With London being relegated and not even a win on the board yet, is it time to wash our hands with the London project and look for somewhere else outside of the heartland to grow our game? Or will them being relegated create a renewed buzz down in London with them possibly winning more games than they lose (pundits' opinions not mine). Honestly I thought it was over with when they moved away from the stoop and weren't even based is London and I do miss the hospitality in the bar at the stoop.

The word "project" bothers me, it reminds me of the ted attitude that too many heartland fans have adopted to the club for too long. If only the RFL had inswws viewed them as more of a special case things may have been different. As it is, they were left to float or sink much like any other club despite a clear strategic need. I wouldn't have offered any on-field support as such, but there was much more which could have been done behind the scenes. But it's difficult - and much of the blame for how it has ended lies with David Hughes. For all the money he's ploughed in, if only he'd not proven so inept at running the club and, more importantly, demonstrated such an amazing ability at appointing idiots in key off-field positions.

Personally I think we should abandon the Bradford project.

I'm with MjM. If London was considered to be a special project then it should have always been treated as such, regardless of favouritism gripes from other clubs. London does seem to have been badly run and seems to have an almost permanent problem of rebuilding its side year after year (with consequent issues round team spirit judging by far too many of their scorelines), but I'd far rather try to run a club in a heartland town with an in-built fanbase and ARL teams around and about than try to run London.

No. The club will continue in the tier below, just like Bradford will. I wouldn't write off the notion of them returning to the top level either, albeit not under the present regime.

I too don’t consider London to have been a ‘project’; more a misguided attempt to unnecessarily expand the sport at an elite level outside of its defined catchment area.
Every time the sport has tried to do this it has failed; start a club in Paris – failed, start a club in South Wales – failed, move it to North Wales – failed and now London.

The Broncos have been nothing but an embarrassment to the sport this year with poor attendance and even poorer on field results.

Call me a fekkwit if you must but IMO trying to develop RL to an elite standard outside of the heartlands is nothing more than folly. If I can be proved wrong then I will admit fekkwitery (wouldn’t be the first time) but I believe my opinion has been proved time and time again with nothing really tangible to argue against it.

RL has been around as a parochial sport for the last 120 years, I guess there’s a reason for that?

Add Gateshead to that list FB.
I'm with FB whilst the amateur scene has thrived down there the SL Club have failed they may or may not regroup in the lower tiers but with teams like Leigh ,Fev Fax and now the Dulls it will be a long long time before we see them back in SL.
This isn't the NRL ,RU or Football it is very much a heartland sport the facts don't lie and IF we are to try another "expansion" experiment lets make sure they have the full required foundations to start with i.e a ground and at the very least a reasonable local fan base.

There's ample scope for there to be a pro/semi-pro club in London. The area has a thriving amateur scene and an expanding youth programme.

I notice nobody is suggesting abandoning Cumbria as a lost cause, despite declining fortunes of its three semi-pro clubs and not having a side in SL since the inaugural season?

London need to strip back and start again, building a club from the base up around local talent with the odd import thrown in. Get some continuity, build a fan base and do it on a sustainable budget.

London has had all the things you need to be a success. I can remember decent crowds at The Stoop in the Edwards/Offiah era, and for a WCC game against Canberra(?). It's just been very badly mismanaged leading to a slow, lingering death.

If you're going to start writing off clubs as unsustainable on that basis, then you're going to have a sport based around Leeds, Wigan and St Helens. Dismissing London as "never going to work" is pure idiocy.

Well said AG. The potential in London is there and they're certainly starting to produce players capable of playing at the top level. Hopefully the drop down will give them chance to push off from a more stable place without the high levels of expectation. I for one would love to see them doing well and help expand the sport. The game is growing is amateur level outside of the heartlands. Hopefully with correct structures in place, we'll see more viable long term options emerge.

As a side note, the way the game has kicked on since the world cup is shocking. For me it shows all that is wrong with the growth of the sport. A tournament that was considered a success has been followed with nothing.

London has been successful in the past, just not at the moment. Someone somewhere must be able to manage it right.

I don't understand why this particular criticism is thrown out in such an aggressive way towards London, but not other clubs.

The same criticism could justifiably be thrown at Wakefield (arguably moreso than London), Salford and until recently, Huddersfield, yet they seen to receive much more sympathy. Why?

Bradford's crowds have fallen by 40% in the last 10 seasons. London's by approx. 30%.

Both comprehensively mis-managed over that period. Not sure why we should "bin" one but not the other.

If London can find themselves a suitable home I can actually see them having a more positive future than Bradford. I can't see how Bradford can turn Odsal into a good place to watch RL with only 4,000 people in it.

The discussion from my pov is purely as a SL entity and the facts support the theory that they've failed and been in terminal decline for years that's not idiocy that's exactly what has happened.
My other point about the other clubs being bigger and better placed for a SL comeback stands as well.

If I had £10m to spare and wanted to lend a hand in getting a side into SL, I'd look at the likes of Leigh, Fax and Fev. If I had 100m to spare and wanted to help take a club to the top of the game, I'd look at London.

when they started as Fulham and they got good crowds some as high as 15k .They averaged over 6000 for a couple of seasons.I know that was a result of marketing and to a lot of the locals at first it was a novelty,but some of them stayed and became regular RL people.I feel sorry for them.As for Bradford high many times have have gone under and reformed? For a large City in the heartlands that's pretty poor.

The club has been around since 1980 and apart from an embarrassing appearance in the 1999 CC final have done naff all. Nearly 35 years in existence with one major final appearance and no silverware. They have produced only one player to go on to bigger and better things (although that could be debatable). They have had four name changes and eleven changes of home venue.

London has had everything it needs to be successful but it hasn't and although you should 'never say never' I really don't see how it can work.

I said "this year" - please explain how London's performances this year can be compared with Salford, Huddersfield and Wakefield?

Are you sure they haven't? I understand they were given financial assistance with a large number of development officers paid for by the RFL. Something which was denied to Bradford.

by the same token bradfords ground was bought to help them out of the sh*t. the RFL didn't do this with wakefield or london.

the number of players coming through and the amount of teams/schools in london playing league shows it a shrewd decision

one would assume there should be more development officers in London than Bradford, one is a city of 8m people, one has 500k.

Development officers are also focused on the junior and amateur game more than getting people through the pro clubs doors.

I would hope that whatever was been done at junior and amateur level in london continues as great success is being seen there independently of the pro club.

As for the pro club. A good pro club in London would be invaluable to the game. As it is we havent had that choice for a few years. To say they have been run potically over the last few years would be an insult to pots. They have been failed in all areas by successive owners and central governance.

Pro RL in london is probably dead now. This club will probably limp on for a few more years, at best they will probably level out at Skolars level. Without long term planning and central support it is impossible for expansion clubs to survive in a regional competition like the game is currently contracting to. Especially under P+R.

People will pay lip service to their survival, say how they hope London will regroup and come back stronger through 'organic growth' but in reality there is a faction of the game desperate to see it remain a small regional competition which is why the only method of growth they will accept is one which has been responsible for a grand total of 0 clubs making it to the pro level in the entire history of the sport.

Bar the venue and name bit, you could hurl those same facts at Wakefield. Or up to the Ken Davy era, Huddersfield.

What have Hull KR done in terms of trophies or producing players in the last 25 years?

London seems to attract a lot of vitriol from chip on the shoulders northerners that they don't feel inclined to throw around closer to home.

I wouldn't say I have a chip on my shoulder as that suggests some element of xenophobia, it's more wasting valuable resource on a hiding to nothing.

The RFL have continually bolstered teams that are outside of the traditional heartland areas and to date all of these follies have proved fruitless. My point is that elite RL always has and always will be confined to these traditional areas, history has taught us this so why bother trying to expand the sport?

Oh and comparing Hull KR, who have only been in the elite league for 8 years to London, who have been in SL since its inception is hardly apples with apples is it?

Hull KR were an elite team before London existed. You can remember that far back, right?

You said "in the last 25 years". You can remember that far back, right?

No, it shouldn't be the end of the London project.

Within the last few years they've produced Louie McCarthy-Scarsbrook, Tony Clubb, Dan Sarginson, Mason Caton-Brown and Keiran Dixon - all players worthy of top-level SL. By rights, that should have been a core around which a succesful London team could be built.

There does now need to be a retrenchment. Find a home for the club and keep it there, if not as landlords at first then at least as long-term tenants. A club can't survive without a support base, so one needs to be built within that locality. Focus on developing the youngsters, building up the amateur scene and passing them along into SL. Only then will London be a goer in SL.

Personally, I'd like to see a carve-up of London. Get Broncos back to Brentford or West London, let Skolars have North London. Look at building up to a semi-pro side in East & South London, and try and develop the area around Hemel and the Medway towns.