So basically you are OK with expansion so long as it's not at the expense of your club.......

Lol at the wakefield fan claiming totonto are only where they are because they spent. If you listened to him you would think the likes of Man City, man united, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Melbourne storm, toulon rugby club, Philadelphia eagles, New England patriots and golden state warriors all got to where they are without spending a pennY. Wakefield are the perfect example of a club who are skint and therefore want to stop the rest of the league spending

Regards

King James

You could so easily apply this criticism to those who believe that we can address the game's challenges by "focusing on the heartlands".

My fear is that unless something happens to inject finance into the sport, the sport is going to find it harder and harder to deliver what you and I think most supporters want - an entertaining, competitive sport played to a high standard. In order to do that, the game needs the funds to address issues such as grass roots development, the real-terms cut in the salary cap that we've seen over the last 20 years, and the ability to develop, retain and attract players.

But from your posts on this issue, you don't seem comfortable with that injection of finance coming from trying to court commercial partners (it will make the sport sterile), you appear to think that the opportunity cost of exploring opportunities overseas is too great (and despite your "dreamers" swipe, I haven't seen any pro-expansion comment that doesn't ackowledge the risks), and your view is simply that we should focus on the heartlands even though there is enough evidence already to suggest that the heartlands aren't exactly fertile soil for new supporters, new players and new sources of funding.

The last few years we have seen a trend of games becoming less competitive (the average winning margin has increased for each of the last three years, and the number of games won by a margin or one score less has decreased in the same period) and, whilst the standard and entertainment value is subjective, I'd argue that those have fallen. In other words, you aren't getting what you want to see but at the same time, you're coming across as resistant to any change in the sport despite the fact that every other sport around us has changed to reflect changes in the modern sports environment.

I don't believe that Toronto and North America are the panacea to these problems, but I think that they're the best option at this point in time. The heartlands clubs, with very few exceptions, have demonstrated that they aren't capable of taking the sport forward.

And at this point, I'd lock this thread because it has been argued and shown that whilst Toronto may not be the answer, they and other expansion clubs are the best option we have now and the heartlands just don't care enough about our sport anymore.

Wakefield, a club with 145 years of history and a founder of the Northern Union can't attract any more than 4,000 people to games and IMHO, should no longer be permitted to hold the sport back, whilst clubs like Hull, Warrington, St Helens, Wigan, Leeds and Catalans strive for better performance both on and off the field. Whether you believe the hyperbole coming from Toronto or not (8,000 in their dreams maybe), they are worth a punt, because they didn't exist 2 years ago and are injecting passion into the game, whilst Wakefield seem to have lost close to 1,000 fans per game in 12 months.......no wonder the OP is afraid!
And in case this is taken as a pop solely at Wakey, the same goes for Widnes, Salford and once Ken Davy has had enough, Huddersfield....Castleford and HKR are heading in the right direction but should be monitored closely and Castleford do need a new stadium which will see them flourish like Wire have at HJ.

Same here: I'm ok with expansion so long as it's not at the expense of his club.

Binning one club to give a leg up to another isn't expansion, it's merely a glorified P&R.

The problem is, that it shouldn't be about heartlands versus expansion, it should be both together. How they can work and move the sport onwards side by side. Progressing the sport. There are people on here who think it should be Toronto or Wakefield for example,When what it really should be is Toronto AND Wakefield.

Your right, the finances into the sport need to be improved. And as much as clubs are to be blamed for just hoping rather than promoting. The RFL can also be blamed, for a lack of a media push, a lack of getting the sport out there. The Eddie stobart deal so devalued the sport. They set it back years. In my opinion (and I know other won't agree), the franchise system did nothing to help. A league were nothing happens doesn't push a sport forward. The consent arguing for who gets the money, makes the sport seem petty. We don't do enough to make the sport come across in a good light. And until there's a proper international calender we will be seen as a small club sport. Which makes the whole sport harder to market.

We're always going to struggle to retain players. We all know that the Nrl is the best league, so of course we're always going to lose players to there. If you want to be the best, you have to play the best. And the fact that RU has such an international calender, means that players who want more than just a small club game, are going to go there.

Your totally right about the grass roots. The lack of funding and help we give them compared to say football is disgusting. But we also need to give young players a clear route to success. And that to me is academy, reserves 1st team. Who wants to play for 4 clubs on DR, or play in a sport were you might not get a game for weeks on end. To bring the best you have to show them how they're going to succeed and become one of your best.

You could argue that the standards aren't falling, but the players are getting better. But to me the games becoming boring. More sides are going for the 5 drives and a kick approach. Trying to win/milk penalties to move them down the pitch. Scoring off kicks, rather than spontaneous play. This isn't helped by coache's constantly going on about completing sets, doing the basics etc. If the product on the pitch isn't great, crowds aren't going to come flocking in. And long term fans get bored and choose there games to go to.
Plus the changes in society don't help our sport. The fact that there's so much football, and things to do without leaving the house. So little money avaliable to the average person, less time to relax. We're a working class sport predominantly and if they can't come there's no one to fill that void. Add in the money and Domination of football, the age group going to RL gets older. And we're doing very little to attract a younger denigration to the sport.
And if crowds don't come flocking in, then advertising and sponsorship falls. What the answer is I don't know, but something needs to be done.

This is precisely the nub of the entire argument. And it’s entirely the point of the whole debate.
I’m absolutely in favour of expansion. I agree totally with all the arguments in favour of Toronto, Toulouse etc etc. I think it’s a really exciting time for rugby league. But you and other posters have all acknowledged that we don’t know if Toronto (especially Toronto) will be a success, yet you think it’s worth a punt and it’s worth jeopardising the existence of clubs like Wakefield, Salford, Widnes etc.
Well, the history of expansion clubs isn’t too encouraging is it - Paris, Gateshead, Wrexham, Cardiff, Scarborough, Mansfield...... So, we ditch the clubs that are ‘holding the game back’ but the great North American dream crashes and burns. What do we have then? Oh yes a professional game comprising Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Leeds, Hull and Catalans. We could probably engineer Bradford, Toulouse and London in there too along with Cas. A ten team SL with the rest of the game dying on its ar5e. Even if Toronto succeeds (and I seriously hope it does) and more N American teams also come on board why do you think that it has to be at the expense of existing clubs? Why can’t we have expansion AND strong heartlands clubs? That’s the fundamental question facing the game. At the moment it doesn’t have an answer and neither do you. Rugby league can’t afford to lose a single club and all your statistics and passionate arguments are worth diddly if we jettison clubs and follow your preferred strategy because the game will lose its history, its heart, its soul and its very reason for existing.

But you’re not anti Wakefield???
And how do you know that Trinity aren’t ‘the answer’? If we’d been having this discussion back in 1980 you’d have been saying Wigan were part of the problem and Widnes were one of the teams we should be looking up to. Ten years ago it would have been Bradford. As you say, Toronto might not be the answer but don’t kid yourself that you definitely know what the answer is.

I can't speak for others on here but I personally don't believe that expansion has to be an either/or scenario. Yes, you have to set a limit of clubs in the top division at some point, but this isn't about ditching the loyal and faithful wife for a 21 year old blonde with bigger boobs.

What it is about is raising standards and raising the bar in terms of what clubs need to do to grow the sport, market the sport and themselves, and reach new audiences. What I think many who are against TW are most fearful of is that they set a standard that their club can't reach.

As I said earlier, there are some on here for whom nothing that TW does will ever be enough. If they pull in big crowds, those crowds are "exaggerated" and they've been counting the pixels on their TV screen to prove it. If they engage new, younger audiences, those fans are "only there for a beer festival". And if they attract big sponsors, that won't matter because they "don't bring any away fans".

TW have done everything that could have been asked of them in less than 2 years. For some their concern isn't about the state of RL, it's a fear that TW may set a standard that their club doesn't have the ambition or ability to reach.

That’s fine, couldn’t agree more. Clubs come and go and, if they can’t reach the required standards, on the field or off, they must find the level at which they can function. I just get the feeling that that’s not what some posters on here are advocating.

FWIW I agree with you (to a large degree anyway), I just fear for them if their benefactor pulls out as they have nothing to support them otherwise.

Btw, maybe it was the microphones in use at the game, but when the guy on the tannoy asked the crowd to "make some noise" it did sound like the Toronto faithful had been rudely awakened from their private conversations. I guess it's down to the way fans support their team, but the Canadians do seem very quiet!!

Thats not at all what I said at all and I think you know it.
I'm ok with expansion as long as "we" dont risk everything in the process and that those teams that are invited are a good "fit" with the league and the progressive evolution of the game.
Planting seeds in the desert in highly likely to be successful and it does seem that "our" sport is incapable of learning from some of its past mistakes.
You seem to have a problem with people who dare to question an opposing view to your own and yes, I may be wrong and you may be right that N. America is the promised land.
Let time be the judge of this one and lets just hope that, when this experiment has run its course, RL remains as a pro sport in the UK (and France).

Kent Invicta ? Celtic Crusaders ? Carlisle ?

Yeah, it's really funny, my sides are splitting whilst I'm trying to reply.
Toronto have spent massively compared to the competition that they've had thus far.
However, assuming that they gain promotion, they will be on a level playing field with many SL clubs and not spending substantially more.
We will then see just how good they are.

I love the Wakey criticisms about them not spending, quite ironic when you look at the sides that they have beaten this season, Wigan, Saints, Hull FC...........
FWIW, we should have been increasing the cap,year on year, since SL began and for those still blaming "clubs like Wakefield" for holding everyone else back, how many clubs are using the second marque player 1,2,3 ??
Other clubs just use the smaller clubs as an excuse for their own failings and their inability to compete higher up the table.