World Cup final is a clash of ideas, money and the future

Compared to the two world records, one is better. The best team of the month versus the best team of the year. The apparent heirs and the emerging pretenders.

Add in a record 82, 000 people, some from the past, including England’s most recent world title against Canada in 2014, and two centuries of interconnected history, and Saturday’s Rugby World Cup final has the weight of a small moon.

There is, however, a second, even more crucial dimension for some.

The game is also a showdown between pride and glory for them, not just silverware.

With millions of pounds in play and the future of women’s test rugby in danger, it also concerns the vindication of an idea.

It makes a significant claim to an already significant match. The situation is this.

The world’s best-funded women’s rugby team is England. 32 players are working on full-time contracts. Their highest-earning members of the squad reportedly receive nearly £50, 000 annually, with top bonuses for victories and titles, as well as cutting-edge analysis, preparation, and coaching at England’s high performance center to aid in their success.

They always come across that success. The Red Roses have won 73 of their 75 matches since signing full-time contracts in 2019.

The best league in the world is also in England.

Talent is gathered from all over the world for the nine-team PWR, which results in a rugby production line for the upcoming Red Roses and unmatched quality and quantity.

In its most recent annual report, the Rugby Football Union gave its national teams, both men and women, a total of £28.7 million. At £4.5 million, rugby Canada’s equivalent figure was less than a sixth of that.

In comparison to England, where there is only a university scene and numerous clubs spread across the country, Canada’s domestic rugby scene is unimportant.

Only 41,202 registered players in Canadian rugby, including players, coaches, and officials, make up Allianz Stadium.

The federation’s finances were used to fund the team’s World Cup preparation plans, which were mostly more time spent together in a centralized camp.

To cover the costs, Rugby Canada’s $2.6 million (£1.4 million) funding was needed to be matched by a $1.6 million Mission: Win Rugby World Cup fundraising drive.

Big backers, former players, new supporters, and community rugby clubs have all donated. Through the sale of a limited T-shirt, The Tragically Hip, a renowned Canadian alt-rock legend, raised C $30, 000 (£16, 000).

It’s encouraging for the underdogs. However, there is still a significant funding gap.

No other Rugby World Cup team, Red Roses or otherwise, has ever reached such heights as Canada did in the semi-final bombardment of New Zealand. In the final eight, Australia was not far behind either with a score of 46-5.

They are playing with flair and tempo, recycling ball quickly, and puncturing defenses, either with the pace of Florence Symonds, Sophie de Goede, Justine Pelletier, and Karen Paquin, or with quick darts around the edges from them.

In the final ten minutes of their semi-final, Canada was four points clear of England at the previous Rugby World Cup.

In their final meeting, which took place at WXV in October, Canada held a five-minute lead.

On neither occasion were they successful in bringing a promising performance home. But they’re more than ever to do it on Saturday.

Canada may have a sizable amount of money behind them, but they have cheated and deceived themselves.

Eighteen of their 32-member players, including Alex Tessier and De Goede, the latter’s captain and world player of the year, play for PWR clubs, giving them crucial high-quality game time.

Ealing Trailfinders, Gloucester-Hartpury, and Leicester are also represented by a group of eight players at Saracens, six more at Exeter, and six more at Exeter.

As an assistant coach, Canada has also hired Saracens’ director of women’s rugby Alex Austerberry to compile the knowledge the players have acquired at club level before adding his own.

Canada played four warm-up games, twice the number that England did, as part of their longer preparations. As part of a mutually beneficial arrangement, the two unions came away with a quickly improving South Africa.

Is there a template emerging after New Zealand heavily invested late in the previous cycle to turn around a struggling Black Ferns side and win the trophy?

How many cash-strapped unions will invest in full-time women’s professionalism if Canada wins, instead pointing to a record that suggests nimble, clever, targeted preparation, along with drawing on England’s investment, can produce comparable outcomes on a smaller budget?

However, to ignore what their own players and coaches are saying would be to take those lessons from a win for Canada. and what the figures indicate.

Canada’s women’s team has made a significant investment. Their only flaw is that they have relatively few pockets.

Few, if any, other unions around the world can claim that Rugby Canada provides equal funding for its men’s and women’s teams.

The rest of their philosophy was provided with a caveat by head coach Kevin Rouet.

We make an effort to be that creative because we must be creative with our preparation when we don’t have any money,” he said.

“I believe it gives us the freedom to do a lot of things that we wouldn’t be able to do with the same amount of money.”

Although it’s crazy to say that, it occasionally allows us to try to be efficient with everything and find the best of everything.

If that wasn’t clear, I would like more money, though!

Pamphinette Buisa, who was chosen for Rouet’s squad but withdrew after suffering a broken leg in their final warm-up match against Ireland, describes similar things.

In a social media post, she wrote, “We want the resources, we want the support.”

A victory would not demonstrate the importance of professionalism. This team’s dedication to providing the systems it deserves would be demonstrated.

On Saturday, Canada has a good chance. They would have a great chance if they had more money and the increased depth, cohesion, and conditioning that followed.

Stalling on cycle-wide spending will only make that goal less likely if Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, the United States, France, or Ireland want to be England’s primary rival in a growing game.

It also seems foolish to reduce England’s return on investment to the number of attractive pots in the cabinet.

A triumph in the Rugby World Cup would be significant in accelerating the sport’s development.

However, a match’s success or failure of a policy can’t be entirely determined by a ball’s bounce or, as in the previous Rugby World Cup final, a head-to-head clash in the first half.

A dominant, excellent English team has been produced that draws players, sponsors, sponsors, and fans like no other.

One of the, if not the, favorites will be The Red Roses, who will win the next World Cup in Australia in 2029.

England has thousands of fans emotionally invested while the Rugby Football Union has made financial investments.