Jump to content

The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

As was eluded to the other day Dave in the thread re Mr Elstone, it was mooted that he would not make a ruling himself on the TWP salary cap dispensation but would be guided by the SL chairmen, that being the case one would expect that to be by a democratic vote of the SL council i.e. the club bosses. 

Mr Elstone said there would be a number of clubs who would be concerned for fear of relegation if TWP were allowed a dispensation so I should think that the clubs who would not be affected if TWP were allowed to spend more would be Wigan, Saints, Wire, Hull FC, Leeds, Cas and Catalan, (thats 7, not 6)  how many of those would consider that it is not correct in allowing a team to spend more than others I don't know, but it seems that Mr Hudgell has some concerns.

What was the topics of the Twitter piece, please.

Sorry your wording suggested one of the bigger clubs had come out publicly criticising them. 

I'll try and dig out the tweets now... 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


15 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

I don’t go to their meetings so have no insider information, I only speak as an ill informed oik. 
But the phrase ‘welcome as a fart in a space suit’ springs to mind. 

We are all about opinions on this site John, we can either be miles away from the truth or spot on, the fact that you said some SL bosses " would be pulling one off" which I take you mean would be pleased if Totonto ceased to be, is an opinion you have arrived at, so you must have some clubs in mind that would be happy forToronto to be out of the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Sorry your wording suggested one of the bigger clubs had come out publicly criticising them. 

I'll try and dig out the tweets now... 

I was getting my Hudgells and Pearsons mixed up when I said "one of the big six" but the relevance is still that some clubs especially those who may consider themselves  to be under threat would deem it unfair for one team to be able to spend more than others,  and that is irrespective if they can afford to spend any more even if they are not up to the cap level themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I was getting my Hudgells and Pearsons mixed up when I said "one of the big six" but the relevance is still that some clubs especially those who may consider themselves  to be under threat would deem it unfair for one team to be able to spend more than others,  and that is irrespective if they can afford to spend any more even if they are not up to the cap level themselves.

I think Pearson has already been negative about them publicly too iirc. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

 

All the hue and cry over Toronto & their travails - Hudgell crying all the way to the bank with HKR's extra 181,000 quid in central funding that Toronto didn't receive.

Some would happily see an established club ... go to the dogs - if Hudgell's canine reference means relegation, the best way HKR can avoid being relegated is to avoid the bottom of the table. He could as easily give the side-eye to Salford or Rhinos or Wakefield on that matter, but oh no, let's play victim and pre-emptively pretend Wolfpack are going to do some nefarious thing to end his club's proud history. Woof woof.

The week's flavour of the month - HKR were happy enough to take Brierley and Rawsthorne from Wolfpack's ice cream shop.

Yes there's speaking straight from the heart, but it helps if the brain is also engaged. No wonder there's a fan culture of moaning and whining if this is the example set from the top.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, TBone said:

Thanks for that, a little belated but still relevant, some will agree with Pearson others will decry him, but it doesn't seem like TWP can rely on the backing of of the 'far eastern' club chairmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

No, but I would be surprised if all of Dan Murray, Matt Storton, Matty Gee, Joe Keyes, Kyle Trout and the other players who have been bouncing around the championship/SL fringe were full-time pro's with no other jobs. 

I am sure those players greatly appreciate your condescension.

Murray signed with Hull KR having been at that other SL club Salford previously. Full time since 2016 although has had loan spells in the championship like many other SL players.

Storton signed from Bulls and commented on his thrill at signing his first full time deal.

Gee was of course at that other SL club London last year having previously been a Salford player again with loan spells elsewhere, full time since 2015.

Keyes has been a FT RL players since his teen years at London. Was one of the Bulls full time players before signing for HKR.

Kyle Trout was of course previously in SL with Wakefield for a few years , dropped down to championship for  a while but again expressed his delight at returning to been a full time pro Rugby League player.

Ability is no pre-requisite for been a full time professional. We can all think of players who we wonder how on earth they are indeed full time RL players , but they exist. Their contract values generally reflect their ability . Tony Smith, for reasons only known to him, has gone down the route of signing a lot of lower value but still FT players with only a few larger, but no mega  , earners within his 30 man full time squad. The fact that they had 9 first choice players missing against Castleford at such an early stage of the season gives a clue to his thinking.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Im sure those players appreciate your faux-indignation on their behalf. 

The facts are that there isnt a whole lot of money in being an RL and most young fringe players combine it with either studying or learning a trade, many other fringe players who are a bit older combine it with another job. 

The vast majority of players wont earn enough to retire at the end of their career, most young players get paid a very very small salary, many fringe players also only earn a relatively small amount. 

Not to mention the lack of stability for those fringe players bouncing between the lower leagues and SL, swapping from fully pro to pro isnt a simple thing, especially for those on one or two year contracts who, in your argument, are simply walking away from their other employment for a year or two in SL. 

An 18 year old squad player may get that £15k minimum, but he would get similar in many other jobs at that age, I'm not sure why he wouldn't be full time at Wigan Warriors for that, but would at Asda. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Dave T said:

An 18 year old squad player may get that £15k minimum, but he would get similar in many other jobs at that age, I'm not sure why he wouldn't be full time at Wigan Warriors for that, but would at Asda. 

That's a terrible shame Dave, sorry if I'm misinterpreting your stance, but in my opinion no professional athlete should be on minimum wage.   The idea that someone who plays for Wigan (as an example) and occasionally makes the first team gets paid so terribly is not a good thing.  Its gotta be preventing people from sticking with the sport.

While we are on it - what part timer could get the 11+ weeks a year off to travel to Toronto to play from their "other job".  Toronto can't sign part timers really!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TboneFromTO said:

That's a terrible shame Dave, sorry if I'm misinterpreting your stance, but in my opinion no professional athlete should be on minimum wage.   The idea that someone who plays for Wigan (as an example) and occasionally makes the first team gets paid so terribly is not a good thing.  Its gotta be preventing people from sticking with the sport.

While we are on it - what part timer could get the 11+ weeks a year off to travel to Toronto to play from their "other job".  Toronto can't sign part timers really!

Yes, you are misunderstanding my stance. My stance isn't that it is correct, more that players will be on the minimum. I am not passing judgement on it. 

If the minimum is £15k, I'm not sure why that means he will have a 2nd job, when 18 year olds in call centres, retail, restaurants etc will be on £15k.

On your last paragraph. I'm not claiming that clubs have part-timers making up their first team squad. I have stated my position that TWP should have additional allowances which would allow them to fill the squad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TboneFromTO said:

That's a terrible shame Dave, sorry if I'm misinterpreting your stance, but in my opinion no professional athlete should be on minimum wage.   The idea that someone who plays for Wigan (as an example) and occasionally makes the first team gets paid so terribly is not a good thing.  Its gotta be preventing people from sticking with the sport.

While we are on it - what part timer could get the 11+ weeks a year off to travel to Toronto to play from their "other job".  Toronto can't sign part timers really!

That's the point , they aren't part time , they are essentially ' apprentices ' learning the trade 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, TboneFromTO said:

That's a terrible shame Dave, sorry if I'm misinterpreting your stance, but in my opinion no professional athlete should be on minimum wage.   The idea that someone who plays for Wigan (as an example) and occasionally makes the first team gets paid so terribly is not a good thing.  Its gotta be preventing people from sticking with the sport.

While we are on it - what part timer could get the 11+ weeks a year off to travel to Toronto to play from their "other job".  Toronto can't sign part timers really!

Most professional sports work this way.  If you aren't first grade, you're playing for scraps, even in NA.  

Had a few buddies I played hockey with that ended up playing a few years of minor professional hockey. One played in a league called the Southern Professional Hockey League after 4 years in the NCAA.

It was probably the Ice Hockey Equivalent of League 1 Rugby League. Pay was like $500 a week and the team owned a bunch of dorm apartments the players would live in, usually four or five guys in the same apartment, earning just enough money for beer and food.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

But that is a step further than we are talking about. 

Super League isnt the minor league. Its the top level and these players whilst young are effectively first team squad players (as in they are necessary for a first team to function), The NHL minimum salary is about £200k.

In reality though, the events of the past 2-3 years have exposed that SL is a minor league because it operates on a minor league basis with a minor league mentality and at a minor league financial level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

it is hypocritical to argue that promotion and relegation is necessary for clubs to find their level and that the level of the top should be restricted.

It is a recipe for stagnation. EIther we take a centralised approach of managing expenditure to create the best competition or we allow clubs to rise and fall according to their own abilities and let the chips fall where they may.

 

You mean like the NRL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Yes, you are misunderstanding my stance. My stance isn't that it is correct, more that players will be on the minimum. I am not passing judgement on it. 

If the minimum is £15k, I'm not sure why that means he will have a 2nd job, when 18 year olds in call centres, retail, restaurants etc will be on £15k.

On your last paragraph. I'm not claiming that clubs have part-timers making up their first team squad. I have stated my position that TWP should have additional allowances which would allow them to fill the squad. 

£15k is not the minimum. Its lower, a lot lower. Where as this figure come from? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bert1 said:

Franchising seems the best way forward.

Franchising won't fly within the existing RL structure in the UK, it can only be done outside of that structure via a whole new league set up to raise the game's profile and break down the stereotypes about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smudger06 said:

£15k is not the minimum. Its lower, a lot lower. Where as this figure come from? 

It states in the regulations that a player who plays a Salary Cap relevant game must have a minimum salary of £15k. The regulation is as detailed as that, so whether it refers to a salary in writing (for cap value purposes), or whether it is a real world stipulation is unclear. 

There was some talk recently about clubs breaching minimum wage (may have been you or maybe Tommygilf who brought it up), I wondered whether this was a regulation to avoid that situation. 

Obviously if players 26 onwards do not play a game they don't show on the cap at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bert1 said:

Why? 

Supporters of Clubs outside the SL will be watching meaningless games with no P+L and will vote with their feet. It wasn't a roaring success last time round. Many meaningless matches in the SL as well. Some Clubs were just going through the motions when they knew they couldn't make the Play Offs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...