Womens' rugby Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread

The possible issues with full publication of the report is far more widespread than you are making out. What if a player submits a statement that doesn’t fully support what others are saying? How will that player get treated by her colleagues and the general public? Everyone who feeds into this needs to be honest and there being any repercussions for their statements will prevent that. Minimising any possibility for repercussions has to be a priority. Otherwise you get a diluted report.

The letter is clear. They were not asked to sign it but we’re made aware of it. As contracted players they weren’t put in that position deliberately and rightly.

If rugby is only played on the pitch why do teams train and prepare for games.

Im pretty sure I’ve seen you leveling some nice criticism at Joe’s door for the defeat to Japan. Though it was all about the players on the pitch right?

So explain how a team goes unbeaten for a year, wins a grand slam. Then follows it by a dire 6 nations and getting beaten Japan in the group stages of the World Cup? Is it all down to the players on the day?

I think you might need to look at the tone in your responses, saying you are stunned I couldn’t see the wood from the trees for example. Your tone has been aggressive. Maybe that comes from a good place in terms of your involvement and passion for the game, but I’m not sure directing that at me is much use.

The letter to the Government clearly stated that they, as a group, had already fed into the RWC review. I’ve seen nothing to suggest that they, or anyone else, have been excluded from either review in any way. Surely that would have been flagged in the letter if it were the case?

I’d need to look back at previous reviews to see how they were carried out, and by whom, in order to understand the history. I don’t recall the details right now.

At the end of the day all I’m suggesting is something that would be deemed fairly standard best practice in any review. A detailed one for private consumption and a summary one for pubic consumption. Both published by the independent body carrying out each review. That removes any possible interference or editing by the IRFU and makes the whole process more transparent.

I fully support those who signed this letter and back what they are doing. There have been too many issues in womens rugby for too long. This needs to be sorted. And I am concerned that the Union has allowed things get to this point, quite probably in no small part down to their engagement with those involved in the womens game on top of everything else. If people feel listened to then everything else from there is easier. Clearly that isn’t the case here and that’s on the IRFU. They are making their lives and those in the womens game more and more difficult. Hopefully someone points that out to them as part of all this too (and they take it on board).

How much would it cost to cover the cost of making the women's rugby team go professional, so they have two professional sides, the 7's and the 15's, separate like the men's.

Would 2 million cover it? That'd pay 40 players 50k each. Surely the IRFU with sponsorship and government funding could scrape that together for a couple of years and see how things improve?

Even if the IRFU have every intention of being completely transparent about this it doesn’t really matter. Like the refs issue we’ve seen in the Pro14 (Irish refs for Itish teams etc), the appearance of dodgy behaviour, even if it doesn’t exist, pollutes everything. The only way to best ensure transparency is for them not to be part of deciding what gets published and what doesn’t.

Of course not. That’s not to say others wouldn’t. We can’t hijack good process because the mob want what they want. Similarly we can’t hijack it because the IRFU want to control the messaging or whatever. Both sides seems to want it hijacked their way. And that’s never going to lead to anything positive.