Watch Rugby League Back Chat online now (updated)

[Total Rugby League]

With so many questions surrounding Toronto Wolfpack we put some of them directly to a man at the club who happens to be in the know, their General Manager Martin Vickers.

It’s never easy for a player to be out injured but what kind of battle is it after being told you are out for the rest of the season? Wakefield’s Tinirau Arona tells all.

And with the Coral Challenge Cup semi-finals imminent, are we due a surprise result?

Matt Shaw is your host for this week’s Rugby League Back Chat which also features League Express Editor Martyn Sadler.

Watch the first broadcast  on Freesports TV on Thur 25th July, 5pm. Check the Freesports TV website for listings and how to access the channel.

 

[John Drake]

15 minute warning!!

On at 5pm today.

[Oxford]

Martin Vickers !

Whatever you do, don't alert the Red Devil's faithful.

And why don't you appear John?

I still say a fan or two would be good too.

[John Drake]

5 hours ago, Oxford said:

And why don't you appear John?

I wouldn't want to send the viewing figures into a tailspin! 

[The Future is League]

13 hours ago, Oxford said:

Martin Vickers !

Whatever you do, don't alert the Red Devil's faithful.

And why don't you appear John?

I still say a fan or two would be good too.

I thought he came over very well

8 hours ago, John Drake said:

I wouldn't want to send the viewing figures into a tailspin! 

I'm sure John your input would be very welcome

[John Drake]

Watch it online now...

[Angelic Cynic]

Perhaps a re-title of Super League Backchat should be considered.

With this show re-titled One Man Monologue For Toronto. 

Another opportunity for Tinirau Arona should be considered.

Will a general manager/CEO of a relatively new club/or any club in League 1 be given an opportunity to appear?

( Mick Hogan has appeared,this year )

[Man of Kent]

So Toronto won’t refuse promotion.

However, they won’t get Sky money AND Sky have the broadcast rights to NA.

Vickers wasn’t very convincing at all on whether a TV deal would be forthcoming anytime soon.

So where will their income come from?

[ojx]

17 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

So Toronto won’t refuse promotion.

However, they won’t get Sky money AND Sky have the broadcast rights to NA.

Vickers wasn’t very convincing at all on whether a TV deal would be forthcoming anytime soon.

So where will their income come from?

Vickers was a terrible speaker. Would think they could find someone better for PR. Especially with this kind of news:

"The team has had growing pains off the field. It currently faces a lawsuit from Alberta's ILink Media Group, which alleges it is owed more than $125,000 in unpaid bills from 2018 TV broadcast work."

https://www.tsn.ca/toronto-wolfpack-owner-endures-bumpy-ride-this-season-but-sees-good-things-ahead-1.1340961

[Man of Kent]

3 hours ago, ojx said:

Vickers was a terrible speaker. Would think they could find someone better for PR. Especially with this kind of news:

"The team has had growing pains off the field. It currently faces a lawsuit from Alberta's ILink Media Group, which alleges it is owed more than $125,000 in unpaid bills from 2018 TV broadcast work."

https://www.tsn.ca/toronto-wolfpack-owner-endures-bumpy-ride-this-season-but-sees-good-things-ahead-1.1340961

Another unpaid bill!

Interesting article. I didn’t know Toronto had a ‘five-year participation agreement with the RFL’. 

“Right now we're not back at the drawing board but we are in discussions with the RFL and will be with the Super League when the time is appropriate to update the participation agreement based on where we are now with the various competitions and how is the best way to go forward," said Argyle.

"There's still a lot of hurdles to get through," he added, referencing the promotion playoffs.

 

[Oxford]

I thought this was a good show and would be for anyone with progress at heart.

Vicker's passion for the game and for TWP's impact was good. I don't expect everyone to share this but concentrating on the negatives is a bit of a give away.

What's clear, in any discussion of TWP, is that passions will dictate how the thread goes rather than anything else.

 

 

[Man of Kent]

40 minutes ago, Oxford said:

I thought this was a good show and would be for anyone with progress at heart.

Vicker's passion for the game and for TWP's impact was good. I don't expect everyone to share this but concentrating on the negatives is a bit of a give away.

What's clear, in any discussion of TWP, is that passions will dictate how the thread goes rather than anything else.

 

 

Vickers was passionate and Toronto are undeniably doing good things in raising profile & interest in RL. 

However, when pressed on visas, long-term viability and TV deals he didn’t convince me at all. Passion doesn’t pay the bills.

[The Parksider]

23 hours ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Perhaps a re-title of Super League Backchat should be considered.With this show re-titled One Man Monologue For Toronto. 

To be fair there are a lot of questions to be asked, and answers to be sought, but for me in my opinion, the press release type answers always seemed to come back round to "eyeballs" again and again, and every such reply just built up an idea that tens of thousands and more people were tuning into TWP to follow them over the various media they appear on.  I know little about it and simply thought the inference was that..........

23 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Sky have the broadcast rights to NA. Vickers wasn’t very convincing at all on whether a TV deal would be forthcoming anytime soon.So where will their income come from?

So Toronto won’t refuse promotion. However, they won’t get Sky money

......Vickers seemed to be saying a TV deal has to come because so many many people around the world were so keen on watching TWP. Whether those numbers suggested were real and if so whether putting TWP behind a paywall has any value (as we all think twice when we have to pay) I don't know. 

I think we have to remember that the original TV deal Perez was chasing for TWP was one that could have been shared with the other Superleague clubs so TWP effectively added to the TV monies significantly. That didn't mean getting just TWP on TV it meant getting 5-6 north american clubs on TV as Perez said. The idea would be that Ottawa and New York and Boston all got equal "eyeballs" on them as well to the point where  the NATV rights were very valuable.

But then it comes back to how the SKY contract would be compromised if the number of English clubs (whose fans actually pay to watch and not just free eyeball) were to reduce to accommodate overseas clubs. To me it's catch 22 - making SL more attractive to America makes it less attractive to Britain??

Unless you add NA clubs and enlarge Superleague.

But this means producing another 120 quality Superleague players we don't have, removing the French and hoping 10 English and 4 North American clubs would actually work? What if the North American clubs could not compete?

Mr. Vickers was not asked about player production.......

Now it may be I am a narrow minded dinosaur (but a dinosaur who has bought League Express and associated RL mags religiously since it was once the Rugby Leaguer in 1968), but the questions above are I think fair enough and do not deserve insults. They deserve answers I have never heard or seen, and the only Answer Mr. Vickers gave me was "Eyeballs"........

[Man of Kent]

14 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

To be fair there are a lot of questions to be asked, and answers to be sought, but for me in my opinion, the press release type answers always seemed to come back round to "eyeballs" again and again, and every such reply just built up an idea that tens of thousands and more people were tuning into TWP to follow them over the various media they appear on.  I know little about it and simply thought the inference was that..........

......Vickers seemed to be saying a TV deal has to come because so many many people around the world were so keen on watching TWP. Whether those numbers suggested were real and if so whether putting TWP behind a paywall has any value (as we all think twice when we have to pay) I don't know. 

I think we have to remember that the original TV deal Perez was chasing for TWP was one that could have been shared with the other Superleague clubs so TWP effectively added to the TV monies significantly. That didn't mean getting just TWP on TV it meant getting 5-6 north american clubs on TV as Perez said. The idea would be that Ottawa and New York and Boston all got equal "eyeballs" on them as well to the point where  the NATV rights were very valuable.

Yep, I thought the plan was for Toronto to forego Sky TV and negotiate their own NA deal.

As it stands they can’t do the latter, and the Perez Plan is off the menu due to the mooted limit of foreign clubs in Super League. So how do they make any money? 

[Angelic Cynic]

As I have been quoted.....

Mention of an unpaid bill - though it does seem out of the remit of a general manager - is not unusual for Mr Vickers when alongside a wealthy owner - http://salfordonline.com/2567-i-knew-nothing-of-salford-red-devils-ccjs-says-koukash.html

'Eyeballs' and 'Hands on Rugby Balls' are just a repeating of the mantra of Mr Argyle.I cannot see Toronto entering a reserve side,and we do not know how the much vaunted link with a Manchester University is developing - https://www2.mmu.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/story/7293/

I want Toronto to do well.I just felt other officials from other clubs should be allowed the air-time to wax lyrical about their club - and perhaps less emphasis on Super League would be nice - or change the title.

Perhaps the editor of the old Open Rugby magazine,when he mentioned getting rugby league into the universities,meant more players playing the sport,or did he mean,like I think he meant,that the next captains of industry would be able to learn the sport at university and then invest some money? We seem to have lots of University educated players in League 1,but fewer people putting their head above the parapet and investing large amounts of money.Maybe the captains of industry,and those who make money,do so without attending university.Sorry for going off topic.It was the mention of Manchester University....Sorry!  

[Oxford]

39 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Perhaps the editor of the old Open Rugby magazine,when he mentioned getting rugby league into the universities,meant more players playing the sport,or did he mean,like I think he meant,that the next captains of industry would be able to learn the sport at university and then invest some money? We seem to have lots of University educated players in League 1,but fewer people putting their head above the parapet and investing large amounts of money.Maybe the captains of industry,and those who make money,do so without attending university.Sorry for going off topic.It was the mention of Manchester University....Sorry!  

Your other bit was Parky ammunition.

But Harry Edgar clearly meant both of the above however the ownership of GB by the public school system, and by default ru, is much harder to combat than it is to aggrevate. Changing attitudes is the hardest thing of all and RL is just one small but very entrenched part of all this. Mind you when Mr Edgar wrote the world was much easier to understand ... times have changed.

[The Future is League]

In my opinion i think Dan Sarginson would be an interesting guest on the show. Came through at London Broncos come North then went to Australia and came back here.

[fighting irish]

Just watched the Great Hack on Netflix.

Perhaps we should employ Cambridge Analytica (only kidding) and hope that the Ra Ra don't beat us to it. 

It wouldn't surprise me to discover that they had already employed them at some point before they were shamed out of existence.