Reports suggest Toronto Wolfpack not guaranteed SL place

[Harry Stottle]

5 minutes ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

No doubt about your examples and the Raptors have had an outstanding achievement.  However what is overlooked and is constantly overlooked when people talk about establishing Rugby League somewhere and playing numbers etc etc is the simple fact that RL is a difficult game to play. One of the most difficult in fact. The fitness and strength levels , the toughness and relative lack of protection do not make it an easy sell amongst the myriad of things young people can choose to do nowadays. I dare say it is much more diffcult a sell and to take up and play than Baseball or Basketball (height allowing of course). Rugby League is probably more akin to Boxing or the like than those two sports.

Probably a much better comparison for your purpose would be NFL. You can please correct me if i am wrong but i read there are around just a dozen players in the NFL from Canada (out of 1700 NFL players). This after 140 years of the very similar Canadian Football. The situation i have no doubt, would be pretty much the same in Rugby League. Canada are not just going to unearth SL or NRL class players overnight. If the project continues more than 5 or 10 years and Wolfpack retain SL status , it is likely that there still will be no Canadian players of standard. This means that continuously for the near to mid-far future the players will have to come from SL or NRL. There is no other option available.

The SL pool is depleting by the year, mainly for the aforementioned reasons. Young people have so many other things to do and we have made the game too difficult (boring i have also heard numerous times at youth level) and inaccesible to many. The NRL , whilst in nowhere near the same spot, is now relying on the seemingly neverending pot of fantasically suited (to the game as played) South Sea Islander lineage players to keep the numbers and quality at their very high (highest) level.  In the UK we have the common situation of players playing on way into their late 30's, much much more than has ever been, as the replacements are more difficult to find and nuture. Within a few years the consequences of that may be seen in some of the players who have played too long , hopefully not, but it is the nature of the sport. It can easily be argued that the quality of SL has perhaps passed its peak. The best players now routinely find their way to the NRL and the playing and club numbers at youth and amateur have fallen dramatically and show little sign of reversing. We fight a continuous unfair fight against Rugby Union and no longer obtain many of our best players from that source. In short Rugby League in the UK is in danger of becoming an even more niche sport.

So, you will find , that it isn't simply a case of "more teams equals more players". More kids might be intially interested but will find the drop out rate will be very high and it will take some time indeed for any fruit to bear. It really can be a quantum leap from "part-time players" to a full time professionals. Thousands in the UK and Australia fail to do it, i don't see Canada as some kind of special place where normality does not apply.

The thing is, the Rugby League world really, desperately, needs more sources of players and Canada could possibly be one in the long term if they are seriously in it for the long term from the ground upwards. However in the short to mid, mid-far term any new team in "virgin" territory is going to be a drain on a depleting resource. Someone , somewhere has to lose out.

Excellent post and echo's my concerns exactly, but don't let logic like that get in the way of another 4 or 5 N.A. teams as some on here believe should be par for the course.

What I believe will be in our favour is that the games hierarchy see it the same way as we do.

[Kayakman]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Toronto Wolfpack v Featherstone Rovers in the Final.

Featherstone Rovers Championship Grand Final Winners 2019.

Featherstone Rovers promoted to Super League 2020 season.

Wanna back that up with a wee bet there Harry ?

[TboneFromTO]

1 minute ago, Kayakman said:

Wanna back that up with a wee bet there Harry ?

Good stakes:

twp get promoted Harry changes his profile pic to a twp one for a season

Fev does it kayakman does it for fev

Toulouse or York? Both of you to the winner lol

[Tre Cool]

There's 13 Canadian NBA players in total.  Canada aren't in the top 20 world ranked basketball teams.  I think we can hope for a successful and popular elite club.  If we're in it for players I think we're being a bit naive.  I'm a big fan of TWP but can we stop asking them to be all things to all people. The game needs them for lots of reasons, not least profile and image.  Let's focus on the positives.  If we don't grab this with both hands it won't come round again in a hurry.

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Tre Cool said:

There's 13 Canadian NBA players in total.  Canada aren't in the top 20 world ranked basketball teams.  I think we can hope for a successful and popular elite club.  If we're in it for players I think we're being a bit naive.  I'm a big fan of TWP but can we stop asking them to be all things to all people. The game needs them for lots of reasons, not least profile and image.  Let's focus on the positives.  If we don't grab this with both hands it won't come round again in a hurry.

I've made the point before that if TWP provide more attractive opportunities for young British lads then how isn't that a good thing for the RFL and their national teams? If TWP want to set up academies in London etc. go for it.

In the meantime, they will add to the SL product by providing another quality team with a rich backer and good crowds and a positive image on TV. 

[fairfolly]

Personally I see no problem in Toronto being allowed into S.L. if they win their place. The only stipulation I would place on them is that they play their games the way the fixtures evolve. Normally one week home, next week away.No package of home games at the end of the season, if the can not play their home games in Toronto then each home fixture should be played at a neutral ground. At the seasons end,or when the pitches in Toronto are fit to play on they follow the same formula. In Toronto one week, in the U.K. or France the next week until the season ends. If that means they only play 3 or 4 games in Toronto,tough,it should be the same rules for all clubs,no exceptions.

[Lowdesert]

8 minutes ago, fairfolly said:

Personally I see no problem in Toronto being allowed into S.L. if they win their place. The only stipulation I would place on them is that they play their games the way the fixtures evolve. Normally one week home, next week away.No package of home games at the end of the season, if the can not play their home games in Toronto then each home fixture should be played at a neutral ground. At the seasons end,or when the pitches in Toronto are fit to play on they follow the same formula. In Toronto one week, in the U.K. or France the next week until the season ends. If that means they only play 3 or 4 games in Toronto,tough,it should be the same rules for all clubs,no exceptions.

If they had a roofed stadium it would be possible, but before that, we might have to have discussions about jet lag and player welfare.  There has to be some work done to make it a level playing field for all.

[Dave T]

12 minutes ago, fairfolly said:

Personally I see no problem in Toronto being allowed into S.L. if they win their place. The only stipulation I would place on them is that they play their games the way the fixtures evolve. Normally one week home, next week away.No package of home games at the end of the season, if the can not play their home games in Toronto then each home fixture should be played at a neutral ground. At the seasons end,or when the pitches in Toronto are fit to play on they follow the same formula. In Toronto one week, in the U.K. or France the next week until the season ends. If that means they only play 3 or 4 games in Toronto,tough,it should be the same rules for all clubs,no exceptions.

I think a little bit of flexibility is fine, it is reasonably easy enough to give them a few runs of home and away games that dont cause an issue to integrity.

[RP London]

24 minutes ago, fairfolly said:

Personally I see no problem in Toronto being allowed into S.L. if they win their place. The only stipulation I would place on them is that they play their games the way the fixtures evolve. Normally one week home, next week away.No package of home games at the end of the season, if the can not play their home games in Toronto then each home fixture should be played at a neutral ground. At the seasons end,or when the pitches in Toronto are fit to play on they follow the same formula. In Toronto one week, in the U.K. or France the next week until the season ends. If that means they only play 3 or 4 games in Toronto,tough,it should be the same rules for all clubs,no exceptions.

yes i agree, same rule for all clubs, no exceptions..

so they can play in a block away from home at the start of the season because the ground in Toronto is unplayable just as Leeds were allowed to play a chunk at the beginning away from Headingley because it was unplayable/being built..

same rule for all clubs, no exceptions... or are there some exceptions?

[Kayakman]

26 minutes ago, fairfolly said:

Personally I see no problem in Toronto being allowed into S.L. if they win their place. The only stipulation I would place on them is that they play their games the way the fixtures evolve. Normally one week home, next week away.No package of home games at the end of the season, if the can not play their home games in Toronto then each home fixture should be played at a neutral ground. At the seasons end,or when the pitches in Toronto are fit to play on they follow the same formula. In Toronto one week, in the U.K. or France the next week until the season ends. If that means they only play 3 or 4 games in Toronto,tough,it should be the same rules for all clubs,no exceptions.

That is pig headed thinking fairfolly...you have to understand something, "There is more than one way to skin a cat."

[Kayakman]

1 hour ago, TboneFromTO said:

Good stakes:

twp get promoted Harry changes his profile pic to a twp one for a season

Fev does it kayakman does it for fev

Toulouse or York? Both of you to the winner lol

I'm in if Harry is...you want any part of this action Parky?

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/video/join-toronto-wolfpack-championship-summer-220243818.html

[Roy Haggerty]

34 minutes ago, fairfolly said:

Personally I see no problem in Toronto being allowed into S.L. if they win their place. The only stipulation I would place on them is that they play their games the way the fixtures evolve. Normally one week home, next week away.No package of home games at the end of the season, if the can not play their home games in Toronto then each home fixture should be played at a neutral ground. At the seasons end,or when the pitches in Toronto are fit to play on they follow the same formula. In Toronto one week, in the U.K. or France the next week until the season ends. If that means they only play 3 or 4 games in Toronto,tough,it should be the same rules for all clubs,no exceptions.

Why?

 

Serious question, because I genuinely don’t understand this argument. 

Leave the loop fixtures out and my team play each other team home and away. Each of those other teams play the rest home and away. If we’re starting from the assumption that home is an advantage and away is a disadvantage, then every team is treated the same. None of that is affected by the frequency/order of home and away matches.

 

If the argument is that lots of home matches on the trot is a bigger advantage then we also have to accept the argument that lots of away matches on the trot is a bigger disadvantage. 

 

So so why does it matter whether a team plays its home and away matches on alternate weeks (which none do, actually), or in blocks? Each team playing Toronto or Catalans only has to make the long journey once a season. If those clubs played in blocks or alternate weeks they’d still only have to make the journey once a season. 

 

So so I can see how making Catalans/Toronto play alternate weeks is a genuine disadvantage for them. But for the life of me I cannot understand why the order in which they play their home/away fixtures is of any relevance to the other teams. 

[Mattrhino]

2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

They have billions now and that market is huge now. They didn't have billions and that market wasnt huge when they invested in it

It was football that made the jump to professionalism, football that made the jump to pay TV and they did so specifically excluding their traditional kick off time, football changes many more fixtures for tv than we do, they play on every day of the week these days, they invested in PLP when there was next to no overseas market, they went out to asia, australasia, north America when not only wasnt there a premier league market but hardly any market for football at all. 

Football makes things works. We see if things work and only as long as they don't impact what already happens too much.

The game isnt nimble or innovative or brave. Its stuck. 

Just watching his interview on Rugby AM and he is still calling Toronto spurious and only has good things to say through gritted teeth and caveats. 

His claims about if they are sustainable and if the comp can handle the travel are completely ridiculous as they have been doing it for several years in the lower leagues. 

He is much happier making vague promises and targets than actual taking on real opportunites in the now. 

[Mattrhino]

9 minutes ago, Roy Haggerty said:

Why?

 

Serious question, because I genuinely don’t understand this argument. 

Leave the loop fixtures out and my team play each other team home and away. Each of those other teams play the rest home and away. If we’re starting from the assumption that home is an advantage and away is a disadvantage, then every team is treated the same. None of that is affected by the frequency/order of home and away matches.

 

If the argument is that lots of home matches on the trot is a bigger advantage then we also have to accept the argument that lots of away matches on the trot is a bigger disadvantage. 

 

So so why does it matter whether a team plays its home and away matches on alternate weeks (which none do, actually), or in blocks? Each team playing Toronto or Catalans only has to make the long journey once a season. If those clubs played in blocks or alternate weeks they’d still only have to make the journey once a season. 

 

So so I can see how making Catalans/Toronto play alternate weeks is a genuine disadvantage for them. But for the life of me I cannot understand why the order in which they play their home/away fixtures is of any relevance to the other teams. 

It isn't,  it's just a convient stick to beat them with. The end goal is either to get rid of them because they don't want the competition or a way too fleece money from them. 

[Damien]

7 minutes ago, Mattrhino said:

Just watching his interview on Rugby AM and he is still calling Toronto spurious and only has good things to say through gritted teeth and caveats. 

His claims about if they are sustainable and if the comp can handle the travel are completely ridiculous as they have been doing it for several years in the lower leagues. 

He is much happier making vague promises and targets than actual taking on real opportunites in the now. 

It's nonsense. If part time players and clubs that in some cases are little more amateur can make it work then full time Super League clubs definitely should be able to.

[CanadianRugger]

3 hours ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

No doubt about your examples and the Raptors have had an outstanding achievement.  However what is overlooked and is constantly overlooked when people talk about establishing Rugby League somewhere and playing numbers etc etc is the simple fact that RL is a difficult game to play. One of the most difficult in fact. The fitness and strength levels , the toughness and relative lack of protection do not make it an easy sell amongst the myriad of things young people can choose to do nowadays. I dare say it is much more diffcult a sell and to take up and play than Baseball or Basketball (height allowing of course). Rugby League is probably more akin to Boxing or the like than those two sports.

Probably a much better comparison for your purpose would be NFL. You can please correct me if i am wrong but i read there are around just a dozen players in the NFL from Canada (out of 1700 NFL players). This after 140 years of the very similar Canadian Football. The situation i have no doubt, would be pretty much the same in Rugby League. Canada are not just going to unearth SL or NRL class players overnight. If the project continues more than 5 or 10 years and Wolfpack retain SL status , it is likely that there still will be no Canadian players of standard. This means that continuously for the near to mid-far future the players will have to come from SL or NRL. There is no other option available.

The SL pool is depleting by the year, mainly for the aforementioned reasons. Young people have so many other things to do and we have made the game too difficult (boring i have also heard numerous times at youth level) and inaccesible to many. The NRL , whilst in nowhere near the same spot, is now relying on the seemingly neverending pot of fantasically suited (to the game as played) South Sea Islander lineage players to keep the numbers and quality at their very high (highest) level.  In the UK we have the common situation of players playing on way into their late 30's, much much more than has ever been, as the replacements are more difficult to find and nuture. Within a few years the consequences of that may be seen in some of the players who have played too long , hopefully not, but it is the nature of the sport. It can easily be argued that the quality of SL has perhaps passed its peak. The best players now routinely find their way to the NRL and the playing and club numbers at youth and amateur have fallen dramatically and show little sign of reversing. We fight a continuous unfair fight against Rugby Union and no longer obtain many of our best players from that source. In short Rugby League in the UK is in danger of becoming an even more niche sport.

So, you will find , that it isn't simply a case of "more teams equals more players". More kids might be intially interested but will find the drop out rate will be very high and it will take some time indeed for any fruit to bear. It really can be a quantum leap from "part-time players" to a full time professionals. Thousands in the UK and Australia fail to do it, i don't see Canada as some kind of special place where normality does not apply.

The thing is, the Rugby League world really, desperately, needs more sources of players and Canada could possibly be one in the long term if they are seriously in it for the long term from the ground upwards. However in the short to mid, mid-far term any new team in "virgin" territory is going to be a drain on a depleting resource. Someone , somewhere has to lose out.

13 Canadians in NFL around 200 in CFL.  Not surprising given just how big football is in the US.  

To say Canadians can't play Rugby League because it's "too difficult" though is foolish.  The official sports of Canada are lacrosse and ice hockey. Ice hockey is rated along with boxing as one of the most difficult sports to play, much less be good at.

If enough people start playing League there will be a few who emerge as capable.  We also have a lot of Rugby Union players in this country.

[Canis Lupus]

1 hour ago, fairfolly said:

 Normally one week home, next week away.No package of home games at the end of the season, if the can not play their home games in Toronto then each home fixture should be played at a neutral ground. At the seasons end,or when the pitches in Toronto are fit to play on they follow the same formula. In Toronto one week, in the U.K. or France the next week until the season ends. If that means they only play 3 or 4 games in Toronto,tough,it should be the same rules for all clubs,no exceptions.

That has to be the most ridiculous comment on this topic.

[Big Picture]

30 minutes ago, Mattrhino said:

Just watching his interview on Rugby AM and he is still calling Toronto spurious and only has good things to say through gritted teeth and caveats. 

His claims about if they are sustainable and if the comp can handle the travel are completely ridiculous as they have been doing it for several years in the lower leagues. 

He is much happier making vague promises and targets than actual taking on real opportunites in the now. 

Is this a recent interview, or the one from a year ago?  If it's recent, do you have a link to it?

[fairfolly]

Canis,

                 Quite obviously my post was "tongue in cheek". All the different scenarios regarding Toronto should have been sorted out when they were allowed into R.F.L. That they were not is normal procedure for the R.F.L.I fully understand that  S.L. is a different kettle of fish but as far as I am aware the R.F.L have the final say on this. I may be wrong in this assumption,I am sure somebody will post if I am.As for Kayakman, I would not know if there are several ways to "skin a cat" as I have never skinned one, all I know is that at the end of the day it does not really matter, the cat has still been skinned. L.O.L.

[Canis Lupus]

Fairfolly,

Fair enough but some of the posts on here have been serious and way outta whack . My only concern with the schedule is player welfare . We asked to join the British league so should have to accept certain restrictions on when and where we have to play games as long as it doesn't become detrimental to the players . it is a hard enough game to start with. On the flip side I would not be happy if the schedule meant a distinct advantage to us either .

[fairfolly]

Canis,

             32 pages of posts ,when anybody with an ounce of common sense knows that it should have been sorted out at Toronto,s inception. I have no qualms at all about them being allowed into S.L. In fact if they are not it will be a diabolical decision but I would not hold my breath on them being allowed in. I am sure you will have gathered by now that some of the people running the game were not at the head of the queue when brains were dished out.That is the biggest problem with the game, it is always somebody else,s fault when things do not go right for certain ,C.E.O s or whatever they are called,never their own clubs or them always the referee ,the linesmen, anything but the real culprits,themselves.Toronto may have to only win two games and they should be in S.L. But, guess what, they have no idea which competion they will be playing in next season.

[TIWIT]

8 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

What lawsuits, did the RFL not lose all rights to SL matters when the split came on who controls who and SL set up their own controlling body in 2018.

That would be part of what the lawsuits would determine. But I would think the agreements signed in 2016 that Super League were a party to would still hold sway now. 

 

[TIWIT]

Why is it assumed that playing most games at home at the end of the season is such an advantage? If you've lost most of your games on the road in the first part of the season you'll be so far behind it will be next-to-impossible to make up the gap.

[Lobbygobbler]

Why is it okay for Toronto to play part timers but not Stupid League?

[Mattrhino]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

Is this a recent interview, or the one from a year ago?  If it's recent, do you have a link to it?

I think it was from the playoff launch at OT. No link sorry watched on my sky+