Women’s Rugby World Cup final: The big questions ahead of England, Canada clash

The moment is finally here: A sold-out Twickenham, the two best sides going to battle for 80 minutes with only one winner. Only one will be standing on the podium come Saturday evening. The other will be watching from just a few metres away wondering what might have been.

England and Canada have met in one previous final — the 2014 edition in Ireland, when the Red Roses last won the tournament — while Canada have never won the competition. Will it be repeat or revenge in London?

– How to watch Women’s Rugby World Cup final
– Hamilton: Why England should be thankful after toughest test yet
– Canada crowdfunded their way to the World Cup. Now they’re in the final
– Get to know John Mitchell, the coach behind Red Roses’ success

Here are the main talking points ahead of Saturday’s main event.

---

England are favourites, but by how much?

Tom Hamilton: Not by a huge distance, but it’s their title to lose. England are on a world record 32-match unbeaten run and are the best side on the planet. No debate necessary.

They have the tools at their disposal to win this tournament, and they have the home support to boot. The Red Roses have done what’s been required through the tournament and have the value of a closely-fought semifinal behind them which will ensure they’re battle-hardened for Saturday.

They have a familiar-looking side of world-class players, including the outstanding Megan Jones and Ellie Kildunne in the backs. But it’s their forwards who will go some to deciding how Saturday’s match will play out. Their rolling maul is astonishingly destructive, while they have the best two front-rows in world rugby.

If it becomes a game of attrition, then England will win.

James Regan: It should be — on paper anyway — by a huge amount. However, both semifinals — Canada’s crushing of New Zealand and England’s tight tussle with France — have reigned in the assumption that England will run away with it.

The best thing for everyone, regardless of the outcome, is a close match. It will come down to how England handle the expectation. Kildunne said after the semifinal that they have been preparing for this moment for three years. It now comes down to 80 minutes.

The week has to be perfect and players can’t let the occasion get to them. That’s easier said than done, but if England can do that, they should lift the trophy at the end.

---

How can Canada deliver a shock?

Hamilton: Canada are a brilliant rugby side. Their semifinal triumph over the Black Ferns was one of the most remarkable performances we’ve seen in recent times. It was a phenomenal 360-degree performance with lightning-quick ruck speed, firm defence, imaginative attack and varied kicking. And they have the tournament’s best player in Sophie de Goede: the goal-kicking second-row who can also force turnovers and sprint away from covering defenders.

In short, this match is going to be tight.

Their coach Kèvin Rouet is offering a player-led environment and the team have thrived. Don’t forget: All this is off the back of a part crowd-funded journey, where they raised near CAN$1M to help their progress in England, under a campaign titled: “Win Rugby World Cup 2025.”

Well, they’re one step away from a dream ending.

Regan: Canada need to do what they did against the Black Ferns, but at a whole new intensity. New Zealand could not cope with their rush defence and ruck speed, but Canada will need to be quicker and more physical against the Red Roses. They need to silence the crowd as best they can.

The start is also vital. Despite giving up an early try, France’s resilience in the first half was so important. If Canada can replicate that and get some individual moments from De Goede, fullback Julia Schell or scrum-half Justine Pelletier then it’s game on.

---

What would winning mean to each side?

Hamilton: All through the World Cup, England have been talking about taking it game-by-game against a backdrop of all-encompassing expectation. They are fully aware of their status as tournament favourites and the pressure that comes with it.

There’s also the added weight of the importance of legacy, and what a triumph could do for the women’s game in the country. So there’s a lot riding on this, but England have shown calm heads throughout and if they can stick to their processes — a phrase frequently used by John Mitchell — they should be okay.

In short, this will mean a huge amount: They’ll be able to breathe with pressure off them, bury some previous demons, and also rest in the knowledge they succeeded in their pre-tournament aim.

For Canada, given the title of their crowd funding campaign, this would be an astonishing achievement.

They’re the second-best team in the world according to the official rankings, so this would be an upset. But given they’ve part-crowd-funded their campaign in England, this would be an incredible moment for the game in that part of the world. Canada have never won the tournament before. The closest they came was reaching the 2014 final where they ran into England.

They have the players, but stopping England is the sport’s hardest task.

Regan: It would mean a huge amount to both sides for very different reasons. It’s the tournament the Red Roses have been destined to win since England were announced as the hosts.

There is also the fact they have been in six-straight finals with just one victory. A significant amount of money has, rightly, been put into the women’s programme, and a win would show other nations that is what is needed to claim the biggest prizes.