so, not SL clubs asking for salarly cap dispensation then?

its in the read he only had 18 to select from

Thanks but you will have to bear with me - does that mean nine are on the injury list?

Don't know to be truthful it's only come to light when he started whinging the other day saying they are up to the cap already, not lot of forward thinking king going on there

Why would there be any forward thinking given the lack of welcome from the SL chairmen, and only a two year guarantee of an SL place dependent on staying up.

It appears loan players have gone like Higson, Fash and Logan, with Worthington on a loan deal to Fev. Higson and Krasniqi seem to have gone back to their original clubs here. Leigh and London. Rawsthorne, Beswick and Brierley left for clubs here, and Sims retired. Wheeler appears to be a long term injury casualty. So that's 11 players off the playing roster with only really Singleton and Cunningham signing up as new players.

I am completely lost on any idea they have spent up to the cap? [uHow can Eleven players out and two players in equate to the salary cap being exhausted????
[/u

It does appear (as happens) TWP came to the player recruitment point late as they didn't get the nod for SL until they won the right to go up early October. Everyone who was anyone was signed up, and yes I suppose there were many a fringe SL player and many a decent Championship player who could have at least padded out a thin squad, but you have to ask what's in it for them?? Part time lads can't be signing professional thus losing their day jobs just to pad out TWP's squad for a year or two. Professionals still without a club may be without a marriage if they are constantly jetting off to North America.

Loanees won't be available until the season is well underway and some players realise they aren't getting games......But hang on - fringe players will all be playing reserves so will there be any loanees??.

There is something VERY fishy going on here and I read that players have been told to keep it shut as regards any comments on TWP.

ANYWAY Jean and Steph will still be behind the future of the game that is the mighty Toronto Wolfpack. Maybe they fancy a game?

They have 3 players (SBW (actual wage 2.5 million, Leutele (actual wage £400k) and Lussick) on marquee level salaries (>£175000) although only 2 can count as a marquee salary so that is a minimum of £150k x 2 and £175k (likely much more).

Wilkin reported that his salary was the best he ever had. No reason to doubt this as I happen to know one current player who earned more in League 1 with Toronto than he ever has in SL. So Wilkin will be well into six figures (150k??) as will Chase Stanley . Bodene Thompson will be on six figures and it has been reported(and never denied) that Russell and O'Brien are on around £100k. So we are up to around half the cap with 15 players (and some decent earners) left to fit in.

Its quite easy to see how they have totally messed it all up. It is telling in the "Destination SL" documentary that Brian Noble talks about the "negotiating" tactics of Argyle (and Perez??). He says that there is in fact no negotiation and that you got what you asked for. Even Noble, a well travelled man in search of a dime, said he had never experienced anything like it.

Entirely of their own making in their supreme , mad dash to get into SL. I assume they thought SL would just roll over and say spend what you like (and also that Mr Argyle has had some bad advice from those with their noses firmly in the trough). They have showed no interest in any longevity of the club or future planning and the project will be milked until expiry and then go the way of many others.

According to the delusional idiot that is McDermott SL [ineeds[/i toronto, they are a [ispecial[/i case and should get a share of central funding.



Oh, and it seems a game against Australia is available if you can buy the fixture.

I am most grateful for your detailed and explanatory post. I also feel honoured as you don't appear to post much!! This site can only get better if more facts and realities are provided. Please post more!!

I'm currently looking at a thread about how Toronto will host Australia on their way to play tests here?? Does that mean they will play them? How on earth can they give them a game when it appears they don't have enough players to give anyone much of a game now, let alone late in the season. Still as you very cleverly perceive this is a typical Toronto stunt that is all show and no substance....

It is quite strange how no-one in the press is attempting to question why the Saracens game is not going ahead and Toronto are now looking to London Broncos to do them a favour and host the SL champions at Ealing yet in another breath Toronto boast about hosting the Australian touring team at 30,000 capacity stadium.

In a very odd timing all round, Toronto and their large number of 30 yrs plus players (not one under 25), having likely had a very hard season, will not have played in over six weeks at that time and Australia are doing a major detour a week before the first Ashes test.

I assume Mr Argyle has been assured by Mr McDermott that all the players will be available (and keen to play) and has promised some serious money to the NRL.

But it's only a few weeks after TWP will have won the GF surely?

Christ alive, how many of you can there possibly be - got another one now

Who will have chosen this fixture, was it 'up for grabs', was their one in the 1st place to bid for ? Surely Saints or Wigan playing OZ would have been a more challenging/attractive fixture.

Agree 100%, but TWP dont give to55 about the sport, just a rich man and his toy.

It's entirely up to Australia who they play whether Toronto, an out on a limb fake side who by next autumn are likely to be pretty much Knackered or one of several big SL clubs who are also interested. Hunter states [i"they (the Aussies) want to do it"[/i but what the Aussies really want is the biggest pay day they can get and a fair run out for the players. We should all know by now how TWP "news" management works (check out the archives). Let's wait and see who gets the gig......

It could be Wigan Wire or Leeds or Saints. It could be TWP with 30,000 free tickets and Argyle paying the Aussies what they want out of his own pocket. What's another $Million down the pan.

SBW is refusing to wear the sponsors logo, can TWP embarass the game any further...?

what a clown

No issue with this really - seems consistent with his approach whilst playing union so nothing new or unexpected.

Whilst I understand his stance, and respect his rights as an individual, to not wear the branding of the main sponsor of the competition is hardly giving the awareness and profile TWP promised he would. TWP have probably known all along but seem intent on keeping themselves i the headlines.

We will have to wait and see what their talking on the pitch is like.

Because out of the entire team wearing the logo, people are really going to notice that he doesnt have it..

It really is a non issue. Also, they claimed he would raise the profile of rugby league in England, not super leagues main sponsor. Thats a really odd argument to use.

So which is it? Surely keeping themselves in the headlines is raising their profile?

Keeping themselves in the headlines with things that are probably making tne SL chairmen cringe. What if BetFred turn around and pull their sponsorship?

Anyway, the TWP cheerleaders are out, I'll reserve further comment until they actually play a game.

The French clubs don't wear betting company logos either and there isn't a fuss made over that. Plus, after the free publicity that has just been generated I'm sure BetFred are absolutely gutted! Mountain out of a molehill.

Please explain how why this is a problem for the game?

We have a Muslim here who doesn't want to promote a gambling company on the shirt he wears. Why would you see this is a problem

Toronto have no issue with this. Toronto should be applauded for respecting SBW religious beliefs.

The bigots will be out in force though soon enough claiming SBW the Muslim is forcing his beliefs on other people.

If BetFred pull their sponsorship because one player out of 200+ doesn't want to wear the logo on religious grounds I'll find it pretty funny to be honest. I at least wouldn't want them sponsoring the game if that was their attitude. It would be incredibly narrow minded of them.

Good point my friend. As if Betfred would pull sponsorship because one Muslim players refuses to wear a shirt promoting the brand.

People are trying to make this a big problem when it isn't at all.