U.K. Sports Minister Tracey Crouch asked the Rugby Football Union to "investigate whether any of the England women's 15-a-side players will be left without a job when their contracts are not renewed after next month's World Cup," according to Martyn Ziegler of the LONDON TIMES. The RFU's decision to switch its focus to the women's sevens team has "caused some controversy," but Crouch said that she held "lengthy talks" with RFU CEO Ian Ritchie this week and she accepted his explanation. Crouch: "The RFU have assured me they are investing more money than ever into the women's game. There is not enough of a schedule for them to receive the contracts, and neither are there contracts for the men. I have asked to be informed if there are any players negatively impacted by this to see how we can support them" (LONDON TIMES, 7/27). In London, Kate Rowan reported the debate surrounding the RFU's decision not to renew women's XVs contracts "has intensified" after a Labour MP "hit out" at the organization for "an affront to women's sport," claiming it would cost 0.252% of its annual budget to fund the side. Tonia Antoniazzi, who is Labour MP for Gower and a former Wales rugby int'l, believes the union can "easily afford to keep XVs players contracted." She said, "If this was one of the smaller nations with less resources their stance might be understandable -- unions have got to live within their means. However, it has been reported that the full-time contracts for women only paid around £18,000 ($23,500) a year. To pay their 28-woman World Cup squad would therefore cost around £500,000 ($654,000), or 0.252% of their projected income for last year. ... I think nearly everyone would agree that 0.252% of your income for an elite squad is an absolute bargain. To consider this as too much is an affront to women in sport" (TELEGRAPH, 7/26).