all the others (and looting them of talent at the same time). One match ended 142-0. That's no use to prepare players for playing international rugby.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:04 pm
by laurent
French team had to much class for the ferns.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:07 pm
by Torquemada 1420
laurent wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:04 pm
French team had to much class for the ferns.
laurent wrote: Sat Nov 20, 2021 4:04 pm
French team had to much class for the ferns.
Could not find a stream.
Vpn and France tv maybe.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2021 8:28 pm
by Niegs
Wales and Canada smash fest highlighted the gulf in quality between this set and the top two. Wales had nothing but crash balls and seemingly no pace without Joyce. Canada had a few players running powerful lines and one or two others with some pace, but the passing, oh the passing. Canada also apparently have no kicker - not only did the goal kicker miss a sitter nearly in front of the posts, they seemed to opt for quick taps in midfield because (guessing here) a punt would only get them about 10-15m downfield anyway?
I reckon NZ probably still sits above Canada, Italy, Scotland, Australia, Wales, USA, Ireland, Japan.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:45 pm
by eldanielfire
England smash USA 89-0. Ruthless. Another glorious Dow solo try.
Can I say though I hate Sara Orchard's commentary. Her voice isn't great or easy on the ears, her phrasing of anything sounds forced, she barely if ever calls the plays as they happen, and she shouts unnatural phrases which grate rather then excite in action parts of the game, and she has an annoying habit of having to read stats and facts robotically instead of, you know, commentating.
So every player has been be announced with their club name before like "Loughborough's Lightning Lark Davis" just as she dots down after a maul. It's a shame she got some abuse in the past form some sexist pricks, but she really isn't a good listen or enhanced or compliments the action.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2021 10:00 pm
by laurent
eldanielfire wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:45 pm
England smash USA 89-0. Ruthless.
Can I say though I hate Sara Orchard's commentary. Her voice isn't great or easy on the ears, her phrasing of anything sounds forced, she barely if ever calls the plays as they happen, and she shouts unnatural phrases which grate rather then excite in action parts of the game, and she has an annoying habit of having to read stats and facts robotically instead of, you know, commentating.
So every player has been be announced with their club name before like "Loughborough's Lightning Lark Davis" just as she dots down after a maul. It's a shame she got some abuse in the past form some sexist pricks, but she really isn't a good listen or enhanced or compliments the action.
The French Commentating Duo is Good (unlike the Idiots doing the mens)
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 2:00 am
by Niegs
eldanielfire wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:45 pm
England smash USA 89-0. Ruthless. Another glorious Dow solo try.
Can I say though I hate Sara Orchard's commentary. Her voice isn't great or easy on the ears, her phrasing of anything sounds forced, she barely if ever calls the plays as they happen, and she shouts unnatural phrases which grate rather then excite in action parts of the game, and she has an annoying habit of having to read stats and facts robotically instead of, you know, commentating.
So every player has been be announced with their club name before like "Loughborough's Lightning Lark Davis" just as she dots down after a maul. It's a shame she got some abuse in the past form some sexist pricks, but she really isn't a good listen or enhanced or compliments the action.
Well, I'll say that I LOVE her commentating. I really can't stand most men who just describe exactly what we're seeing. This isn't the radio era, ffs! I had a nice chuckle at Sara's comment on ... someone, I forget who ... loving ice cream, Mo saying it's not the weather for it, but Sara saying ice cream is good all the time. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'd rather commentators who are giving analysis (like Mo and Brian did very well) and the 'play by play' person doing the minimum of that, adding some tidbits ... like everyone's legendary voice, Bill McLaren used to do!
People can't help their voices either, so as long as they're not 'um-ing' and 'ah-ing' (as I would), and as long as there's some emotion (unlike Hugh Bladen), and not talking utter biased bollocks (like far too many to list), then I'm fine with it.
Anyone else want to play a drinking game next game Mo Hunt does, taking a swig every time she says "For me..."
eldanielfire wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:45 pm
England smash USA 89-0. Ruthless. Another glorious Dow solo try.
Can I say though I hate Sara Orchard's commentary. Her voice isn't great or easy on the ears, her phrasing of anything sounds forced, she barely if ever calls the plays as they happen, and she shouts unnatural phrases which grate rather then excite in action parts of the game, and she has an annoying habit of having to read stats and facts robotically instead of, you know, commentating.
So every player has been be announced with their club name before like "Loughborough's Lightning Lark Davis" just as she dots down after a maul. It's a shame she got some abuse in the past form some sexist pricks, but she really isn't a good listen or enhanced or compliments the action.
Well, I'll say that I LOVE her commentating. I really can't stand most men who just describe exactly what we're seeing. This isn't the radio era, ffs! I had a nice chuckle at Sara's comment on ... someone, I forget who ... loving ice cream, Mo saying it's not the weather for it, but Sara saying ice cream is good all the time. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I'd rather commentators who are giving analysis (like Mo and Brian did very well) and the 'play by play' person doing the minimum of that, adding some tidbits ... like everyone's legendary voice, Bill McLaren used to do!
People can't help their voices either, so as long as they're not 'um-ing' and 'ah-ing' (as I would), and as long as there's some emotion (unlike Hugh Bladen), and not talking utter biased bollocks (like far too many to list), then I'm fine with it.
Anyone else want to play a drinking game next game Mo Hunt does, taking a swig every time she says "For me..."
I think we're in serious disagreement on this (for the first time?). I find the cadence and forcedness of Orchard's commentary just spoils it for me. And I like her as a person so the "icecream stuff" and interactions with others is fine. It's the actual commentary which is grating. I don't mind the little the chuckles, but the way she comments over try scoring moments is blah.
Re: Women's Rugby Thread
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 9:12 am
by eldanielfire
On my other women's rugby rant. I dislike how when the England women smash some body it's an issue in the women's game and professionalism. When the All Blacks smash the USA by an even bigger margin, it's just an example of how great The All Blacks are. Dominate teams have never been seen to ruin or damage men's sports, from Michael Jordan's Bulls, USAs swimming and Gymnastics domination to the various football dynasties of Liverpool and Man Utd to British Cycling at the Olympics.
Likewise when the USAs football team dominant and won everything, it's seen as an example of how great they are, not how their investment in the women's game for a long while was bigger than the rest of the worlds (and still is, they have more girls playing than all of Europe combined). It seems unnecessarily self-flagellation for being successful and investing. I also disagree that it is bad for growth of the women's game. Outstanding champions are usually seen as good for the sport.
