Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

RS

London Broncos time to be very afraid

181 posts in this topic

He has no need I put him on ignore several months ago.

That won't stop me highlighting your misuse of statistics to justify "pins-in-a-map". We need a real debate about how to get a sustainable SL club from London; not one where "What about Salford?" is the answer to every probing question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rugby league in Britain, forget France for the moment, without a SL side further south than Warrington (soft southerners that they are) would be very damaging to the sport as a professional image.  If it were me, I'd be going out of my way to save London. Rugby league won't die without London, Sky won't abandon us, but it will be that bit more difficult to persuade people that we're credible.   

A young promising player living in London is highly unlikely to shift to up north for a chance at a moderate pay packet if they end up as one of the few on very good salaries, they could stay down south and earn the same at a middling union club.  Regardless of what some people snobbishly think of with London, they are a massive beacon (good word Viking Warrior) for youngsters in the game playing at the lower tier clubs in London and the South and it would be a painful long-term loss to the game.

My views exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My views exactly.

Moderators and admins can't be put on ignore :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderators and admins can't be put on ignore :P

Both myself and Parky are both mods. I'm a mod in the NCL forum (not a lot of work tbh).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both myself and Parky are both mods. I'm a mod in the NCL forum (not a lot of work tbh).

Ah, sorry, should have been more specific.  Moderating rights only exist for the forum you're appointed to, it only overrides ignores on those forums.  That said, there have been a few big changes to the forum recently, might not work quite like that any more.

 

Also, sorry for taking this off topic.  My fault.  Please keep on topic from here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the travel time between Hemel and Oxford?  It's got to be the at least 90 minutes, or worse.

Did it last year after a football match at Oxford United.

An hour to get out of the Kassam Stadium car park, then an hour home

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My views exactly.

But it doesn't deliver what the typical Londoner wants.

To have a sustainable London based club you have to build a sustainable RL community around you - impossible if you're on the move every other season.

Create an identity - difficult if you are called "London", rather than the "East Ham Dragons" or whatever.

And develop your players. Oh and a fair bit of money from sustainable sources.

On the other end of that is the credibility. ATM it seems no-one takes RL seriously in the capital, it's not big enough a sport and the club is too small. Further by funding a false London SL club you do nothing to create any more credibility than you would by having a sustainable club in the championship. I may actually undermine your plans when the truth is revealed.

There are other ways to build huge credibility for RL in London without chucking money down the drain. It just takes some guts to make strategic rather than tactical decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely, but SL is the only full time professional league, and as such, is viewed (by the union fans where I work at least) as the benchmark of the "spread" of the game. I don't necessarily subscribe to this view, but those from outside the game that I know, do.

 

Point taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did it last year after a football match at Oxford United.

An hour to get out of the Kassam Stadium car park, then an hour home

 

Fair enough.  I've spent a good chunk of my working life stuck between the two.

 

I'm not sure I'd include Oxford in the London "group" though, it's not really London, but then neither is London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. But it doesn't deliver what the typical Londoner wants.

2. There are other ways to build huge credibility for RL in London without chucking money down the drain. It just takes some guts to make strategic rather than tactical decisions.

1. Oh come on. There are many RL clubs that don't deliver what the customer wants in traditional places. Inadequate numbers of fans to sustain vibrant RL clubs can be found in York, Rochdale, Widnes and east Hull as well as london. Hemel delivered to 122 fans the other week. HKR lose money on 7,000 fans - why pick on London again?

2. The reason for London in SL has been expplained by various RL luminaries down the years and the fact is those reasons have changed around and we have ended up where we are which was last years RLW article on London that stated their value was in the player production system.

So when you talk about the reason for London Broncos being to "make RL credible" it's not is it. The reason for London Broncos is to expand the player pool.

I've also posted the answer to chucking money down the drain. Do you want me to analyse all the millions of private money and SKY money thrown away on a whole series of traditional and expansion clubs? Why pick on London again??

Neil Hudgell spoke about how he's been chucking his money away on HKR as there is a glass ceiling in Superleague.

The problem is basically SKY provide £90 million for a professional rugby league. That money is pretty much shared out evenly wether your a club with a rich chairman and 10,000 crowds or wether your "important to expanding the player base".

London haven't nearly been killed off because londoners aren't interested. Manchester/Salford people are just as capable of gross disinterest. I posted Londons decent crowd figures 1996-7-8 on the other day. London have not been nearly killed off through just bad management. The game has merely decided it wants London to deliver a player development system and compete in SL but it won't allow the club a penny more than anyone else to achieve that.....

The expectations have been far beyond the practicalities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough.  I've spent a good chunk of my working life stuck between the two.

 

I'm not sure I'd include Oxford in the London "group" though, it's not really London, but then neither is London.

It's not a London group as such as Hemel isn't London either. It's a London plus bits of the home counties group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is, and I'm happy to be corrected, that the conference level clubs that have done best at producing young players (outside the 'heartlands') are the ones with London Broncos near by.

 

Yes, Im not disagreeing with any of what you've put Jon, it was more a minor quibble of what seemed like an incorrect summary of "No Bronks in SL=No RL south of widnes/warrington, etc".

 

FWIW I'd love to see top level RL in London and everywhere else too. But the Broncos are doing more harm than good in their current state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it doesn't deliver what the typical Londoner wants.

To have a sustainable London based club you have to build a sustainable RL community around you - impossible if you're on the move every other season.

Create an identity - difficult if you are called "London", rather than the "East Ham Dragons" or whatever.

And develop your players. Oh and a fair bit of money from sustainable sources.

On the other end of that is the credibility. ATM it seems no-one takes RL seriously in the capital, it's not big enough a sport and the club is too small. Further by funding a false London SL club you do nothing to create any more credibility than you would by having a sustainable club in the championship. I may actually undermine your plans when the truth is revealed.

There are other ways to build huge credibility for RL in London without chucking money down the drain. It just takes some guts to make strategic rather than tactical decisions.

 

What on earth is a typical Londoner?  There are 8 million or so, and it's probably one of the most culturally diverse cities on the planet.

 

I agree with you about the static base, it's certainly hard to get established if you're flitting around every few years or worse.  The name is well worth thinking about, but that can only come if you have a firm solid home to call your own (or secure tenancy).  I wonder how much this was debated or whether they defaulted to London when the days at Craven Cottage came to an end.

 

What strategic decisions should be taken in your view?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting thing is while the "London" name is seen as a mistake; Skolars, who have had a very stable base for their entire semi-pro existence, are also "London".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there is a feeling at the RFL that the natural place for a London side right now is in the Championship. There seems to be a decent production line of players coming thru in the South East and having a presence in the Championship leagues is a clear development pathway for players from that part of the country. Given that more and more SL clubs will be looking at the lower leagues to find value signings who are the next Walmsely or Hill should not mean that the lack of a London SL side hinders talent development.

You need to deal with the point made by a number of people inc CKN, that if Rugby kids in london start as RL juniors and then go on to London RL championship clubs they won't have a pro career unless they travel up north to be developed by an M62 club.

I don't see many RL professionals coming out of championship clubs in the north let alone london??

Shall we kick Catalans out because their developing players can all just go and live along the M62?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting thing is while the "London" name is seen as a mistake; Skolars, who have had a very stable base for their entire semi-pro existence, are also "London".

There are examples for and against.  To my mind, nothing looks less natural than a franchise suddenly calling itself London.  British Basketball must have had a dozen of the buggers; London Monarchs never sounded right; the addition of 'London' to Wasps is hilarious.  The Skolars always strike me as first and foremost being 'the Skolars', the London bit to this outsider seeming the less important.

 

It's also worth noting that the London fans do chant 'London' - even in our 'Lahndan' way.  I haven't often heard anyone cheer on 'the Broncos'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All we've learnt over the past 3 decades is that those people in London who know that the Broncos exist won't come out to support a very badly run club. To simply say the London public don't want a SL team is wrong.

Indeed, and again we can equally state on that logic that most of northern britain don't want RL either. Certainly not championship RL which is where people are shuffling them off to with a "don't worry you'll be all right there".

I'm fine with saying no to French clubs because they bring no away fans and are full of Aussies, I'm also happy to say no to Broncos because they aren't successful in SL. Let's have an M62 league again, at least we can all fail in our own back yard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's also worth noting that the London fans do chant 'London' - even in our 'Lahndan' way.  I haven't often heard anyone cheer on 'the Broncos'.

 

In fairness you're not going to stand much chance from your sofa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fairness you're not going to stand much chance from your sofa.

 

Oooo ... I'm not getting back up from that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you about the static base, it's certainly hard to get established if you're flitting around, that can only come if you have a firm solid home to call your own

I think Batley have had a firm solid base for well over 100 years???

Put them in instead of London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to deal with the point made by a number of people inc CKN, that if Rugby kids in london start as RL juniors and then go on to London RL championship clubs they won't have a pro career unless they travel up north to be developed by an M62 club.

I don't see many RL professionals coming out of championship clubs in the north let alone london??

Shall we kick Catalans out because their developing players can all just go and live along the M62?

You need to deal with the reality that London are not being kicked out of SL, if the rumours are true then they are kicking themselves out (much as Crusaders did) so your rhetoric is misdirected.

 

The player production line is something the game needs to deal with but "players heading north to have a career" is something that is already happening. LMS did it, Sarginson looks like he is next, there will be others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Batley have had a firm solid base for well over 100 years???

Put them in instead of London.

 

Please stop trolling, it's very boring.

 

Do you agree or disagree that it would be easier to get established if the side had a firm solid base?  I'll take the liberty of answering for you and say that you agree.  Just because the recently much improved Batley club had had a solid base, but is not a major force in the game or challenging for a top flight place is not a counter argument against the benefits of having one.

 

We should be proud of the way that some of the currently smaller clubs have had fans that have stood by them through thick and thin despite in part their nomadic existences.  Ideally we'd like them all to have had firm bases, but that can't always be the case.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to deal with the reality that London are not being kicked out of SL, if the rumours are true then they are kicking themselves out (much as Crusaders did) so your rhetoric is misdirected.

 

Whether Crusaders kicked themselves out or whether the RFL did still remains shrouded in mystery as far as I'm concerned.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether Crusaders kicked themselves out or whether the RFL did still remains shrouded in mystery as far as I'm concerned.  

 

Crusaders kicked themselves out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Oh come on. There are many RL clubs that don't deliver what the customer wants in traditional places. Inadequate numbers of fans to sustain vibrant RL clubs can be found in York, Rochdale, Widnes and east Hull as well as london. Hemel delivered to 122 fans the other week. HKR lose money on 7,000 fans - why pick on London again?

2. The reason for London in SL has been expplained by various RL luminaries down the years and the fact is those reasons have changed around and we have ended up where we are which was last years RLW article on London that stated their value was in the player production system.

So when you talk about the reason for London Broncos being to "make RL credible" it's not is it. The reason for London Broncos is to expand the player pool.

I've also posted the answer to chucking money down the drain. Do you want me to analyse all the millions of private money and SKY money thrown away on a whole series of traditional and expansion clubs? Why pick on London again??

Neil Hudgell spoke about how he's been chucking his money away on HKR as there is a glass ceiling in Superleague.

The problem is basically SKY provide £90 million for a professional rugby league. That money is pretty much shared out evenly wether your a club with a rich chairman and 10,000 crowds or wether your "important to expanding the player base".

London haven't nearly been killed off because londoners aren't interested. Manchester/Salford people are just as capable of gross disinterest. I posted Londons decent crowd figures 1996-7-8 on the other day. London have not been nearly killed off through just bad management. The game has merely decided it wants London to deliver a player development system and compete in SL but it won't allow the club a penny more than anyone else to achieve that.....

The expectations have been far beyond the practicalities.

I'm not interested in the vagaries of RL in other places, or of other times. My comments are regarding London, as of now as per the thread title. I have also offered my take on a solution.

However I will respond to your comments here and now and will not again to save the degeneration of the thread at such a young age.

The credibility comment I made is based on what other posters have experienced discussing RL in London at work with disinterested parties so what are you on bout? It's a big problem clearly. I never said it was the reason London exists but the majority of the stories and credibility of the sport in London fall squarely on the shoulders of 1 final, and x rounds of SL played out by a failing down-trodden team.

Also there are sustainable clubs everywhere, sustaining an SL club in London has it's own factors unrelated to those in York and clearly it is not possible to carry on sustaining it as it stands now. We'll worry about York if and when they make SL.

Regarding the player production system, you ignore the facts and back track on posts made a few months ago. Clearly SL clubs don't want the responsibility of developing players otherwise they wouldn't have dropped the academies. You and I also agreed that grass roots development was the way forward. Not having an SL club in London does not affect this at all. Class will always win through. The problem is whether more championship clubs in the conurbation of London will be enough. An untried phenomenon you either fear or embrace.

Also you accuse me of picking on London again. Boo hoo. You clearly like playing the victim.

Regarding the money side, what have London done to capitalise on it apart from create a new logo?

And finally Londoners aren't interested. Face facts. I'll bet there are far more exiles watching the Bronco's than bona fide Londoners. However I'll bet a few Londoners would happily go on a jolly to watch the world club challenge at Wembley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017