Quote 1 - The lot. Primary, secondary, FE, HE, community club. All schools/FE delivery was to promote sign-up at local community clubs. Same sort of thing that goes on at every pro club community trust.
2 - Quite a few. Jamie O'Callaghan, Olsi Krasniqi, Mike McMeeken, Erjon Dollapi and a few others are all products of the West London development work. It's not 40k people who can or will ever play Super League though, so that's not a bad return. A 7-year-old in 2010 will still only be 11, so is unlikely to play this season. Likewise the girls, students, disability groups and standard amateur-club level kids won't ever get near a SL shirt. It's about getting people knowing about - and playing - the game. The performance pathway then got the right ones to SL level.
3. Again, quite a few. All the kids playing in West London & Surrey benefited from this work in some way. Even if they didn't directly have a schools session, love it and join the local club then the local club was assisted by, their coaches supported by, and in some cases clubs and teams administrated or coached by Broncos people.
'"
Not a bad return at all:
1. It's great that they managed to get the game played during curricular time! this is really how you get things moving. Weekends = Kids don't turn up, but play the xbox. Extra-curricular= schools can't afford to cover teachers! I've often wondered if rugby league could be squeezed in the pe curriculum during the summer term, when cricket and tennis are covered. During the Autumn term its competing with Football and union. During the Second term it is competing with schools who play 2 term union.
2. Also a good return. The population density of students around this area must be higher than some areas in the more traditional heartland therefor it has to be worth a shot at keeping the game alive down here, it seems to be spreading too, only this morning I received a flier from Hemel Hempstead Staggs. Hopefully it won't be long before we see London born players playing for England.
3. This interests me, I have played League and union to a reasonable level. The difference in my opinion is that in union you can play as an 'old timer', be the person who rucks and doesn't make as much contact, also due to the infrastructure there are vets teams and therefore the risk of injury is lower. League on the otherhand, due to constant crashing into each other lack of vets teams is harder to play the older you get. Unless you are Steve Menzies or stanley gene. This means that vets will often kick off early then watch a game on the telly or buy a batch of tickets and go together. It keeps the interest, and that is what I'd like to see happen with league, I know we have the masters, but it would be great if it was build upon.
Another thing I have noticed:
Union is often over coached, a lot of focus on technique rather than reading the game. League to use a Laurie Daley quote is a more "simple game" however league seems to have more some success in that I'm guessing more kids play union, however we could be looking at an ex league back line in the England union team.