The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

[Gooleboy]

19 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

What was on SKY Sports back then 

Gurning, Leek growing and Cheese rolling.

[TIWIT]

22 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

What was on SKY Sports back then ?

Football?

[Robin Evans]

3 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Gurning, Leek growing and Cheese rolling.

Kellington has some fine exponents of gurning. I am fairly certain some of today's contributions would be up there in the three ridings top gurners.

[TheReaper]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

So now you are telling me how i should think and feel ? 

Might need to work on your reading comprehension there. 

I said I believe, then posed a question, then referred to many fans (not all fans) feeling similarly, then gave a real world example. I don't see where I give a what you think or feel in there, just countering the opinion that no one will have interest.

But it seems to me that maybe if you're bored watching a rugby game if it isn't part of a bigger competition, you don't like it as much as you think you do.

[Rupert Prince]

3 hours ago, Robin Evans said:

The last time we had licencing I continued to watch my club. I lost heart. That hope that my club might get a go in SL removed for a system I loathe.

I watched my club win a grand final.... and yes it was OK, but the level of elation was quite low. It meant little to me beyond that game. No promotion. No looking forward to another challenge. Hope suppressed for licencing.

I will walk away if that system returns.

So if you were a Manly fan (look at the table) you would be bored and stop watching.  Right now Bulldogs will be looking for a challenge no doubt.  But of course Bulldogs are a part of a massively successful system - no need to wotty about rekegation. So much so that they can open their wallets to sign British players from an anaemic super league.

[GUBRATS]

Just now, TheReaper said:

Might need to work on your reading comprehension there. 

I said I believe, then posed a question, then referred to many fans (not all fans) feeling similarly, then gave a real world example. I don't see where I give a what you think or feel in there, just countering the opinion that no one will have interest.

But it seems to me that maybe if you're bored watching a rugby game if it isn't part of a bigger competition, you don't like it as much as you think you do.

Prior to licencing Leigh were getting around 2,500 just after moving to the LSV ( not forgetting the RFL had put much stall in clubs achieving ' framing the future ' , stadium standards which would be rewarded with a better chance at getting into SL ) , 5 years down the track and we had around 1,400 turning up , promotion returns and we quickly pick up to 3,000 + 

It is that simple , other clubs in the Championship saw similar drops , irrelivant what happens in other countries , UK sporting culture is based on ' on field ' P and R , take it away and the sport suffers 

[Robin Evans]

8 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

So if you were a Manly fan (look at the table) you would be bored and stop watching.  Right now Bulldogs will be looking for a challenge no doubt.  But of course Bulldogs are a part of a massively successful system - no need to wotty about rekegation. So much so that they can open their wallets to sign British players from an anaemic super league.

I'm not a manly fan. I watch rugby in the UK. Licencing returns and thats me done. Hope and ambition removed and the rest is rather drab and pointless 

[Rupert Prince]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

" Comfortable in not being competitive " , isn't that what the clubs at the bottom of a ' locked in ' SL would be ?

But what is the point of that ?

Is Canterbury Bulldogs currently comfortable?  Is Brisbane comfortable?

Are they going through the motions?  By your logic they should close down.

 

[GUBRATS]

Just now, Rupert Prince said:

Is Canterbury Bulldogs currently comfortable?  Is Brisbane comfortable?

Are they going through the motions?  By your logic they should close down.

 

No idea , I don't have any interest whatsoever in the NRL 

What sort of attendances are they getting ? , are they down on other seasons ?

[Davo5]

10 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

No idea , I don't have any interest whatsoever in the NRL 

What sort of attendances are they getting ? , are they down on other seasons ?

Given that crowds are restricted because of COVID I’d think they are down.

[Rupert Prince]

12 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

No idea , I don't have any interest whatsoever in the NRL 

What sort of attendances are they getting ? , are they down on other seasons ?

If you have no ideas, then you should start to learn to pay attention.  We all know Saints fans won't be watching Thompson for a few years.  We can expect English fans to be missing a few more players in due course.  

[gingerjon]

19 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

No idea , I don't have any interest whatsoever in the NRL 

What sort of attendances are they getting ? , are they down on other seasons ?

I make it that the NRL has had 13 different champions this century compared to 4 in Super League.

Maybe the focus on excitement at the foot of the table is what allows mediocrity to thrive.

[GUBRATS]

22 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

Given that crowds are restricted because of COVID I’d think they are down.

Of course , completely forgot , stupid question 

Still got ###### all to do with the UK and our sporting culture 

[GUBRATS]

19 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

If you have no ideas, then you should start to learn to pay attention.  We all know Saints fans won't be watching Thompson for a few years.  We can expect English fans to be missing a few more players in due course.  

I have no interest in the NRL , or any players in it , be they Aussie , English or Andorran 

 

[GUBRATS]

18 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I make it that the NRL has had 13 different champions this century compared to 4 in Super League.

Maybe the focus on excitement at the foot of the table is what allows mediocrity to thrive.

Couldn't care less , as I said , don't try to tell me how to think or feel 

[Davo5]

8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Couldn't care less , as I said , don't try to tell me how to think or feel 

He wasn’t but given that there are only 2 fully professional leagues in RL and 1 is hugely more successful than the other comparisons are inevitable.

[GUBRATS]

28 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

He wasn’t but given that there are only 2 fully professional leagues in RL and 1 is hugely more successful than the other comparisons are inevitable.

Yes but other than the sports being the same , the environments they operate in are completely different 

[Niels]

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

I make it that the NRL has had 13 different champions this century compared to 4 in Super League.

Maybe the focus on excitement at the foot of the table is what allows mediocrity to thrive.

But that doesn't apply in other sports. Also it didn't in the Championship either, there have been plenty of different winners this century. 

It's because there are 3 very strong teams in Super League and at one point in time at least one will be better than the rest. Scrapping relegation won't alter that. Or the demise of the 3 as happened with Bradford but that would cause real problems for the game. 

 

[Oldbear]

I’m not a Luddite, I’m a big fan of expansion, but I can’t see with the current state of the  game in the Northern Hemisphere how licensing can be introduced. For anyone who is championing this right now I would love the answers to the following questions.

1. How many teams would you have in this licensed league?

2. What fair, measurable criteria would you use to decide who gets in or not?

3. If the existing SL clubs are already given a license then please explain to me why for example Wakefield is more deserving than Fev? (Not bashing Wakey but realistically as they and Fev are so close geographically and as Wakey have not exactly set the world on fire since promotion then I’m not sure on what criteria they are better qualified).

Licensing works in the NRL because they have sufficient strong teams to allow it, and to be able to set high standards. If that were applied to SL I could only see Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Leeds, Hull and Catalans being worthy, maybe Huddersfield. Anyone else getting in would be doing so under some pretty dubious criteria, which will always lead to allegations that the system is rigged.

[Oldbear]

9 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

So again , " let us win , or I'm taking my ball home " 

Maybe I’m not making myself clear, I’m undergoing some pretty serious medical treatment right now so my communication might be off, if so I apologize. My point is more in response to the numbers of posters who claim that we can’t exclude TWP because doing so will mean the game loses out on untold NA TV riches, the reality is that

1. Just admitting this TWP back in and the team being totally out of its depth will add $0 to any TV pot as local viewing figures will not justify it.

2. Admitting a strong, competitive TWP will increase the likelihood of TV $ as it will attract interest around the country, having said that I would be surprised if it’s ever anything large enough to share and make a difference. I still have my suspicions as to the real reason why Mr Argyle pulled the plug.

In summary if TWP are allowed back into SL then please let it be as part of some defined strategy, rather than hoping for riches from sources unknown. If it doesn’t add up from a business perspective then it shouldn’t happen.

[Harry Stottle]

7 hours ago, Oldbear said:

I’m not a Luddite, I’m a big fan of expansion, but I can’t see with the current state of the  game in the Northern Hemisphere how licensing can be introduced. For anyone who is championing this right now I would love the answers to the following questions.

1. How many teams would you have in this licensed league?

2. What fair, measurable criteria would you use to decide who gets in or not?

3. If the existing SL clubs are already given a license then please explain to me why for example Wakefield is more deserving than Fev? (Not bashing Wakey but realistically as they and Fev are so close geographically and as Wakey have not exactly set the world on fire since promotion then I’m not sure on what criteria they are better qualified).

Licensing works in the NRL because they have sufficient strong teams to allow it, and to be able to set high standards. If that were applied to SL I could only see Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Leeds, Hull and Catalans being worthy, maybe Huddersfield. Anyone else getting in would be doing so under some pretty dubious criteria, which will always lead to allegations that the system is rigged.

Good luck with those questions, I have asked the same on more occasions than I care to remember.

Sorry to read you are having some health issues, I hope you get well soon.

[Tommygilf]

7 hours ago, Oldbear said:

I’m not a Luddite, I’m a big fan of expansion, but I can’t see with the current state of the  game in the Northern Hemisphere how licensing can be introduced. For anyone who is championing this right now I would love the answers to the following questions.

1. How many teams would you have in this licensed league?

2. What fair, measurable criteria would you use to decide who gets in or not?

3. If the existing SL clubs are already given a license then please explain to me why for example Wakefield is more deserving than Fev? (Not bashing Wakey but realistically as they and Fev are so close geographically and as Wakey have not exactly set the world on fire since promotion then I’m not sure on what criteria they are better qualified).

Licensing works in the NRL because they have sufficient strong teams to allow it, and to be able to set high standards. If that were applied to SL I could only see Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Leeds, Hull and Catalans being worthy, maybe Huddersfield. Anyone else getting in would be doing so under some pretty dubious criteria, which will always lead to allegations that the system is rigged.

I wouldn't be so confident at saying the NRL has "sufficient strong teams to allow it". They've had 2 mergers (so 4 clubs) in the dragons and tigers, 1 failed Merger in Northern Eagles, and the clubs get 130% of the salary cap from central distribution. 9 of the teams are still suburban Sydney teams that were preferred or merged with other suburban Sydney teams.

They had some strong teams. And where they didn't have them they've built strong teams and its taken 20 years to do so (not to mention the SL war). Thats a fundamental point here.

The equivalent in the UK would be something akin to the proposed SL mergers. The fiscally weaker SL teams, Wakefield, Castleford, Salford, even Hull KR arguably, would be prime targets for the creation of "sufficient strong teams", along with several championship sides. I'm not saying I support the idea but using the NRL is better logic this is where one ends up.

[Omott91]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I wouldn't be so confident at saying the NRL has "sufficient strong teams to allow it". They've had 2 mergers (so 4 clubs) in the dragons and tigers, 1 failed Merger in Northern Eagles, and the clubs get 130% of the salary cap from central distribution. 9 of the teams are still suburban Sydney teams that were preferred or merged with other suburban Sydney teams.

They had some strong teams. And where they didn't have them they've built strong teams and its taken 20 years to do so (not to mention the SL war). Thats a fundamental point here.

The equivalent in the UK would be something akin to the proposed SL mergers. The fiscally weaker SL teams, Wakefield, Castleford, Salford, even Hull KR arguably, would be prime targets for the creation of "sufficient strong teams", along with several championship sides. I'm not saying I support the idea but using the NRL is better logic this is where one ends up.

I still don't understand why smaller champ and league 1 Uk clubs don't merge. Instead of scraping by each year financially, pool their resources together, appeal to a wider fan base and have a proper crack at promotion.    

There isn't the amount of money needed in the Uk for the current number of clubs imo.

 

[gingerjon]

11 hours ago, Niels said:

But that doesn't apply in other sports. Also it didn't in the Championship either, there have been plenty of different winners this century. 

Very quick calculations ...

Baseball has had 13 different champions, the NFL 12, NBA 9, AFL 10, in 17 seasons some 13 of the 18 counties have won the T20 Blast.

Not sure how to work out the Championship as, obviously, there are several seasons when the champion, by definition, can't come back to defend their title. But it looks like 9 winners? Three of whom only won when franchising was in place.

I'm not making any definitive point with this except to observe that if closed shop leagues really were about half the league muddling along and just surviving then that's not borne out by the reality of the diversity of their champions - both in rugby league and in other sports too.

[GUBRATS]

18 minutes ago, Omott91 said:

I still don't understand why smaller champ and league 1 Uk clubs don't merge. Instead of scraping by each year financially, pool their resources together, appeal to a wider fan base and have a proper crack at promotion.    

There isn't the amount of money needed in the Uk for the current number of clubs imo.

 

Like who ?