Well that's 3 towns west of the pennines and a couple of cities east of the pennines.

We should demand more newspaper and TV coverage on that basis.

Quote ="Londo06"How can you roll your eyes at your own made up fact. This is from Sport England, and provides a robust breakdown of the game outside the professional ranks. www.cwsportspartnership.org/file ... _facts.pdf And the breakdown of schoolkids who regularly play the game in London and the suburbs is around 20,000. www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... -gospel.do The game at youth level in London in terms of numbers is second only to Leeds, although I haven't been able to find the article again to back that one up. But London and the South East providing more 16+ rugby league players than the North West'" It doesn't say "regularly", it counts participants. Rugby league in London tends to produce b*llocks stats like this and some people swallow them uncritically. With youngsters, a fair number of schools will take part in the Championship Schools tournament but that might pretty much the only rugby league that these kids will play all year. There is a London Junior and London Mini league but we are talking about a handful of clubs. Basically we're talking about infrastructures that are only a few years old and haven't had time to get very many kids playing "regularly" like kids in many M62 towns do. The game is expanding fairly rapidly but it's not nearly as big in London as people are trying to suggest. You could live your whole life in London and remain ignorant of the distinction between union and league.

Quote ="Londo06"How can you roll your eyes at your own made up fact. This is from Sport England, and provides a robust breakdown of the game outside the professional ranks. www.cwsportspartnership.org/file ... _facts.pdf And the breakdown of schoolkids who regularly play the game in London and the suburbs is around 20,000. www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard- ... -gospel.do The game at youth level in London in terms of numbers is second only to Leeds, although I haven't been able to find the article again to back that one up. But London and the South East providing more 16+ rugby league players than the North West'" It doesn't say "regularly", it counts participants. Rugby league in London tends to produce b*llocks stats like this and some people swallow them uncritically. With youngsters, a fair number of schools will take part in the Championship Schools tournament but that might pretty much the only rugby league that these kids will play all year. There is a London Junior and London Mini league but we are talking about a handful of clubs. Basically we're talking about infrastructures that are only a few years old and haven't had time to get very many kids playing "regularly" like kids in many M62 towns do. The game is expanding fairly rapidly but it's not nearly as big in London as people are trying to suggest. You could live your whole life in London and remain ignorant of the distinction between union and league.

The criteria generally used for Sport England participation stats is an average of 1 hour per week. Which is reasonable IMO.

When will you northern Monkeys get it into your thick skulls that it was Thatcher that closed your pits, not us

Erm, yes of course. Because half of the population of London are schoolchildren and every single one of them plays Rugby League of course.

[size=200BBOOOOOORRRRRRIIIIINNNNNGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!

Have had no more than 4/5 years as Quins in Twickenham. Had no more than 8/9 years (if that) as London Broncos playing in a couple of different towns. Had a few years as Crusaders and a few years as Fulham. Pretty much played all over London....so where are you getting this 30 years non-sense from?

Only when the club settle (name etc) and make a decision to plant permenant roots (in ONE town/stadium) and THEN go 30 years can you make your comments about them failing and actual get some credit for your dribble.

Seems ever Quins/London thread starts with a stab by a blinkered fool and then ends up the same with them shot down and looking like an idiot....yet these threads keep coming....incredible!

Peace Out! [/size

Ps...it's in large font because I'm sick of seeing these threads

I have some bad news for you.....if a team are ejected from SL in 2 months time and if that team isn't QuinsRL, there will be a few more threads like this one.

Pretty common denominator?

Tell me about it! The rlfans.com forum will just crash...there will be outrage!

I could fully back the argument for London failing if the club had been in one place and had one name for 30 plus years....but non of the guises have had a chance to develop for multiple reasons.

Just stop responding to the pillock then, he's an idiot, nothing we do here will cure him of that.

No one reason only: not enough people in London are interested.

One thing that I find striking is that the hierarchy of Quins RL are quite open about their desire to go it alone, drop the Quins tag and become London in their own ground. Surely this is only worsening things, from the board room to potential new fans walking through the gates?

the problem's not it won't work, it's that it's being played in the wrong place. Richmond is strong Union territory. Richmond, Quins & London Welsh RU all in about a miles radius.

Rebrand them London, move them to East London (move in with Leyton Orient?) & have a big community push there. We have a lot more in common with soccer in terms of who watches RL than we have with Yawnion.

To be fair I've often thought the location and taking on a union club's name and colours was a lot like making a near-impossible situation impossible. Having said that I don't believe there were many other options at the time, so potentially it saved the club. I still think they'll always be p155ing in the wind whilst it is how it is though.

I honestly don't know what that means.

richmond is strong union territory granted, but st.mary's uni have won BUCS, or BUSA as it was three times, and gotten to the semi's on other occassions. the sharks have also done well in the national conference, so there is scope for success in the area.

Simply close them down.

RL in London won't work.


Ever.

You want St Marys University closed down, just because they had the temerity to play rugby league in London. The is a new low for the contractionist argument, almost puts it on a level with the rugby union officials who gave players life bans, just for playing a game of rugby league.

If we put Phipps in it and then close it down would it be a price worth paying?

Nope. The day you remove his right to voice his opinion is the day free speech dies. He is a wind up merchant and will pour petrol on this thread (and the countless others) so long as we respond to him.

So, here we go (again)



He is like many people on here, who try to look clever (and fail) by inflaming the debate with off the cuff comments with nothing to really add top the topic.....he jokes about 3,000,000 schoolkids playing League, when in fact, London is second to only Leeds I believe when it comes to kids playing the game. He points at the terrible crowds and says that is the reason they should go......although we are not a loss making club......he looks at our results as another reason we should go, but we have never finished bottom of the leage and we tick more franchise boxes than some....he adds nothing other than a post that takes him one step nearer to becoming a bad impersination of The GLF......and we all know how that ended.

,......But, as I said, he is entitled to his opinion, as narrow minded and wrong as it is

Quins RL is operating at huge deficits. Technically insolvent and saved by the generosity of David Hughes. Sadly RL will never take hold in London as a big spectator sport. This is a great shame but an inescapable fact, as the many aborted attempts going back as far as Streatham& Mitcham, Acton etc indicate. There may be a lot of kids playing for a fixed time every week, but this does not translate into spectator numbers.

I wish things were different as I'd love to see the game grow, but sadly they aren't. There is a nig difference between being anti expansion and a purveyor of cold hard reality.

Oh..look. Another newbie. Welcome.
Cold hard reality eh.....how much does that sell for? By the Pound or are you Metric in your trade?

Expansionism in RL is quite possible.......and as usual (it pains me to say this), the NRL have showed the way to do it. Australian RL gets less TV money than the AFL due to the AFL being played at top level in more capital cities. The Melbourne Storm were created purely to tick another state box.......and try to attract more money. As the NSW Mafia weren't too keen on what they saw as a gamble (with their money) to maybe attract more TV cash, News stepped in.......and threw shed loads of cash at the franchise.........they still get crap crowds, but they are on the up...and being caught cheating has perversely created a Millwall type metality down there..........
Now let's look at London in SL shall we......bandied around, moved from pillar to post, new owners, new promises, never delivered upon....yeah,,,,that's the RFL way.

Give a London RL Franchise 3,000,000 a year for 10 years.....ensure that 50% of this is devoted to attracting and keeping fans..........employ marketing professionals (something that has never been done)...and then if it fails, come back and post your Cold Hard Reality.

BTW.....it has never been about attendance figures in the eyes of those who bankroll the game......it is about audience spread.

London Broncos were added to SL, along with Paris St Germain because Sky wanted a 12 team competition with two new sides. Should Maurice Lindsay have ensured that London and Paris were given more Sky money for a fixed period?

Richard Branson and a Wembley appearance couldn't ignite the interest of Londoners. Why can London be compared to Melbourne? Are the sporting environments and culture broadly similar?

Who took London Broncos to Charlton, Griffin park and The Stoop? Where should they be in order for it to 'work'? What should the team be called? Is it simply a matter of marketing and they will come?

Is there any evidence that having Quins RL in SL directly affects audience spread?

I'm not on either side, it just seems that those who say it will work don't really know how to make it work, even though history shows it won't, and I include the SL era in that history.

You don't help viewpoint by saying Quins RL isn't loss making!

IMO...Yes.


Branson totally missed the point...he really thought he was buying the new London Monarchs.....

In a way, they are alike when comparing the sporting geography.....AFL rules in Melbourne./ they get 80 or 90 thousand to regular season games.....soccer, Union and League are all third rate sports when compared by attendance and interest. Soccer used to get 20k to games, but they split their fans with a second franchise......London is a soccer town.....League and Union together with basketball all pale into insignificance by comparison.

No idea of the backroom shennanigans....but


IMO, Brentford was a good location. If the money was available to buy a share of the stadium and develop it then I believe that the club could build on the crowds they had there between 2002-2005. Call them London RL again......they were never oficially the Broncos BTW.


No....but some marketing would be good






Regardless of where the money comes from, the P&L account for Harlequins RL is cash neutral........same way Halifax averaged the right number of fans last season exactly.......it may not be correct, but it is accurate.