Jump to content
John Drake

The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

But they won't Irish is the answer, in fact there will be more hopefuls clamouring to take up the game over here, simply because the opportunity to play and live in these exotic locations will be available to them so I have been told, Irrespective of there being far less people to teach them the game doesn't even come into the equation. 

Well that's what I'm inviting him to explain Harry.

Without a ''conveyor belt'' of top quality players the games a dead duck.

No matter how many billionaires you've got.

Edited by fighting irish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

 

We should have published a very entertaining Mick Gledhill "I'm hearing" book which would get us through the dark nights of this pandemic.

He is hardly Shoe Shine Johnny from Police Squad

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Scubby said:

We should have published a very entertaining Mick Gledhill "I'm hearing" book which would get us through the dark nights of this pandemic.

He is hardly Shoe Shine Johnny from Police Squad

Please not another one, we have already have the Blind Side and Graveyard one's on this site, we do not need the Shoe Shine variety also.😏

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

 

Does any vote have to be Unanimous, Majority or have a percentage to acheive to carry?

If Unanimous the word 'Catagorically' says the Wolfpack will not be returning.

I wonder who the 4 clubs are? Would it be the less financially better off clubs who want to continue to share the funding, but that wouldn't last long they would be surely be replaced if not this coming season definitely the next, also would an accepted Toronto team not be a candidate for relegation next season? We can be sure it isn't Saints with the McManus comments, I wonder who they are?

Suggestions and motives please, anyone.

Edited by Harry Stottle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I wonder who the 4 clubs are? Would it be the less financially better off clubs who want to continue to share the funding, but that wouldn't last long they would be surely be replaced if not this coming season definitely the next, also would an accepted Toronto team not be a candidate for relegation next season? We can be sure it isn't Saints with the McManus comments, I wonder who they are?

Suggestions and motives please, anyone.

Hull KR for certain. Wakefield are very much in the sceptic camp. Maybe clubs who have had financial issues with them? Salford? Cas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets be honest, Would TWP be even competitive next season ?  They were not exactly competitive this season with all their superstars !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

To commence in 2023 or '24? and you mention that stubborn and varying word 'Criteria' which can have different connotations from whoever brings it up.

I can see you have made proviso for clubs to attract investors and sponsership to suit their requirements does this include 'Capital Investment'?

With the best will in the world there are some clubs you mention  - and honestly I wish it wasn't so - who's stadia is not befitting of this bright and shiney concept you have so eloquently suggested, unfortunately your club sits bang right in the middle of this discussion and without the Local Government, Investor Capex or both working in unison to make it a reality for not one but two clubs (including Wakefield) either individually for each club or a dual purpose facility erected to suit both I simply cannot see how this could  be acheived in under 6 or 7 years UNLESS plans are in place and have been approved and monies allocated already to finance new sites or radically improve existing ones.

It beggars the question how would some other suggested clubs like Bradford or London fare, but the big difference is there are other facilities within their immediate catchment that they could 'rent' and utilise. By my reckoning there are 14 clubs in rented or part owned facilities (not including yet to be established clubs) that would come into consideration to be included your suggested 2 x 10 system so there is not a problem in that, BUT Is that avaiable within Wakefield MDC? Or would these two teams have to up sticks and franchise to another area?

Whilst I think your suggestion is good you have already highlighted two potential flaws, I would say this I have eluded to is the biggest especially for fans of both clubs. 

PS did you overlook Widnes purposefully?

PPS. Writing this prompted me to have a look to which clubs are actually in rented or part owned facilities in our League system and it surprised me there were so many if I have got it correct, namely, Wigan, Hull FC, Salford, Huddersfield, Leigh, London, Bradford, Halifax, York, Widnes, Coventry, Doncaster, Swinton, Hunslet, Sheffield, Oldham, Rochdale, North Wales, West Wales, London Skolars, and of course Toronto, Ottawa and Toulouse. 

If I have got any wrong or missed a club, please amend as appropriate, anyone.

Evening Harry,

My post was an attempt to show a structure that may be possible by utilising existing teams, facilities, playing squad to create a competition that could include P&R, expansion be inclusive to as many teams as possible and provide a more solid foundation to move forward.

Of course what I produced is not watertight in covering all issues I.e capital investment or omitting Widnes by accident and probably 100 other things that other posters could suggest.  It would probably take a glossy 32 page document that drills down to the minutiae to cover every issue .... and even I am not that good 😄

And that Is why I took the start point from where the game is at, at the moment.  I have always agreed that Cas have a stadia completely unfit for the 21st century but if we have some criteria - sorry Harry I cannot think of another word to describe words that must be compiled - e all known that some clubs will fail in a category.  But the bottom line is that we have to start somewhere with what we have got.

We cannot keep repeating what we have done for 25 years and hope that someday it delivers something it hasn’t delivered before.

Edited by Adelaide Tiger
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Why KR? 

Tony Smith has intimated that one of the reasons Hudgell is selling is due to disillusionment with the Toronto situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Tony Smith has intimated that one of the reasons Hudgell is selling is due to disillusionment with the Toronto situation.

Will Hudgell's opinion matter going forward if he is no longer at the club? Is he persuasive enough to influence others.

Another thought accured to me from the reported comments, in That 4 clubs 'catagorically' do not want Toronto readmitted, how many clubs 'catagorically' are in favour of Toronto returning, how many are undecided?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Will Hudgell's opinion matter going forward if he is no longer at the club? Is he persuasive enough to influence others.

Another thought accured to me from the reported comments, in That 4 clubs 'catagorically' do not want Toronto readmitted, how many clubs 'catagorically' are in favour of Toronto returning, how many are undecided?

He's still there, Harold...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Does any vote have to be Unanimous, Majority or have a percentage to acheive to carry?

If Unanimous the word 'Catagorically' says the Wolfpack will not be returning.

I wonder who the 4 clubs are? Would it be the less financially better off clubs who want to continue to share the funding, but that wouldn't last long they would be surely be replaced if not this coming season definitely the next, also would an accepted Toronto team not be a candidate for relegation next season? We can be sure it isn't Saints with the McManus comments, I wonder who they are?

Suggestions and motives please, anyone.

Going round in circles H. Was the vote unanimous to let them in SL?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't the vote to move to a 3x8s League system carried by one vote from SL clubs? Are all SL board decision required to be unanimous? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

But the bottom line is that we have to start somewhere with what we have got.

Starting somewhere, obviously 2 x 10 means 2 teams out of SL (assuming they return to 12) in the 2nd tier, the 'criteria' issue will be all important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Wasn't the vote to move to a 3x8s League system carried by one vote from SL clubs? Are all SL board decision required to be unanimous? 

Don't know that is why I posed the question, doesn't Mr Rimmer now hav a casting vote in the event of a tie? I know Mr Barwick did but he is now gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/09/2020 at 20:08, Kayakman said:

KNOCK...KNOCK....KNOCK...Please, Kind Sir!,  just open the door A LITTLE and let us in....its cold outside...I promise we won't stay long.

I think that's the big concern for many - that TWP won't stay long. We need clubs to be in for the long-term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Does any vote have to be Unanimous, Majority or have a percentage to acheive to carry?

If Unanimous the word 'Catagorically' says the Wolfpack will not be returning.

I wonder who the 4 clubs are? Would it be the less financially better off clubs who want to continue to share the funding, but that wouldn't last long they would be surely be replaced if not this coming season definitely the next, also would an accepted Toronto team not be a candidate for relegation next season? We can be sure it isn't Saints with the McManus comments, I wonder who they are?

Suggestions and motives please, anyone.

Tbf H, I get the sense that this is Gledhill overstating or misrepresenting something but if it isn't you'd have to say on the anti side Hull KR and Wakefield, and by the same deduction the other way it wouldn't be Leeds or Saints. That leaves Wigan, Salford, Hull FC, Cas, Huddersfield, Warrington, Catalans in ascending order of how I think they view the Wolfpack at board level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PhilCarrington said:

I think that's the big concern for many - that TWP won't stay long. We need clubs to be in for the long-term.

If we go back into sporting lockdown and the 2020 season is scrapped some of the existing SL clubs may not survive. Nothing is guaranteed anymore. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Toronto will be the only club not to play every game this season, hence the change in the table structure. 

Toronto although made a number of mistakes, would have struggled to continue this season regardless. 

For me, get that back into Super League next season and hopefully next season will be much easier and simpler. 

All we here is how the clubs are "together" and will assist each other, but that is not the case with Toronto. 

If all clubs survive this season / next I will be very surprised. For me, the WC next year is in danger of not being played.


2008 RFL Wakefield & District Young Volunteer of the Year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

Starting somewhere, obviously 2 x 10 means 2 teams out of SL (assuming they return to 12) in the 2nd tier, the 'criteria' issue will be all important.

Yes you are right that 12 doesn’t go into 10.

You could either say that in a final season the top 10 go into League 1 or whatever you would call it.  Or you have the dreaded word ‘criteria’ and teams are graded 1-20 through a transparent process.

If the teams across each league have the same share of the TV pot then then the ‘demotion’ of at least 2 existing SL teams (Depending upon the system used to determine the make up of the leagues) is less traumatic.  It is important that although I suggest P&R both leagues are seen as relative equals in terms of their importance and in promoting the whole game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, fighting irish said:

I've asked you this before BP and you declined to answer. So I'll give it another shot.

Your Big City league is a laudable goal but my question is, how do you get from here to there?

You are convinced we can't grow from within the existing structure, so how can it be done from without?

You pick 12 cities, I'll grant you the Billionaire backers, what next?

How do you create the teams (and sustain them) if the English player factories close down?

The teams would be stocked by a mix of current RL players and converts from RU and/or gridiron, I'd have a salary cap high enough to offer the latter enough money to interest them all.

I don't see why the English player factories would close down, they'd more likely grow and have increased output due to more boys and young men taking up the game due to the new league lifting its profile and stature.  On the contrary, if as I suspect the decline in the numbers playing now is due to the sport's low profile and stature and small time ways putting off the sons and grandsons of the RL players and followers of yesteryear, then something like I have in mind is likely the only thing which could turn that around.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Does any vote have to be Unanimous, Majority or have a percentage to acheive to carry?

If Unanimous the word 'Catagorically' says the Wolfpack will not be returning.

I wonder who the 4 clubs are? Would it be the less financially better off clubs who want to continue to share the funding, but that wouldn't last long they would be surely be replaced if not this coming season definitely the next, also would an accepted Toronto team not be a candidate for relegation next season? We can be sure it isn't Saints with the McManus comments, I wonder who they are?

Suggestions and motives please, anyone.

It's probably not a unanimous decision requirement as Hull KR saying no would have put an end to the matter some time ago.

I'm guessing it's a majority decision but they are trying to get everyone saying yes to make it look like a unified decision.

Am sure the RFL have/had a vote in these things and they are supportive of Toronto.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...