Jump to content

The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Can The RFL revoke a licence? I take it Argyle will still own the Toronto licence should no one buy them, so can The RFL pull that from him and reallocate it elsewhere if they wanted?

Depends on the terms, small print of that particular participation agreement which you'd imagine was stamped up by solicitors of both parties. I think the participation Agreement as already been null & voided. I think there is a short window as of now for someone to come forward with the potential to sign a similar agreement if they take over the Wolfack brand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 10.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
18 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Can The RFL revoke a licence? I take it Argyle will still own the Toronto licence should no one buy them, so can The RFL pull that from him and reallocate it elsewhere if they wanted?

As far as I'm aware they don't have a license as such. Their membership to SL has been revoked and they aren't full members of the RFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Can The RFL revoke a licence? I take it Argyle will still own the Toronto licence should no one buy them, so can The RFL pull that from him and reallocate it elsewhere if they wanted?

There are currently no such things as licences in English rugby league, just RFL members and guest clubs with participation agreements. Toronto are now neither, so to all intents and purposes don't exist from the English perspective. 

That said, the business still technically exists, comprising a mailing list of Canadian ticket buyers, some club branding, and some partnerships like with Toronto council. Plus rapidly decreasing 'intangible goodwill'.

If someone were to buy out the business quickly before further brand damage becomes lethal, then there's a chance a functioning club could be retained in Toronto. 

Then RFL and SL would have to decide whether and at which level they want to readmit them.

EDIT: Of course as others have pointed out, a decision to buy out Argyle, and a decision to readmit at whatever tier are dependent on each other and need to be taken together. Unclear if that is actually happening in such a joined up way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes we need to come away from the term licence.....it's causing confusion and is merely a relic of the Super League 'Licencing' era of about 6 Seasons. 

There's 37 Clubs, 35 are RFL members, 2 are on Particpation Agreements. RFL membership basically comes with an embedded generic participation agreement. 

The difference between membership and Particpation agreement come down to:

Members have a say (voting rights) 

Membership is perpetual (can't be kicked out really, unless they are liquidated after an insolvency event or they do not fulfil their assigned fixtures without a damn good excuse.) 

Whereas the 2 clubs not holding membership (Toulouse/ catalans) will not have a perpetual agreement, could be 10 years, 25 years etc but will be limited terms with renewal options and do not have a say (part ownership) 

Toronto was the 3rd club on a Particpation agreement (non RFL member) however that agreement has been terminated (null & void) probably because they are not fulfilling fixtures which they promised they would as part of th agreement. 

However, there seems to be a small window open for someone to take over the TWP and sign a new participation agreement on similar terms. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

The RFL are very biased with membership, a Widnes or a Bradford go bust, they will sign up a new full member under that banner / brand no questions asked......A Oxford or a Gloucester withdraw from fixtures, that's the definate end. 

Widnes and Bradford wanted to carry on. Oxford and the All Golds made it clear they wanted to pull out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

Yes, it's entirely the fault of everyone except the Toronto management...

There's plenty of blame to go around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

Argyle has put in well in excess of £10m if reports are to be believed, central funding up to now they'd have gotten less than £3m back. Even with the funding the problems would exist. The central funding wouldn't even cover SBW's wages, it's time to stop using that as an excuse for Argyles failure to put competent administrators in charge of spending his money.

 

Well put even with central funding the clubs spending was never sustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Themusician_2 said:

Well put even with central funding the clubs spending was never sustainable.

It was with a true billionaire who is committed to covering the shortfall forever and a day. Argyles wealth / commitment were the doubt all along. Too good to be true for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hela Wigmen said:

So is there any prospective buyers left then? 

What is there to actually buy ? They have a brand name and a mountain of financial liabilities. This is a "buy it for £1" scenario and take on the liabilities. Not very appealing really.

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Derwent said:

What is there to actually buy ? They have a brand name and a mountain of financial liabilities. This is a "buy it for £1" scenario and take on the liabilities. Not very appealing really.

Oh, I know that. I was more interested if there was anyone willing to do what you’ve said. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hela Wigmen said:

Both wanted to continue playing, even under a slightly different guise, Oxford and All Golds didn’t at all. 

Slightly different guise? You cannot continue playing if you literally and more importantly legally do not exist. 

A wholly separate Club and legal entity were granted full membership. 

Oxford / Gloucester needed a time out, hiatus for a season or two. They didn't want to just voluntarily give up membership. The situation was made impossible to keep hold of it. 

I'm not knocking The RFL for accepting new members to the gang with full rights pretty much immediately  Widnes & Bradford are local markets that buy challenge Cup tickets & sky sports subs primarily due to RL coverage, they'd be fools to throw away that fan base. Not so for Oxford etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

Other sports do, whether that's player's unions or association. Not always perfectly but there's far more player support available, including payment of missed wages.

The RFL needs to do 3 things immediately :-

1. Pay the players what they are owed from Toronto, whether thats directly or via the Benevolent Fund

2. Terminate their contracts with Toronto with immediate effect and make them free agents and salary cap exempt for the rest of this season (as they did with Celtic Crusaders players) so they can resume playing elsewhere.

3. Launch legal action against Argyle for repayment of the costs under the Personal Guarantee he signed and lodged with the RFL when Toronto were first admitted.

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Chamey said:

The Arrows must be delighted, Lamport now available, TWP mailing list probably cheap to acquire, and a less crowded marketplace.

And if any fans care enough to look into it, MLR paid all of its players their full contracts despite only playing 5 of 16 games. Something they committed to in March at the very beginning of the shutdown. That's certainly appealing to anyone soured by the current state of TWP affairs.

MLR to pay players despite Coronavirus shutdown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Derwent said:

The RFL needs to do 3 things immediately :-

1. Pay the players what they are owed from Toronto, whether thats directly or via the Benevolent Fund

2. Terminate their contracts with Toronto with immediate effect and make them free agents and salary cap exempt for the rest of this season (as they did with Celtic Crusaders players) so they can resume playing elsewhere.

3. Launch legal action against Argyle for repayment of the costs under the Personal Guarantee he signed and lodged with the RFL when Toronto were first admitted.

Bang on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rugger Unionists are coming out of the closest? That's a shame. Such a mess of an on field code, very scruffy actual product when anything but lining up, trying to pack down or kicking a ball actually happens. Should talk up MLR on cross code though? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it true that the Newcastle bid is actually the Newcastle Premier League football club?  ‘The Mole’ reporting this has a chance.

“But Wide World of Sports is hearing that the Newcastle Premier League soccer club is keen to take over the franchise next season.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lowdesert said:

Is it true that the Newcastle bid is actually the Newcastle Premier League football club?  ‘The Mole’ reporting this has a chance.

“But Wide World of Sports is hearing that the Newcastle Premier League soccer club is keen to take over the franchise next season.”

Ah, true billionaire owners. If only.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Lowdesert said:

Newcastle United’s change of ownership has fallen through. I cannot see Mike Ashley, their current owner, buying another sports side and I can’t imagine that the Saudi’s who wanted to buy the football club, have decided that they now want a Rugby League team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Bang on. 

 

32 minutes ago, Derwent said:

The RFL needs to do 3 things immediately :-

1. Pay the players what they are owed from Toronto, whether thats directly or via the Benevolent Fund

2. Terminate their contracts with Toronto with immediate effect and make them free agents and salary cap exempt for the rest of this season (as they did with Celtic Crusaders players) so they can resume playing elsewhere.

3. Launch legal action against Argyle for repayment of the costs under the Personal Guarantee he signed and lodged with the RFL when Toronto were first admitted.

1.  I don't think the RFL would be using resources wisely given the drop in revenue to do that. 

The RFL should take blame but the game cant afford it.   They have wider responsibilities, like keeping their own staff in jobs.

The Rugby League media needs to be held accountable for being fan boys and not doing their jobs properly.

Attacking people who tried to offer wiser council.

2.  I think this might be a good idea.

3, Forget trying to go after Argyle legally its a fight you cant win.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.