Watching the Black Ferns lose to England on Sunday was a hard
pill to swallow, but it was medicine that needed to be taken.
The New Zealand women's rugby team last lost to England eight
years ago.
I can still visualise this loss as if it happened yesterday,
because I remember begging my stumpy hooker's legs to run
faster as the speedy English winger ran three quarters of the
field to score a try.
Unfortunately, my legs were not co-operating and our 10-year
winning record came to an end.
Suffering a loss at the hands of the English a year before
the Women's Rugby World Cup turned out to be a blessing in
disguise, so I'm hoping members of the 2009 team who are
preparing for the World Cup next year can find some positives
from their loss.
In 2001, we were afraid of losing and that was projected in
the way we physically and mentally prepared for and played
that game.
We played defensively, and limited our flair by resorting to
safe tactics.
What did we change in 2002 in order to beat England in the
World Cup final in Barcelona? On a recent television show,
former Kiwis coach Brian McLennan said: "You've got to love
winning more than you hate losing."
This simple change in mindset is what we did.
There is nothing like losing to make you realise that resting
on your laurels does not cut it in elite sport.
We also wanted to play an exciting and innovative style of
rugby and that is impossible when individuals are too afraid
to try new things, or make risky decisions.
The opportunities for women's teams to dazzle and impress
spectators live and via the media are few and far between, so
when an opportunity arises, women have to grab it with both
hands or feet and put on a spectacle.
The only way this can be done is with long-term preparation
and planning, fit and skilful athletes, a great game plan,
and the right mindset.
The most spectacular game I remember playing was at
Carisbrook in 1997 as a curtain-raiser for the Bledisloe Cup
test.
We played in front of thousands of scarfies who can always be
counted on to turn up early to a rugby game.
We also thrashed the Australian women 40-0, so the tryfest
brought us some new fans, silenced some cynics, and won over
some supporters in that blissful 80 minutes.
Oh yes, and the All Blacks lost to the Wallabies, which meant
the public and media gaze fell on us for a brief moment.
Comparing men's and women's teams in the same sport is always
going to happen, and, in a twisted way, when men's teams
don't do so well, women's teams get attention.
Being told that the women are better is a backhanded
compliment for the women, and a slap in the face for the
men's teams.
At Twickenham, it was the first time a women's game acted as
a curtain-closer rather than a curtain-raiser to a major
men's test.
I'm not too sure if it was an effective way of promoting the
game, especially when the game produced only one try and many
handling errors.
The men's game produced just one try as well and the All
Black performance has received criticism, but we've all heard
the saying that women have to work twice as hard to be
considered half as good.
It is often assumed that women's rugby is strong in New
Zealand because rugby is our national sport and the national
women's team has won the last three world cups, but the rest
of the world is catching up.
The 2010 World Cup is nine months away and there is a lot of
work to be done before then if the Black Ferns are going to
be world champions for the fourth time.
The organisers of the 2011 Rugby World Cup want to
demonstrate that we are a rugby nation, but does that apply
to the women's game? In the professional era and times of
economic recession, administrators are always looking at ways
of cutting the budget.
That often means women's sports programmes and teams have
their opportunities limited.
Until women's teams get more in the way of independent media
attention and funding, they have to be content with riding on
the coat tails of events where men are centre stage.
From the edges they must give exceptional performances and
hope for the best.
