WHy are you being so defensive? Why can such an issue not be discussed by our fans?

Leeds' fans recognize the importance of Harlequins and a London presence in SL which is why your worrying attendances, results and finances are of concern to us.

There are some great strides being made with amateur RL in London but there's also some bitterness. If the RFL (and, by definition, its' member clubs), paid for 50 development officers in Bradford or Birmingham there would be equally as good results and equally good opportunities for young people there to play the game. You shouldn't deflect attention away from your club's failings by lauding your success in junior development too much when that is being funded by the rest of us heartland clubs.

You have to justify your existence and for all the wonderful work in the amateur game so far SL has seen only Tony Clubb and LMS. The rest of us in the game are paying a high price for two England fringe players.

I wasn't aware that I was coming across as being defensive, it genuinely interests me as to why the attendance of our games warrants a discussion among you, and several fair points have been raised. And hopefully some people will see a long term future rather than the short term which is what seems to be focused upon.

I think I am probably the last person who you could accuse of deflecting attention away from our club's failings, and I really don't buy the idea that we are a shoein because of our development.

Can you explain how heartland clubs are funding our junior development? Sadly, LMS and Tony Clubb have been rubbish all season too

I understand that the RFL fund 50 development officers in London. Where does the RFL get it's money from?

I understand one heartland club asked the RFL for some help with development workers which was refused, the cause of some bitterness.

I understand, for example, Bradford have one development officer.

50?! I don't know where the RFL get it's money from, this is where I was hoping you could enlighten me. Do Bradford need more than one development officer?

Bradford certainly feel that they need more than 1 development officer and, personally, I would like every club to be given the same support with development officers that Quins are.

I do agree that a professional team in the South is important for generating interest in the game down there but I don't see the SL being the place for this team. You have won one championship in 28 years so in an 'on-the-field' context, you can hardly be seen as benefiting the game. You playing style for far this season has been dull and tedious to watch which does not help in boosting rugby league audiences as a whole, especially when you get televised.

I see. I can understand where you are coming from, but surely you can appreciate the need for more in the South, given the area that the development encompasses being so large.

Are you sure that there are 50? A ratio of 50:1 would indeed be ridiculous.

Where do you see the team then if it isn't in SL?

One championship in 28 years. Well, as we both know, that wasn't even a top flight championship, but if you are getting like that, what have Wakefield offered - they have won 2 championships in 100+ years. What sort of a return is that?

I agree, we have been absolutely woeful this season but then teams have been poor in the past and returned to better days. Remember our match against Leeds 2 seasons ago at The Stoop? That was a cracker - and hopefully one day, within 3 years I would say, we can return to being that competitive.

Harlequins crowd last night was the 58th smallest of the SL Era.

Among the 57 fixtures that had smaller attendances were such as:

11th August 1999 ..... Huddersfield V Warrington ..... 2,183
31st August 2003 ..... Halifax V Wigan ..... 2,543

London (under one guise or another starting with Fulham) have been around for 30 years. London/Harlequins have been a permanent fixture of the SL with an average finish (1996 to 2009) of 7th (the same as another permanent member - Warrington) and much less permanent - Hull KR. An average finish of 7th is better than fellow current SL teams from Castleford, Les Catalans, Wakefield, Huddersfield and Salford have been able to achieve in their SL careers to date.

Harlequins current 25 man squad has only 5 antipodeans and they are achieveing the 80/20 split which Gary Hetherington challenged himself to achieve at Leeds.

Their crowds have often been a concern over their 30 year existence but they are still here despite that and is a matter more for them (IMO) than anyone else. People in Leeds should perhaps appreciate the difficulty in establishing a supporter base for the respective 'other' code.

My hero

You won't be saying that once G1 responds and finds angles to rip my post to shreds.... comment by comment, line by line, even word by word if neccessary.

My beef is not with Quins as a club (or even the Welsh outfit), my problem is the RFL’s relentless and pointless pursuit in expanding this sport outside its natural homeland.

There is limited or little interest in Rugby League outside this area but there seems to be this insistent attitude that the Super League HAS to be a national past-time.

Develop the sport where there is an existing interest instead of trying to light a fire with wet newspaper and damp wood.

those clubs were all already in the top league of rl division 1 you got put in at the expense of featherstone widnes etc so its not the same issue you wasnt even the best club in division 2 keighley and batley were due to go up

Would the Quins be missed if the RFL allowed them to fold? I doubt it.

If Featherstone, Batley and Keighley were such exciting prospects then what have they been up to since the inception of Super League? Getting screwed over by the RFL in your eyes no doubt, while Red Hall slip us large payments on an annual basis.

Those clubs and others were starved of T.V and sponsorship money that were directed down south and lets not forget the SL clubs voted not to have you lot thrown out for insolvency before you became Quinns so it's not unreasonable for the resentment to surface where your club are concerned.
I personally can see where the other clubs are coming from especially as they haven't received the "extra" backing and suport that you have but i doubt the RFL would retract your franchise anyway.

Yes. There would be significantly less media interest and the good work at amateur and schools level that has been going on would be wasted as there would be no pathway for local players.

Have you not heard of London Skolars? Havent they started from scratch without having shedloads of money thrown at them and being bailed out on numerous occasions?

I'm not sure I buy into this media interest thing. We are never in the newspapers ourselves, or reported on particularly extensively online. If we were to fold, what would stop the press picking up on big games between Wigan, Warrington, Leeds etc? People often say that Sky would pull the plug too, and again, I'm struggling to work out why they would do that, considering they only show us occasionally and we usually lose.

London Skolars are struggling big time at the moment and have been for a while.

Shouldnt the money have been thrown at them rather than the Quins?

This "argument" seems to be presented every year. Which money has been "thrown" at Harlequins RL?

And no, not really, considering their club is even further away from being sustainable in the long-run than ours is.

how many times have you been bankrupt?

I know Quins themselves don't have a high media profile but London is the only city media give a toss about, if top grade RL were to pull out its just an even bigger incentive for the public schoolboys who run the media to give even less coverage to RL as a whole and can then more easily label it as only a "northern" game.
I don't think Sky would pull out of RL at all, but I think they would be tempted to reduce the amount they pay.

None. The club went into liquidation once and restructured as a new business. What's your point?