Don't Mention The 'C' Word!

First though, is women's rugby truly uncompetitive? Is this criticism of the women's game actually founded in truth or can it be packed up by statistics? Well, yes, it is.

The fact that this Does It Matter debate even exists proves that it's true.

England's Red Roses have lost just two games this decade and are, statistically, the most dominant team in the history of rugby union.

These days, even talking about most of their matches has become difficult.

There is simply nothing new to say because nothing different ever happens.

Beneath England, the Canadians, French and New Zealanders are often competitive with each other, but below that, there is a huge drop-off to the next best team.

The only real upset to the Big Four in recent years came when Ireland shocked the Black Ferns at WXV in 2024.

Other than that, and France's loss to Italy in 2022...

They have only lost to each other since 2020.

Outside the Big Four, the competitive order does fluctuate, with various teams hitting purple patches then falling away as squads evolve and coaches come and go.

The problem is, though, that these teams rarely play each other in meaningful matches.

WXV did try to address this by running a three-division, merit-based format in 2023 and 2024.

World Rugby themselves published data tracking the closeness of games in that competition, showing that competitiveness was indeed a KPI being applied to women's rugby.

However, the reversion to one-off friendlies and test series for 2026 has brought this experiment to an end.

The explanations for the disparities between teams are numerous and varied, with investments and pathways usually at their core.

What isn't varied, however, is the results.

In the Six Nations, we have known who will finish first and second every year for a decade now, with the most excitement we can hope for being who will finish third.

And with Ireland's recent improvements, that has now become who will finish fourth.

Meanwhile, the games themselves are usually one-sided blowouts, with just three of the 15 games in the 2026 tournament seeing a winning margin of less than 20 points.

The Pacific Four is little better.

Despite being a tournament comprised of just four teams, it effectively has two divisions.

The winner is always between New Zealand and Canada, and who will finish bottom is always between the USA and Australia.

Now, whilst these games in isolation can be thrilling, the overall narratives have not changed for several years.

And beyond these two marquee competitions, the Asian, African, European and Oceania regional tournaments are all cakewalks for single teams who are significantly stronger than their opposition.

The games themselves are a formality.

First though, is women's rugby truly uncompetitive? Is this criticism of the women's game actually founded in truth or can it be packed up by statistics? Well, yes, it is.

The fact that this Does It Matter debate even exists proves that it's true.

England's Red Roses have lost just two games this decade and are, statistically, the most dominant team in the history of rugby union.

These days, even talking about most of their matches has become difficult.

There is simply nothing new to say because nothing different ever happens.

Beneath England, the Canadians, French and New Zealanders are often competitive with each other, but below that, there is a huge drop-off to the next best team.

The only real upset to the Big Four in recent years came when Ireland shocked the Black Ferns at WXV in 2024.

Other than that, and France's loss to Italy in 2022...

They have only lost to each other since 2020.

Outside the Big Four, the competitive order does fluctuate, with various teams hitting purple patches then falling away as squads evolve and coaches come and go.

The problem is, though, that these teams rarely play each other in meaningful matches.

WXV did try to address this by running a three-division, merit-based format in 2023 and 2024.

World Rugby themselves published data tracking the closeness of games in that competition, showing that competitiveness was indeed a KPI being applied to women's rugby.

However, the reversion to one-off friendlies and test series for 2026 has brought this experiment to an end.

The explanations for the disparities between teams are numerous and varied, with investments and pathways usually at their core.

What isn't varied, however, is the results.

In the Six Nations, we have known who will finish first and second every year for a decade now, with the most excitement we can hope for being who will finish third.

And with Ireland's recent improvements, that has now become who will finish fourth.

Meanwhile, the games themselves are usually one-sided blowouts, with just three of the 15 games in the 2026 tournament seeing a winning margin of less than 20 points.

The Pacific Four is little better.

Despite being a tournament comprised of just four teams, it effectively has two divisions.

The winner is always between New Zealand and Canada, and who will finish bottom is always between the USA and Australia.

Now, whilst these games in isolation can be thrilling, the overall narratives have not changed for several years.

And beyond these two marquee competitions, the Asian, African, European and Oceania regional tournaments are all cakewalks for single teams who are significantly stronger than their opposition.

The games themselves are a formality.