Is this the start of youth Grassroots in Canada

[Omott91]

2 hours ago, The Parksider said:

Well the definition of "opinions" are "The ideas that a person or group of people have about something which are based mainly on their feelings or belief".  I personally try to keep the argument factual. Much of the TWP cheer leading is emotional, people want to believe North America will save us, for some so much that they actually believe that is what TWP are doing. It leads to some very strange stances:-

1. They think Canada RL are now producing the Superleague players of tomorrow, because they can find some references to Canada RL still operating, even though nearly 10 years on the handful of players who got near pro level got sacked off because according to these people themselves they weren't good enough!!!

2. They constantly believe TWP are providing valuable publicity to the game, but they fail to value the publicity? The three biggest stories were when they were bad bad losers on the BBC against Warrington in front of the British Sporting Public and the game effectively ended as a sporting contest somewhere half way through the second half. It was disgusting. Noble could not speak. Plus if you want disgusting just go back a couple of weeks to the highly publicised owners even more disgusting comments to the Swinton player. Try also the publicity Mr. McManus and Mr. Pearson whom they need to impress gave them when they called TWP out as "an English squad in North American Jerseys", I bet Argylle and Perez were erm "disgusted".

3. TWP are charged with obtaining a NATV contract because they are of no value to the SKY contract. As it is they pay to be on TV which could not be a bigger embarrassment for TWP and Perez. Perez actually excused this saying that he needed "five to six north american clubs in Superleage before he could get that contract" . The simple point I have asked people to consider for nearly three years now is how does the game survive here, if (and this is what these people say) TWP, Ottawa, New York, Vancouver Boston and Montreal say replace six English "useless"Superleague clubs. People will not debate this I wonder why?

You see that is the ultimate North American plan Mr. Perez set out quite clearly and oddly nobody on what is a Rugby League debate site has in nearly three years ever debated this with me. Insults and calls for me to be ignored and even banned aplenty have been the reply, in what has been a "virtual reality Lynch Mob"

Thanks ever so much for your support BTW, not only you but some other realists who dip in now and again. In general though in the real world I find the vast majority of RL people enjoy the North American dream for what it really is, a novelty.

Finally I can't let you get away with your idea we should go to 14 to give TWP a chance in SL because TWP cannot succeed on the criteria they were set - home grown SL players and a TV deal. Give them even a 5 year run in Superleague and that won't happen by nearly everyone's measure. Plus you also fall for the catch 22 again here my friend. What happens to the 13th. & 14th. clubs in such a league? do they compete? do they even stand still? or do 2 clubs badly struggle, just to create an experiment in which we all know it cannot succeed unless we totally ingore Mr. Perez's own definition of success - a NATV deal worth many $$Millions and top quality NA players appearing for TWP.....Not my definition.........his.

I know that with this post I am basically having a conversation with myself but couldn't resist.

1. Your argument about Twp losing to Warrington is childish. You do realise that 50% of rl teams that play each week are going to lose.

2. For three years you have been wrong when you state  ''replace six English "useless"Superleague clubs. People will not debate this I wonder why''? No one but you have ever said the word ''replace,'' realise that they are adding to the competition not subtracting.

3..''a Rugby League debate site'' This is laughable coming from someone who ignores everybody when debatable issues arise.

4. ''I personally try to keep the argument factual.''  Also laughable as the majority of your posts are opinion pieces with 3 to 4 year old quotes or statements. 

It's now 2019, you need new material.

[Omott91]

I commented on his post. Furthering conversation on some points and calling him out on others. 

[Davo5]

On 19/06/2019 at 07:58, The Parksider said:

Well the definition of "opinions" are "The ideas that a person or group of people have about something which are based mainly on their feelings or belief".  I personally try to keep the argument factual. Much of the TWP cheer leading is emotional, people want to believe North America will save us, for some so much that they actually believe that is what TWP are doing. It leads to some very strange stances:-

1. They think Canada RL are now producing the Superleague players of tomorrow, because they can find some references to Canada RL still operating, even though nearly 10 years on the handful of players who got near pro level got sacked off because according to these people themselves they weren't good enough!!!

2. They constantly believe TWP are providing valuable publicity to the game, but they fail to value the publicity? The three biggest stories were when they were bad bad losers on the BBC against Warrington in front of the British Sporting Public and the game effectively ended as a sporting contest somewhere half way through the second half. It was disgusting. Noble could not speak. Plus if you want disgusting just go back a couple of weeks to the highly publicised owners even more disgusting comments to the Swinton player. Try also the publicity Mr. McManus and Mr. Pearson whom they need to impress gave them when they called TWP out as "an English squad in North American Jerseys", I bet Argylle and Perez were erm "disgusted".

3. TWP are charged with obtaining a NATV contract because they are of no value to the SKY contract. As it is they pay to be on TV which could not be a bigger embarrassment for TWP and Perez. Perez actually excused this saying that he needed "five to six north american clubs in Superleage before he could get that contract" . The simple point I have asked people to consider for nearly three years now is how does the game survive here, if (and this is what these people say) TWP, Ottawa, New York, Vancouver Boston and Montreal say replace six English "useless"Superleague clubs. People will not debate this I wonder why?

You see that is the ultimate North American plan Mr. Perez set out quite clearly and oddly nobody on what is a Rugby League debate site has in nearly three years ever debated this with me. Insults and calls for me to be ignored and even banned aplenty have been the reply, in what has been a "virtual reality Lynch Mob"

Thanks ever so much for your support BTW, not only you but some other realists who dip in now and again. In general though in the real world I find the vast majority of RL people enjoy the North American dream for what it really is, a novelty.

Finally I can't let you get away with your idea we should go to 14 to give TWP a chance in SL because TWP cannot succeed on the criteria they were set - home grown SL players and a TV deal. Give them even a 5 year run in Superleague and that won't happen by nearly everyone's measure. Plus you also fall for the catch 22 again here my friend. What happens to the 13th. & 14th. clubs in such a league? do they compete? do they even stand still? or do 2 clubs badly struggle, just to create an experiment in which we all know it cannot succeed unless we totally ingore Mr. Perez's own definition of success - a NATV deal worth many $$Millions and top quality NA players appearing for TWP.....Not my definition.........his.

Another thread corrupted by pathetic hatred.

[Dunbar]

On 19/06/2019 at 07:58, The Parksider said:

Perez actually excused this saying that he needed "five to six north american clubs in Superleage before he could get that contract" . The simple point I have asked people to consider for nearly three years now is how does the game survive here, if (and this is what these people say) TWP, Ottawa, New York, Vancouver Boston and Montreal say replace six English "useless"Superleague clubs. People will not debate this I wonder why?

I would be utterly delighted if this scenario came to fruition.

It depends on how you define the game 'surviving'.  If we want elite Rugby League in the Northern Hemisphere to be the historic northern towns/cities in England, the south of France and the occasional outcrop in London then let's crack on with what we have now... and what we have had for the last 125 years. 

If in 25 years time the biggest matches in Rugby League are still the same derbies we saw 50 years ago then I would still be watching (if I'm still around!) but I would be disappointed that our sport had not broken out of its current confines.

If, on the other hand, the elite Northern Hemisphere Rugby League was five or six North American teams, 5 or six from the north of England, two or three from the South of France and London then I would be a happy man.  Because the sport I love has started to finally break out and achieve its potential.

Of course this means that some of the established top tier clubs here will have moved down a level (and the clubs below them as well).  I would hope that this would not mean clubs going out of business as I would hope and expect that people would not stop watching Rugby League just because of international expansion - that feels to me to be a very negative reaction to expansion.

I guess that this process will disappoint and disenfranchise some fans.  And I get that as fans love their clubs/teams and they want them to succeed.  I am from Wigan and I was a season ticket holder at Wigan for many years.  But so I am not accused of hypocrisy then yes, if Wigan RLFC were to lose its place at the top table in order for the wider sport to thrive then I would be ok with that.

None of us can predict the future and we have to be very wary of people stating with immovable confidence what will happen in the future.  This tends to be the prerogative of people who have a strong belief of what they want to happen and cannot see the future in any other way.

From my perspective, if Super League in a decade were made up of North America and European teams in equal measure I will say this.

• Is there a danger that this has negative consequences on the game in the UK?  Yes, of course there is a danger as all change has the potential for negative consequences.
   
• Is there a danger that the rapidly expanding North American Rugby League venture could implode?  Yes, I believe that this would be a significant risk... I would hate to see Rugby League grow as a 'fad' and then disappear again overnight.

The thing is that none of us know what will happen... there may be no North American presence in elite Northern Hemisphere Rugby League in 10/15 years.  It may be Toronto bouncing between divisions relying on players developed by NRL clubs or Super League/Championship teams or it may be that Super League has a strong footing in North America with big city teams joining our elite.

And this brings us down to the key question.  As we don't know the future and because all talk of success or failure is speculation it is a matter of appetite for risk.  I fully understand if you don't want to take the risk and feel that the potential negative effects outweigh the upside.  My feeling is that, as a sport, we have an opportunity here.  An opportunity to break out of the confines that has kept our sport pretty much static for 125 years.  It may all go drastically wrong but that is a risk I would take because of the possible upside.

Where we differ is not intelligence, not the love of our game or our ability to see potential successes or failures.  Where we differ is on the appetite for risk when it comes to unknown possibilities.

This is not a critique of you.  You could in fact be right and the expansion into North America could be a foolish pipe dream.  But neither of us know this and I for one am excited about what it could become.

[Oxford]

20 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I would be utterly delighted if this scenario came to fruition.

It depends on how you define the game 'surviving'.  If we want elite Rugby League in the Northern Hemisphere to be the historic northern towns/cities in England, the south of France and the occasional outcrop in London then let's crack on with what we have now... and what we have had for the last 125 years. 

If in 25 years time the biggest matches in Rugby League are still the same derbies we saw 50 years ago then I would still be watching (if I'm still around!) but I would be disappointed that our sport had not broken out of its current confines.

If, on the other hand, the elite Northern Hemisphere Rugby League was five or six North American teams, 5 or six from the north of England, two or three from the South of France and London then I would be a happy man.  Because the sport I love has started to finally break out and achieve its potential.

Of course this means that some of the established top tier clubs here will have moved down a level (and the clubs below them as well).  I would hope that this would not mean clubs going out of business as I would hope and expect that people would not stop watching Rugby League just because of international expansion - that feels to me to be a very negative reaction to expansion.

I guess that this process will disappoint and disenfranchise some fans.  And I get that as fans love their clubs/teams and they want them to succeed.  I am from Wigan and I was a season ticket holder at Wigan for many years.  But so I am not accused of hypocrisy then yes, if Wigan RLFC were to lose its place at the top table in order for the wider sport to thrive then I would be ok with that.

None of us can predict the future and we have to be very wary of people stating with immovable confidence what will happen in the future.  This tends to be the prerogative of people who have a strong belief of what they want to happen and cannot see the future in any other way.

From my perspective, if Super League in a decade were made up of North America and European teams in equal measure I will say this.

• Is there a danger that this has negative consequences on the game in the UK?  Yes, of course there is a danger as all change has the potential for negative consequences.
   
• Is there a danger that the rapidly expanding North American Rugby League venture could implode?  Yes, I believe that this would be a significant risk... I would hate to see Rugby League grow as a 'fad' and then disappear again overnight.

The thing is that none of us know what will happen... there may be no North American presence in elite Northern Hemisphere Rugby League in 10/15 years.  It may be Toronto bouncing between divisions relying on players developed by NRL clubs or Super League/Championship teams or it may be that Super League has a strong footing in North America with big city teams joining our elite.

And this brings us down to the key question.  As we don't know the future and because all talk of success or failure is speculation it is a matter of appetite for risk.  I fully understand if you don't want to take the risk and feel that the potential negative effects outweigh the upside.  My feeling is that, as a sport, we have an opportunity here.  An opportunity to break out of the confines that has kept our sport pretty much static for 125 years.  It may all go drastically wrong but that is a risk I would take because of the possible upside.

Where we differ is not intelligence, not the love of our game or our ability to see potential successes or failures.  Where we differ is on the appetite for risk when it comes to unknown possibilities.

This is not a critique of you.  You could in fact be right and the expansion into North America could be a foolish pipe dream.  But neither of us know this and I for one am excited about what it could become.

Good effort Dunbar but next time, having tried to debate it with him, he will repeat the phrase no one wants to discuss this I wonder why?

And you'll wonder why you bothered.

When you talk of risk to the risk averse they do tend to glaze over at best. There are probably an infinite number of ways that the TWP/NA experiment can work out but we end up discussing one .... I wonder why that is?

He's not alone

"There’s no scope to expand Super League yet, writes Mike Critchley in his latest column for the St Helens Star, citing money as the main reason. "

and that why he's able to cut and paste to the level of his conviction. We must be the only sport that has more inside doubters than players. A 5th column of our own making. If and when the lovers of yawn read our posts they must be celebrating like the second coming of Margaret Thatcher at a blue rinse conference!

[Damien]

3 hours ago, Dunbar said:

I would be utterly delighted if this scenario came to fruition.

It depends on how you define the game 'surviving'.  If we want elite Rugby League in the Northern Hemisphere to be the historic northern towns/cities in England, the south of France and the occasional outcrop in London then let's crack on with what we have now... and what we have had for the last 125 years. 

If in 25 years time the biggest matches in Rugby League are still the same derbies we saw 50 years ago then I would still be watching (if I'm still around!) but I would be disappointed that our sport had not broken out of its current confines.

If, on the other hand, the elite Northern Hemisphere Rugby League was five or six North American teams, 5 or six from the north of England, two or three from the South of France and London then I would be a happy man.  Because the sport I love has started to finally break out and achieve its potential.

Of course this means that some of the established top tier clubs here will have moved down a level (and the clubs below them as well).  I would hope that this would not mean clubs going out of business as I would hope and expect that people would not stop watching Rugby League just because of international expansion - that feels to me to be a very negative reaction to expansion.

I guess that this process will disappoint and disenfranchise some fans.  And I get that as fans love their clubs/teams and they want them to succeed.  I am from Wigan and I was a season ticket holder at Wigan for many years.  But so I am not accused of hypocrisy then yes, if Wigan RLFC were to lose its place at the top table in order for the wider sport to thrive then I would be ok with that.

None of us can predict the future and we have to be very wary of people stating with immovable confidence what will happen in the future.  This tends to be the prerogative of people who have a strong belief of what they want to happen and cannot see the future in any other way.

From my perspective, if Super League in a decade were made up of North America and European teams in equal measure I will say this.

• Is there a danger that this has negative consequences on the game in the UK?  Yes, of course there is a danger as all change has the potential for negative consequences.
   
• Is there a danger that the rapidly expanding North American Rugby League venture could implode?  Yes, I believe that this would be a significant risk... I would hate to see Rugby League grow as a 'fad' and then disappear again overnight.

The thing is that none of us know what will happen... there may be no North American presence in elite Northern Hemisphere Rugby League in 10/15 years.  It may be Toronto bouncing between divisions relying on players developed by NRL clubs or Super League/Championship teams or it may be that Super League has a strong footing in North America with big city teams joining our elite.

And this brings us down to the key question.  As we don't know the future and because all talk of success or failure is speculation it is a matter of appetite for risk.  I fully understand if you don't want to take the risk and feel that the potential negative effects outweigh the upside.  My feeling is that, as a sport, we have an opportunity here.  An opportunity to break out of the confines that has kept our sport pretty much static for 125 years.  It may all go drastically wrong but that is a risk I would take because of the possible upside.

Where we differ is not intelligence, not the love of our game or our ability to see potential successes or failures.  Where we differ is on the appetite for risk when it comes to unknown possibilities.

This is not a critique of you.  You could in fact be right and the expansion into North America could be a foolish pipe dream.  But neither of us know this and I for one am excited about what it could become.

Nice post Dunbar.