Looks like London could be on their way out of Super League: www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... oncos-fold

Looks like London could be on their way out of Super League: www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... oncos-fold

It would be a shame if London,guess it has been on the cards for a while though.

They have a pretty decent academy,wonder what happens there

Hope Fev don't get our 50 grand next year,that really would be a p1ss take too many

was just going to post similar to that roger, what will happen with our funding if london go and fev come up, will fev get £50k extra, will fev miss out and the £50k be split and awarded to the other teams, or will we get the £50k back or even will we get it all back. Some decisions the RFL and SLE need to work out first.

Trouble is with the K***heads who run RL I fear if Fev or Halifax come in if London go under, they will probably give the replacement team a dispensation to miss out on relegation if as expected they finish in the bottom two. So instead of 14 fighting to avoid the 2 positions they will be 13, making it that touch harder for the less advantaged clubs. (including The Bulls)

Can certainly see something like that happening with the RFL in charge of proceedings

Lets hope Omar has got the RFLs number ready on his phone if the worst comes to the worst with London, regarding our 50 grand

Our £50k is certainly not the first thing I'd be worried about. A sport where Warrington are the top flight team furthest South in the UK is not a good image to have and will put off many potential sponsors from associating there brand with the sport. I suspect there is a lot more than £50k to worry about if the Broncos do fold

certainly going to miss seeing their ball/water boy...that guy creases me!!

I'm pretty sure that Catalans is further south then Warrington.

Surely you're not suggesting that there are people who only sponsor RL in general because there's a London team? Who's that, then, and precisely what value do they get out of it?

Personally I think a season in the Championship would do London more good than harm.

If London do drop out of SL for 2014, then admitting Featherstone would be a very sensible and indeed fair solution, and they want to do it, but if it happened it could only be on the basis that they played to the same rules as everyone else. In any even why would they worry? They would have had a season in the sun even if relegated again, and if their new pro or semi pro side improved in the SL season then they may be seen as a shoo-in for promotion the following year so what would be the problem?

See, the heartland for RL is the M62 and that heartland includes both Manchester and Leeds, 2 of the biggest cities outside the capital in terms of what is actually there. I really don't see the logic behind the old "Oh we need a London club or we won't get any money". The London club has failed, I'm sorry but that's the truth of it.

They need a huge investment to cover their shortfalls EVERY year. The last time they fully went to the wall Caisley was painted as the villain for saying they should go at that point, but maybe he was right as they've limped along ever since.

Why what's wrong with the north of England?

Yeah Liverpool and Manchester United struggle for fans away from the north west too.

I would suggest more people in Wales and London would watch a saints Wigan derby over London versus crusaders. It's te product that's important and having a government body willing to sell the sport without having an identity crisis as seems to be the problem.

The problem is, the pyramid system of young kids playing in schools and juniors and the academy teams are all doing well in a tough area but growing; it's the top level that's made of jelly and ruining it for everyone else underneath.

We've a bubbling growth in London, arguably stronger than ever, but no f*cker wants to watch the Broncos. If they do drop out of Super League (and I think it may be best) keeping that hard work at grass roots with something aspirational for the kids is number one priority. Otherwise, there will be some exceptional young players trained to run and pass playing union in 10 years time.

The Broncos project has failed in Superleague terms but you can't ignore the growth of the game in the South east at school' ,amateur and semi pro levels. Everyone from the north who has been associated with London has said the same-- the Broncos have been the catalyst for that expansion. If the 2 extreme opinions are represented by Garry Schofield and Brian McDermott I favour the latter.
Perhaps the RFL might consider setting up a one off working group with a remit to report in a month. Oxley could chair it and instead of the usual Red Hall gang. Ask people like McDermott and a rep from the London fans (that Michael O'Hare springs to mind) to participate or at least contribute.
FA's scenario involving the championship is probably the best solution as things stand .
Finally the most telling argument I ever heard about the need for a London involvement in our game was from an American who I introduced to the game around 20 years aqo. He hated Rugby because he'd only seen Union. He could not believe the difference when he saw his first League match but said we would never be a national game without a presence in the capital and all the major cities.

Not sure how they can do that.

Having a three year period in the higher division is part and parcel of the licensing system and I can't imagine how you can fit in some kind of, 'delayed relegation', into a P&R system. Surely it would be straight up and down?

They did it when Catalans were first admitted they couldn't go down.

Let's be honest,it's the RFL we are talking about so the scenario that's makes the least sense will be the one they go for

My guess is if London do go,they will give Hudds Londons share of our Sky money to help pay their fine for poaching Kopzack

They did, but that was a special 'one off' situation, as I remember and was only for the one club.

To do something similar for every promoted club over, say say three seasons with two clubs promoted and relegated per season, from the fourth season onward of the new regime, if we're giving them three years to get up to speed, you would finish up with six clubs permanently 'protected' from relegation at any one time. Which means that the bottom two of the play-off teams would be relegated.

Much as I think it is better for the new clubs to 'get a leg up' I'd call that ludicrous and unworkable under P&R, to be honest. Unless you were only going to have P&R every three years, like the licensing. Still, I'm sure it's all been thought through..

Not quite, I'm suggesting there are people who don't sponsor RL in general because of its flat cap, m62 corridor image that will only be furthered by the loss of London



I dare say as the RL product is, IMO, second to none, some more of [url=http://www.rfu.com/abouttherfu/partnersthese[/url guys (left hand column) might be interested if we had a stronger presence in other areas of the UK.

I think the big name sponsors of the RU are there because of the international nature of the other code, and its high profile TV presence which brings it a big audience. If you look at he 6-nations it is almost a social event spiced with inter-country rivalry to the extent that what actually goes on on the pitch is almost irrelevent.

But the heart of the UK marketing industry and the majority of the major corporates with sponsorship budgets are within the M25, so if you had a successful presence in London - it does make a difference to attracting high level sponsorship.

TBH I think it's more the type of person who watches yawnion than the actual numbers. Sure internationals attract huge crowds but apparently RL attracts better league TV figures. I don't watch much live polo or see any on the tele, but it sure attracts some massive names in sponsorhip due to the superior type of person involved.

That sounds very much like an Andrew Mitchell moment, surely you are not suggesting that followers of our great game are pennyless plebs

Well, it does tend to be intellectualised a bit more into A1s and 2s etc, but there must be some reason why the unionites get Lexus and we get Foxy bingo

It's not that fact that we are pennyless, lots of us aren't, it's what we choose to spend our hard-earned cash on that they are interested in.

I used to be an academy player at Bronco's (when they were Harlequins) and I have too say what a shame it is. They have a great youth set up, but as people have stated its the first team ruining it for them. I just hope that some of the youngsters get a break with another SL team. And I visited a friend down in Colchester the other week and watched Hammersmith vs Eastern Rhinos, and I must say it was a great game of Rugby League! So there are some improvements at amateur level (even though Hammersmith were all Aussies and New Zealanders haha)

I've seen London under 19s this year,some very good player,it will be a massive shame if some of them lads can't get fixed with another club.It will be very difficult for them all to relocate so I guess some will be left in limbo