Style over substance by males in suits

There hasn’t been a worse example of style trumping substance than World Rugby’s headline-grabbing move to make its respective World Cups gender neutral.

With one press release last month full of huge promises and grand statements, the governing body reckoned it put the women’s World Cup on an equal footing with the men’s.

But, as is so often the case when it comes to women’s rugby, the promises are proving to be empty and the realisation is sinking in that a still heavy male executive has worked out they only need say they have occupied the moral high ground rather than actually haul themselves up there for real.

It is a big deal New Zealand has won World Cup hosting rights with a bid that includes the prospect of teams being put in three-star accommodation. It’s big because such terms would be rejected outright by the men. No country bidding to host a male World Cup would dream of asking the players to stay in three-star accommodation.

And that right there is gender discrimination, which will be passionately refuted and defended as being a consequence of the reality of the different economics of the respective tournaments. Such justifications are as tired as they are flawed. World Rugby says it has begun a crusade to fight unintentional gender bias and that it is setting new standards in gender equality and yet has also voted for New Zealand’s bid knowing it has not offered the same terms as the men’s World Cup.

If New Zealand couldn’t afford to accommodate all 12 teams in a minimum of four-star accommodation then its bid for the 2021 World Cup should have been deemed to have fallen short of expectations and rejected.

The particularly galling part of this attempt to position the discrepancy as an economic rather than a gender bias issue is that the many male World Rugby executives who come to New Zealand in 2021 will be put up in four or five-star hotels while they are here.

The money will stretch to keep them in the style to which they are accustomed but not far enough to give all the high performance athletes the foundation they need to be at their best.

Good facilities with pools, gyms and meeting rooms support the needs of the team which is why the male teams insist on minimum fourstar venues.

A heavy realism sits across women’s rugby in that those who play, coach and administer the game understand the major salaries of the male players are paid for by the vast sums of broadcast, sponsorship and gate revenue their product attracts.

It will take time for women’s rugby to reach the same level of popularity and subsequently generate the same volumes of revenue and to get there, they need to win the audience through the quality of their product in the same way the men have.

But to improve the quality of the rugby, to be able to generate the sort of contests that compel people to watch, women need the basics such as accommodation, training facilities and medical support to be at the same level as the men.

The journey towards genuine gender equality can’t really begin until women are better supported at foundation level.

Sticking them in dud hotels at the World Cup will not be conducive to performance and hence it becomes hard to build the momentum to break the economic cycle and change the revenue profile of the sport.

The onus now sits with World Rugby to deliver on the substance of its grand claims around gender equality at World Cups.

Rightly or wrongly New Zealand has won the right to host the 2021 World Cup and doesn’t have a magic pot of money which it can use to upgrade the quality of accommodation.

World Rugby has lapped up the kudos that came its way in the wake of making World Cups gender neutral, now it must dig into its own pocket to ensure that the experience of the men in Japan is not vastly superior to the experience of women in New Zealand in 2021.