This is more of a case that most of the information
that the guy has
suggested just doesn't exist period.
The review appears to be treating this sport like it
is a male dominated
sport, with male dominated obsession with statistics, access to the same
amount of funding that men's sport have... and that just isn't the case
because this is a female administrated and female participation sport
relying on female spectators.
I see my suggestions addressed my concerns, not yours, but this essay:
Wikipedia:What the Good article criteria are not
may be helpful. It discusses requiring information which is not available
and applying one's personal, read gendered, criteria rather than the good
article criteria. Essays are not policy, but this one seems quite useful.
Fred