Quite funny seeing you strop, seeing as my initial post didn't even mention London, but was simply against another new overseas expansion club being thrown into SL. But you still jumped in and spat that dummy right on the floor. And it gets funnier the more emoticons you throw in. I'm not even particularly anti-London, but if you insist on bringing the issue up...

So can you quantify the sh*t atmosphere at most London games due to no travelling fans? Doesn't the game exist for fans? Well, you don't have many, don't bring any and drag the rest of us down.



Go and ask any SL if he'd like a decent away following and the additional pennies they'd bring. And if you think RL would lose Sky if London lost their licence you're sadly deluded.

[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby-league-branson-takes-over-the-broncos-1233350.htmlRugby League: Branson takes over the Broncos[/url




An annoying publicity seeking RL chairman, promising the earth .... I thought it sounded familiar

How would sir like his freshly spanked handed to him?



BTW.....I never said that Sky would walk....I simply summised that they might. Either way...with all that herritage and history, as well as a sense of community, surely the 12 hearltland clubs can find 100 more fans per home game.......I mean to say.....it's the heartlands

Oh well, couldn't be d checking back. Well done. If you call that a booty handing you're easily pleased.

So, have any of those SL clubs come back and answered whether they'd prefer a decent visiting contingent every home game and the pennies they bring?

And it's not an either/or question. Clubs need to find 100s more per game, whilst pushing for bigger travelling support at the same time. Not one or the other. Unfortunately with London in the mix they won't get both.

Catalans and London are not the only teams with "so many Aussies." Take a look at Hull KR, Wakefield, in fact most of the SL clubs except Leeds and Huddersfield are stacked with Aussies and Kiwis.



Who is putting a gun to the head of English fans and forcing them to fly to France? They all go of their own free will, and the overwhelming majority love the experience. You should try it. Or don't you travel abroad?



It is quite relevant. The distances between many clubs in the NRL is much greater than in the SL. Townsville is more than twice the distance from Sydney than Perpignan is from Salford. Nobody in Sydney area NRL clubs have complained about this problem when North Queensland fans don't travel from Townsville to Sydney. It is only the parochial whinging fans from failing clubs in the north of England who do.

And that's a good thing?


Fans want to watch the team they support. Why should they have to pay above the odds to do so? Don't be so arrogant as to dismiss the fans - if they stop going the whole game is f*cked.

Oh, and I lived abroad for several years and travel internationally all the time with work. I've been to Perpignan several times and enjoyed it massively, though I've not been in the last couple of years as I resent paying so much to watch my team.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but crowds in the NRL tend to be bigger. Losing 1,000 travelling fans when you've got 15-25,000 turning up every week is a loss, but of far less impact than when your average gate is perhaps 6-8,000. Multiply that across visits from Catalans, London and according to your epic plan, the mighty Toulouse, and you're impacting club matchday income significantly, and that's before we talk about the flat atmosphere these clubs bring to games with no travelling fans - something you're all conveniently ignoring.

No....you made a false claim, I showed it to be false and unfounded....in fact, based on a lie. Admit you were shown up and do it with some grace....you had your handed to you, end of.



Been there, done that......All I need is an XL T -shirt.



Away fans are nothing.......they are less than 4% of the TV revenue across the board and less than 1% of the Superleague clubs turn over. I suggest you stop digging and support a second local side so you can have a home game to go to every weekend without leaving your postcode

They should kick out all clubs east of the pennines. How can you expect Yorkshire folk to travel that far? Only so much petrol the pit wage will pay for!

There are many reasons why Salford and London may not have a long term future in SL but travelling fans are not one.

East of the pennines? I agree

If you think any club can afford to lose 60k then you are far dumber than you already appear. What the hell a 4m pound turnover has to do with it is beyond me. In what way does that mean you can afford to lose money. If that 4m is all spent up then 60k is the difference between profit and loss or a players wage - what a monumental lack of understanding you have for basic economics and the state of RL, it's actually quite sad.

Below are the number of Antipodeans in each club's squad number 1-17s:

Bradford - 5
Cas - 4 (5 if you include Chase)
Catalans - 8 non French, includes some English.
Huddersfield - 3
Hull FC - 5
Hull KR - 8
Leeds - 2
London - 10 (Though to be fair that discounts players such as Sarginson and other local talent not wearing 1-17.)
Salford - 4
Saints - 7
Wakefield - 5
Warrington - 3
Widnes - 7
Wigan - 4

So a bit harsh on Wakefield I'd say to label them as 'awash' with Aussies and Kiwis. And "most" being "stacked"? 9 of 14 have 5 or fewer, with Catalans having 8 which includes some Brits, and whose first 17 squad numbers doesn't include such as Fakir. Aside from London; which I agree is disappointing but at least for the first time that certainly I can remember there seems to actually be some good talent coming through the youth system; I'd say Saints, Hull KR, and Widnes are disappointing. Widnes hopefully will head downwards in number as their SL structures bear fruit. Was a little surprised/disappointed with Saints, who arguably have one of the best academy set ups... Good to see that last years CC winners, LLS winners, and GF winners are 3 of the 4 lowest numbers on the list.

I'd hazard a guess that if you compared that with 10 or even 5 years ago you would find a higher number back then.

What are you, about 12? I made a small error after forgetting what I'd posted. Already admitted it. Suggest you calm down.


Never noticed the sig, muppet? I bet I do more work developing RL locally than you ever have.

Away fans aren't 'nothing'. How would London's home attendances look if we removed all away fans? Even fooking worse than they do now. No that WOULD be embarrassing.

Still had no response on whether SL clubs would prefer good visiting numbers and their cash or half a dozen from London or France? Find me one SL club that would sniff at the 'nothing' figures you've posted. I bet you can't.

Still had no response on why you think the rest of us should have to put up with a lame atmosphere when you come to town - dire numbers, no rivalry, no singing, a team no-one cares about? Even home fans are turned off.

Still had no response on what purpose London serve? Not grounded in any community, no rivalry, no history, no tradition? Just a hollow, soulless team. Most other SL teams have a town or community behind them, years of tradition and rivalry, generations of local fans and players. Not you.

And well done. Single-handedly, your attitude has turned me against London. I've always been willing to give them a go and hope it eventually got somewhere, but now I think "f*ck it, get rid."

How can you expect a team 30 years old to have "generations" of local fans? There are plenty of sticks to beat London with, but rubbishing them for not sending fans back in time to start loyal Broncos families in the 1900s is not one. And if you really can't see a single benefit from having London in SL then he or anyone else won't be able to convince you there are any.

If, done *right*, we can't get a team based in one of the world's biggest cities (and full of Aussies too as it happens) with an average home gate of more than 10k then I'm a monkey's uncle. There's nothing whatsoever fundamentally wrong with the idea of a team in London, it's just been messed up time after time. As I've said, if Sky can run a cycling team I'd strongly encourage them to run a Rugby League team too. We need serious professionals to get a grip of the need for a good London club and make it happen with the proper commitment and investment, not the half-baked messing about we seem to have had for decades.

Completely agree.

I bet your mates back at Craven Park were thrilled to see that remark. (I do appreciate you MAY be joking).

Meant West of the Pennines, living down under screws with your geography!

I should hope you did mean West. Your boys have enough to worry about at the minute.

WoW......I should get into politics if I'm that good at changing peoples minds......then again,in your case, there was very little to change in the first place

Pathetic. Can't respond to the comments so resorts to throwing smilies into every post. Deary me.

If asked if they would prefer 1,350 or so away fans once a year paying 27k instead of London, or 54k for 2 x 1,350 or so replacing London and Catalan,I suspect the majority of Chairmen, CEO's and CFO's would look into the long term financial implications, together with taking advice and guidance from the RFL.
I can't say for sure that they would all, or even some of them, would select the exchange of the 2 expansion clubs the same way I can't say for sure that they would opt to keep them.

The point is....neither can you.

The exchange of opinions on an open forum are what make boards like these tick. I have backed upmy standpoint on the issue of away fans and financial with facts:
From here: [url=http://retro.rlfans.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=545199&tsmp=1362002528What London actually costs SL clubs[/url


By the way...I have taken the above factual figures using the home clubs average....I could have easily used their next lowest attendance v a heartland club......the cost would have come down considerably.

Interestingly, all you've come back with is your "opinion" that the SL clubs would jump at the chance of getting rid of London in favour of recouping some of this lost revenue.....when in fact, they decided exactly the opposite in 2005 when asked to vote on us staying in the comp. Your comment that they would get rid of us is based on nothing...no historical factual data, no reports from accepted media...nothing.

On the topic of "away fans" at London games....we welcome those that make the trip and are appreciative of them. I have heard very little negative feedback from those that have visited the stoop and we have received many many messages of support and thanks for our hospitality. It is very depressing for us who support the club to see the current administration bereft of ideas on how to increase crowds,as well as revenue streams, but it is our cross to bear.

Your club are listed above. At a score a ticket, they would need to attract between 264 and 19 more locals to 13 games a season to make up for the loss in revenue from away London fans.....surely with their herritage and sense of community for the game they wouldn't struggle with that would they?

Let's put into even more perspective.....just to make it easy for you....

London, being in SL, cost the Bradford Bulls £18,000 last year at £20 a ticket against their average attendance.....I think....and feel free tocorrect me if I am wrong here, they needed slightly more than £18k to get out of the trouble they'd got themselves into.

In 2010, Tony Clubb, Born down south in Gravesend in Kent, became only the 10th England RL player to score 4 tries in an competetive international.......he did it against PNG in the 4 nations......but it was not given the same level of praise as spoilt brat tomkins of wigan, who achieved it against the might of France in a mid deason friendly and had flat cappers ing over their wippets.

NOT A SMILIE IN SIGHT!

Yeah, I've seen all that. You've come up with those numbers and seem to think costing other clubs potential income is acceptable. Strange.

You also appear to think SL clubs should go out and attract new fans to make up for your shortcomings. Hmm. Of course, clubs are trying to attract fans all the time (or they should be), but it shouldn't be to compensate for your weaknesses.

So now, I'll ask again seeing as you keep ignoring it: why we should put up with a poor atmosphere at some home games thanks to no visiting fans and a visiting team no-one cares about? A downbeat game that even turns home fans off?

I don't enjoy putting London down. I'd love a thriving London club, but 30 years later it's still a relatively pointless endeavour. I've sat near and spoken with London fans at Wigan and been impressed with their dedication and passion for the game. They (and you) deserve much, much better, but not at any cost.

Oh, and yes, I saw the Tony Clubb game. He did well, and I seem to recall plenty of praise from within the game. Not quite the same level of individual skill Tomkins displayed to get his four though. And not sure why you bring it up at all.

And someone, please, reveal to me the mystical benefits of London in Super League? People keep hinting at them but no-one actually reveals them. And don't talk about Sky money - they would NOT pull out of RL if London lost their licence.

Why is it strange? Financials were one of your reasons for beomoaning expansion.....specificall lost revenues. I simply showed you that it accounted for about half a percent of most clubs turn overs.


Nope....I simply said that 105 was the average increase in attendance for home games over a season to make up for londons lack of away support. Again, this simply underlines the fact you have nothing but opinion when faced with facts.


Who is this "we"? Are you a SL Chairman? If so, you'd have blown holesin my financials, so I take it you mean "we the fans". Well, given I haven't ignored this, but have actually answered this, I'll keep it short this time......I go to RL for the RL....everything else is a bonus. In fact, I have been tomany games asa neutral in the north and found that some of this "atmosphere" you crave is actually either powder puff stuffor in the case in thr east of the country....borderline violent. As for "home fans" being turned off.....that's the home clubs problem, not ours.



What is this cost you speak of? I though we were on to atmosphere? I have already shown the cost to RL that London extract...money well spent if you ask me.....at 330k a year, then 5.6 million over 17 seasons.....whilst SKY, who asked for us to be in, pumped more than that into the game year 1.


Because we are developing players.....when the plug gets pulled (and it will) then these guys, players like the SARGE and Dixon will be lost to Union......



Simple maths as stated above.
London cost the combined heartland clubs 330k a year. Over 17 years, that's about 5.5 million. Sky wanted London in as part of their TV agreement...if you deny this, you are insane BTW.....and as a result of London being in the comp, the first TV deal was signed.....I suspect it was worth more than 5.5 million to the clubs.


As for what SKY would do if London weren't in the comp......you can guess, as can others, but the evidence to date shows an almost unhealthy desire to keep us in...and as before, we can all guess as to why that is. When we went to the wall in 2005....surely those clubs that were loosing gazzillions because of our taxi would have voted us out....they didn't. Even Widnes, who had most to lose that year didn't vote us out......but you know best.

And SL clubs can afford to lose that? You've never run a business, have you?


Nope, you've repeatedly stated that SL clubs "won't have an issue" and "wouldn't struggle with" bringing in additional fans to cover the lost support when London visit. Why should they cover for you?


I go to RL for RL. I play and watch a lot of amateur RL, but when I travel and pay £20 a ticket I want something more - a matchday atmosphere, not the sense that a 'nothing' club has come to town.

There you go again, blaming the home club. Why is it down to them to cover for your shortcomings? If you're not an attractive proposition for fans, that's your problem.


London Broncos' involvement in SL is not a condition of Sky's money. HTH.


Is that really a bragging point?


THAT'S your argument: "Erm, Sky want us!"

Sky may have wanted London once, back when it was believed it might grow into something substantial, but if you think London are a condition of their money in 2013 you're the insane one.

The answer is, London currently bring nothing to SL apart from the thrill of a team based in London. Low crowds, little atmosphere, mediocre team, no travelling support, loss of potential revenues for other clubs, no community support, little media attention even in the capital - nothing.

I never said it was.......I said it WAS back in 1996. Are you saying it wasn't?



No...as much as you'd like me to say it is, it has never been that. I simply pointed out that half a percent loss of income was hardly a reason to expel us.

As for running a business, the company I set up in late 2009 turns over $3,500,000 a year (or will have by the end of march this year)....half a percent of that is $17,500......I could swallow that in a heartbeat. I wouldn't be happy, but guess what, if I budgeted for it, I'd soon get it baand if I knew it was coming every year, I'd put measures in place to allow for it.

I repeat, the total loss in ticket revenue, giving you the london v average maths that asists your standpoint as well asgiving you 20 quid a ticket dating back 17 years is around 5.6 million in total.....SKY paid more than that to the clubs in year 1.