Trouble at Harlequins?

[The Parksider]

Something for juniors to aspire to is one thing, but surely they have to go watch and want to be part of it as well.

The free season ticket deal a year or so back showed they only wanted to play for their club side, not go watch S/L for nowt.

How deep are the RFL pockets this time, what impact will Quins folding have on Juniors?(I suspect very little on the second bit if the development officers are still in place)

Playing and watching sport is two different things surely?

I've watched RL avidly all my life but hardly played it compared to soccer. Lads in our junior soccer club on the whole don't watch Leeds United and it's just down the road?

Take your point on the development officers though, how much they get the kids playing against Quins is something to consider.....

[Northern Sol]

You should have quit whilst you were ahead.

Now you are completely over the top suggesting getting signed to an SL or NL academy side is "making it".

By your definition if a couple of hundred lads a year are "making it" then, we'll have the Aussies shivering.

Lets see who actually comes into SL and does the business....

Given that the Northampton club has only been going a few years, it would be absurd to expect them to have turned out any SL regulars. And yet you do.

At most any of their players might have 3 years' experience of rugby league.

Edited August 29, 2010 by Northern Sol

[The Parksider]

Given that the Northampton club has only been going a few years, it would be absurd to expect them to have turned out any SL regulars. And yet you do.

At most any of their players might have 3 years' experience of rugby league.

Nice try but getting signed to academies is not "making it".

[bewareshadows]

There seams to be an unspoken fear that the Quins equal Super League and that a league with no Quins will lose everything that has been gained since SL came into existance.

I think this fear is exagerated from the fact the London Broncos were created from the Fulham club at the start of SL. SKY did broadcast and put money into RL pre-SL and would continue to do so whether it was called SL or the Ultimo league, whether it had a London club or not or 3 London clubs. I'm sure the London club allows the RFL to charge a higher premium from SKY by arguing national rather than region interest, but the same can be argued for the addition of Catalan meaning they can bid based on a European interest. However the value of this premium is quite unknown to pretty much everyone. For certain no one on here knows what London RL adds to the value of the contract.

For some years SL opperated without a European side and the loss and then addition of the French side did not seam to effect the value that the RL could get from SKY.

So actually the loss of Quins may effect the contract in exactly the same way ie not at all.

Sure there is a great regional strength in RL based along the M62, however with clubs in both Wales and France, I think the RL can argue that there is a wider appeal and to be honest I don't think SKY are idiots and know very well that 2000 fans watching in London demonstrates very little.

I am not anti expansion, but neither am I expansion at all costs including the cost of the club and the league itself. I'm not a huge fan of the London name as I feel this identifies with no one. London is huge bigger than some countries in population and is far too big for one club to appeal to all. I think the London name has more emphasis for those outside of London than those in it. Look at other sporting clubs in London and they are far more local, basing themselves around a region or town within london, not the whole place. Quins name did nothing as it's not local or city wide, it's just a RU club one of the most famous in the world, I understand that at the time it was nessasary but I think that has always been the way with the London club since the start of SL.

There has been no long term strategy, just tactical planning and firefighting at each stage. I think if the RL can get them to the end of the licence all well and good, but in the end IMHO, a whole rebuild probably in the Championship is what is required.

I would much prefer for 'London' to find a home they can afford long term, be that Milton Keynes or London or anywhere without the need for a sugar daddy. As if we are always looking for people to invest with no monetary return well the list of suckers is fast running short. I would hope that if London was lost at the next round then it would be replaced with another expansion club such as tolouse in addition to the already stated franchise system. So that would mean Tolouse and Widnes up. London to rebuild alongside another club that did not meet the franchise criterion. With the aim to move to 16 teams 3 years later with a financially stable, 'London' club to be one to return for certain. After hopefully having 3 successful years on and off the field building good finances, players and fans who have had some reward in terms of cup and league success.

I know it may sound niave but only as naive as every other attempt to fix the London club from day one.

[Chronicler of Chiswick]

I don't think the RFL should spend any money on bailing out any club, full stop. Otherwise the spending will never stop and will simply increase whatever antipathy might exist towards whichever club(s) are involved.

Should the RFL also contemplate bailing out Whitehaven, or is this simply too far-fetched to contemplate?

That's a good point - bailing us out (which I wouldn't agree with) could set a dangerous precedent. Look how much Saints lost in the last financial year - they'd be straight onto Red Hall for a cheque for

[Northern Sol]

That's a good point - bailing us out (which I wouldn't agree with) could set a dangerous precedent. Look how much Saints lost in the last financial year - they'd be straight onto Red Hall for a cheque for

[The Future is League]

lets be honest and admit that a lot of Rugby League people are happy for the game only to be played in the M62 corridor in this country, so they will be happy with the Quins RL situation. sky will be happy as they will pay less for covering Rugby League with no Super League club in London. if people think that sky will pay the same or more for Rugby League without a super League club in London they are kidding themselves its not going to happen. if you don't believe me speak to the people at the RFL who are aware of the situation as regards the importance of having a Super League team in London.

Edited August 29, 2010 by The Future is League

[Blind side johnny]

lets be honest and admit that a lot of Rugby League people are happy for the game only to be played in the M62 corridor in this country, so they will be happy with the Quins RL situation. sky will be happy as they will pay less for covering Rugby League with no Super League club in London. if people think that sky will pay the same or more for Rugby League without a super League club in London they are kidding themselves its not going to happen. if you don't believe me speak to the people at the RFL who are aware of the situation as regards the importance of having a Super League team in London.

How does having a club in London affect Sky's audience and the ammount that they can generate from advertising during RL games? My guess is not a lot and if the RFL can't negotiate around that then they are pretty poor at their jobs. Remember ESPN has now snaffled a chunk of the RU rights so Sky should be keen to maintain their grip on our game. Comparison of the viewing figures provides interesting reading.

[bowes]

lets be honest and admit that a lot of Rugby League people are happy for the game only to be played in the M62 corridor in this country, so they will be happy with the Quins RL situation. sky will be happy as they will pay less for covering Rugby League with no Super League club in London. if people think that sky will pay the same or more for Rugby League without a super League club in London they are kidding themselves its not going to happen. if you don't believe me speak to the people at the RFL who are aware of the situation as regards the importance of having a Super League team in London.

We should be honest and admit there's no proof a club with few fans in London makes an iota of difference to the SL contract. Also it's a myth that a lot of fans want no expansion of the sport. Fans would love a thriving London SL club, what noone but the truly crazy want is the RFL bankrupting themselves by bailing out an unviable club with few fans to the tune of

[The Future is League]

How does having a club in London affect Sky's audience and the ammount that they can generate from advertising during RL games? My guess is not a lot and if the RFL can't negotiate around that then they are pretty poor at their jobs. Remember ESPN has now snaffled a chunk of the RU rights so Sky should be keen to maintain their grip on our game. Comparison of the viewing figures provides interesting reading.

if your in the camp that thinks the sky will pay as much for Rugby League without a super league club in London your wrong. less money from sky means less money going to Super League clubs. if you don't believe there is nothing i can do about it, but i am right.

[Northern Sol]

if your in the camp that thinks the sky will pay as much for Rugby League without a super league club in London your wrong. less money from sky means less money going to Super League clubs. if you don't believe there is nothing i can do about it, but i am right.

I think you may be forced to face your delusions rather soon.

Bronquins are of such a low profile that they couldn't find a backer after three years of Lenaghan trying. Now I'm willing to believe that Sky wanted Bronquins in back in the mid and late 90s but they clearly don't give a **** about them now.

It is ludicrous to argue that it is self-evident that Sky value RL as being worth millions more with Bronquins in but have no explanation as to why Sky have never shown any interest in bailing Bronquins out of their various crises.

[Northern Sol]

if your in the camp that thinks the sky will pay as much for Rugby League without a super league club in London your wrong. less money from sky means less money going to Super League clubs. if you don't believe there is nothing i can do about it, but i am right.

It is no much of an argument. There is no logical reason why Sky should want Bronquins in, they don't do anything for Sky Sport's profile or for rugby league's profile.

[The Future is League]

We should be honest and admit there's no proof a club with few fans in London makes an iota of difference to the SL contract. Also it's a myth that a lot of fans want no expansion of the sport. Fans would love a thriving London SL club, what noone but the truly crazy want is the RFL bankrupting themselves by bailing out an unviable club with few fans to the tune of

[goldcard]

Playing and watching sport is two different things surely?

I've watched RL avidly all my life but hardly played it compared to soccer. Lads in our junior soccer club on the whole don't watch Leeds United and it's just down the road?

Take your point on the development officers though, how much they get the kids playing against Quins is something to consider.....

As a teen, I watched when I could, and really wanted to pull the primrose and blue on.

As I played, it was obvious I wasn't that good, but I then wondered, before my knee went, if maybe second tier second team could be my level, but I didn't get to go ask for a trial anyway on a whim, my doc said retire (at 19!!!, didn't last but I'd lost too much fitnes/edge by the time I played again)

I guess being from Warrington, or Wazza for the Sport readers on here, it's more ingrained, if you love the game it's want you want to do.

London is a whole bigger ball-park, and with real access to venue issues.

[The Future is League]

I think you may be forced to face your delusions rather soon.

Bronquins are of such a low profile that they couldn't find a backer after three years of Lenaghan trying. Now I'm willing to believe that Sky wanted Bronquins in back in the mid and late 90s but they clearly don't give a **** about them now.

It is ludicrous to argue that it is self-evident that Sky value RL as being worth millions more with Bronquins in but have no explanation as to why Sky have never shown any interest in bailing Bronquins out of their various crises.

come the next TV contract without a Super League club in London i will be proven right. all i'm doing is pointing out to you what the RFL know and are aware of. i'm not saying the RFL should prop up the Quins i'm telling you what will happen if they don't. the RFL are stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one.

[Northern Sol]

look if your happy for Quins RL to go to the wall thats up to you. all i'm pointing out to you is that with no Super League club in London the money from sky will be less.

And all we are pointing out that is that there is no reason to presume this. None at all.

[Pen-Y-Bont Crusader]

Easy solution to all to all this 'Sky won't pay up without Quins/London side' is to call their bluff/the RFL's bluff.

When RU went professional down here and they went to regional rugby Lllanelli needed 'bailing out' by the WRU. Cardiff and Newport have also needed the same. In each case the WRU stumped up the cash. For the Celtic Warriors (under Mr Samuel ) when they need the money the WRU left them high and dry leaving top level rugby to disappear from the Mid-Glamorgan Valleys.

Now to be fair the support has drifted principally to Ospreys and in the more easterly valleys to the Blues, but Quins don't have the geographical competition. You'll see kids in London (if they are still bothered) supporting Warrington/Saints/Wigan etc etc which will do nothing for developing RL as they will always aspire to 'Go North' just as Welsh RU players did in shamateur days. Unless they transfer allegiance to Skolars/Hemel - but that would never happen in the 21st Century world where kids will always support the best E.g Chelsea/Man U in the Premier League

Whatever happens the Quins need the support of everyone in the game.

[Pen-Y-Bont Crusader]

Double Post.

Edited August 29, 2010 by Pen-Y-Bont Crusader

[The Future is League]

And all we are pointing out that is that there is no reason to presume this. None at all.

the next sky deal without a London Super League club will be less than the clubs are getting now. i hate to say to anybody i told you so, but a Quinsless Super League = less sky money.

[Father Ted]

Perhaps one view of it would be that if the London viewing of RL on SKY is large, say 10-15% of the total then perhaps that percentage of SKY revenue should go to Quins. That would transform their finances and maybe persuade Mr Hughes to stay if he doesn't have to dig in his pocket every year.

The remaining % of the SKY money could then be shared out between the other 13 clubs on an equal basis.

If the SKY money from the London area is disproportionally high then surely there's a case that Quins should benefit from the viewers "they" bring to the game?

Plenty arguments against but it would solve Quins financial problems overnight!

[Northern Sol]

Perhaps one view of it would be that if the London viewing of RL on SKY is large, say 10-15% of the total then perhaps that percentage of SKY revenue should go to Quins.

The issue being that people who live in London aren't necessarily Quins fans, quite a few Northerners live in London.

That would transform their finances and maybe persuade Mr Hughes to stay if he doesn't have to dig in his pocket every year.

The remaining % of the SKY money could then be shared out between the other 13 clubs on an equal basis.

If the SKY money from the London area is disproportionally high then surely there's a case that Quins should benefit from the viewers "they" bring to the game?

Plenty arguments against but it would solve Quins financial problems overnight!

And create lots of others, before you know it Leeds will be asking why they only get the same money as Wakefield.

[Northern Sol]

the next sky deal without a London Super League club will be less than the clubs are getting now. i hate to say to anybody i told you so, but a Quinsless Super League = less sky money.

Time will tell but the reality is that Sky are the only bidder for SL and they pay pretty much what they feel like paying. And that's just about enough to keep the game full time (since this is the product they want). I don't for a minute believe that they pay a "London premium" so they can televise an empty stadia in Twickenham. Perhaps they would if Quins were a well-supported team but they aren't and almost certainly never will be.

[Mumby Magic]

the next sky deal without a London Super League club will be less than the clubs are getting now. i hate to say to anybody i told you so, but a Quinsless Super League = less sky money.

But if Toulouse join SL?

[paley]

the next sky deal without a London Super League club will be less than the clubs are getting now. i hate to say to anybody i told you so, but a Quinsless Super League = less sky money.

Sky pay what they feel the game needs. I doubt they care if there is a team in London or not.

[EastLondonMike]

id be interested to know what the RFL are doing to attract investors in a london RL team.. are they actively looking for investment or merely waiting for it to fall from the sky or knock on the front door??.. from looking at other sports there appear to be a great deal of rich people eager to involve themselves in pro sports teams.. Russian oilgarch's, uber rich arab families, Asian businessmen with endless bank accounts.. i would have thought with a bit of investment (not a great amount) a London RL team could become absolutely huge.. bigger then any club currently playing the game.. the potential here is massive. but it does need someone whose prepared to not only put in some investment to make the team a good and winning one, but someone whose also prepared and able to create a sustained marketing and PR campaign to make the masses in London aware and interested in watching and supporting this team. its been done in football with arsenal and chelsea, two teams who through the success of the premie rleague and the major investment in the clubs, have attracted fans to their games on a regular basis who 15 years ago would never have set foot in a football ground for love nor money. nor who would have watched a game of football on TV..