Yip......and as a way to reduce other "outgoings" AitrTransat were on board as [TRUMP MODE]a massive sponsor...the biggest ever[TRUMP] in the history of the game.......yet suddenly, rather than play games at an alternate venue whilst lamport is being rejigged, they are essentially playing games in Blocks, which gives them a massive advantage...........they should be home and away like everyone else and if it's too cold, then they should find an indoor arena.......letting them start with a block of games in the UK, then finish by hosting teams fresh of the plane is just Biased.......sorry, but it is!

As for the route being half empty, then it's obviously a loss making route for them hence the ability to offer "free" or heavily discounted seats for travelling teams the only cost then is the extra fuel burn which using conservative figures is going to be about 500kg of fuel each way which in the grand scheme is nothing, trust me when they start filling that route they will start paying.
So actually we are agreed then dog, TW is a rich mans plaything who will be around as long as mr Perez puts his Money in

But they are a development team dog! Should they not be allowed to do that without anyone complaining? Or are you saying it gives them an unfair advantage? Am confused now, in another thread I do believe you said London Broncos should not be bound by the overseas player rule, would that not effectively give LB an advantage over teams they play that were bound by overseas player rule.
Actually in my opinion they should play home and away the same as everyone else, if it's not possible due to weather then it's a bit of an inconcieved plan, bit like having world ski champs in the alps in august. It will be interesting if/when they are inserted into SL if the other SL teams will be as willing to bend to there demands.

I did.....and I think I also said that we should get a minimum 25% compensation of the cap too. Toronto having a squad that is "very close to being full cap"....<s> UNDER THE CAP MY 'ARRIS<s> and being able to field a team full of aussies isn't my gripe....but them playing the last 12 regular games next year at Home whilst the opponents will be just off the plane is.......

But you are still suggesting that we should be allowed an advantage over other teams but other teams shouldnt.
As for the away teams just getting off the plane, nothing stopping them travelling earlier! They just pay for it

Yes....we are running an academy and we will produce more players but it will take time......and until such time we should be allowed play as many ANZACS as we need.......and more cash because living in London ain't living in Leigh!


...now I know you're just looking for an argument!

Toronto came to us and already in year 1 we let them play 4/5 on the trot away....not that's more with the last dozen at hoe and on the trot......it'll be like bige-watching a netflix show for their 300 or so beer-loving fans......

Am never after an argument just healthy debate! The fact is if Toronto were to be doing home and away alternating the costs would be extortionate, I doubt even air transat would stomach that deal. We could get into that discussion of what day broncos travelled to away games, night before and overnight in hotels or travel up the morning before a game! Does it really make that much difference to how they perform on the park? For me I would suggest very little.
Crossing the Atlantic is slightly different I agree but it's a 4 hr time difference so a 1630 local kick off is a 2030 uk time kick off, simple for any club travelling stay on UK time for sleep patterns hey ho no jet lag. So 7 and a bit hrs sat in an airplane with a night to recover or 4 hrs sat in a coach on the m6 m1 with a couple if hours.
For the good of expansion it's not that hard

So? We were assured that they were cashed up and other teams wouldn't be adversely affected.......If it costs them or AirTransat loads then so what....their sponsorship deal we were told was massive.
I am not saying we were told lies, but I can only comment on what I see and that is a schedule skewed to suit the new side.......it could be argued that when the pitch was being worked on at Griffin Park, we could and should have just asked to play away games for 8 straight weeks then the end of the season with 8 Home games....it sure would have been easier to build a marketing momentum up. I'd imagine the flat earth brigade (some of whom are pro-Toronto but were anti-London??????) would have gone ballistic......and it would have bee added to the team full of aussies, extra payments and over the cap conspiracy theories that abounded back then........and....

.........we're told that all clubs are currently under the cap and it's managed "live"....I wonder what accounting software the Canadians are using

But they are a development side? Should the sport not be doing everything it can to ensure they succeed, you suggested they should bend the rules for london!!! Not sure how you can suggest one thing for us and then criticise efforts for others.
I actually don't disagree with you, they shouldn't be playing games in blocks, the pitch is artificial so should not be that adversely effected by the weather!! Their is sport played on it year round!
But the RFL in its wisdom are willing to bend to see them succeed. They did something for Catalans as well remember, and in the past I believe we had relaxed rules on overseas players, so hey that's how it is.
We have 35 plus years under our belt, we are not a development side anymore.

if its not on the floor you can't play on it!!

Wq you read any of the thread. Bad planning is bad planning!
If you start a business that relies on local support, building that support one year knowing that it's highly unlikely you can deliver the promised goods the following year is simply daft.

Or very clever

Very interesting post Monkey