On the contrary, I think some people believe that Harlequins make rugby league what it is. Put it this way, the only thing Harlequins disappearing or being demoted will do is potentially alter the TV deal. In the time that we've had rugby league in London, national media coverage has decreased significantly and during the time I was doing my dissertation, one of my interviewees stated that the perception on most editorial desks is that we're still very much a Northern sport (which we are)

However, I cannot see us suddenly going from overnight to a new dawn where no games are televised. A broadcaster will pick it up as it is a marketable game. Potentially, someone like PremierSports could invest in it and suddenly find themselves with 400,000 new customers over night. And similarly, if Sky dropped rugby league, I'd estimate a few people may reduce their Sky package not to include Sky Sports. Obviously it's all ifs and buts but people are making assumptions and using them as fact. We don't know until it happens.

A very good post

I think we need to be a bit careful and not jump to conclusions as no-one knows what sort of assistance has been requested or provided.
However, I think the RFL needs to be very careful. In the 'good old days' an existing SL club's survival in SL depended on its performance on the field and the team with the fewest points at the end of the year was relegated. In those circumstances assisting a team to stay up by say, awarding them 3 points for a win whilst everyone else got 2, or disallowing every 3rd try their opponents scored would have been viewed as outrageous and would have made a mockery of the sport. Nowadays a club's survival in the SL is largely dependent on their financial performance with less emphasis on the on-field performance, so providing certain teams with financial support whilst denying it to others is not all that different to this hypothetical extra points scenario.
I can understand (though don't necessarily agree) with giving clubs from expansion areas like Catalans & Crusaders a hand for the first 3 years when they first enter the competition but no established club should be treated any differently to any other otherwise they risk making the 'competition' a laughing stock.

There is no way at all that the RFL should bail out London. The whole London thing has been a failure from start to finish and IMO if we want to expand the game then it should be from the heartlands outwards, not by just sticking satellite clubs in areas where they think they have a good catchment area.

If a business is failing (and needing to be propped up by £1.5 million per annum is failing in my book) then why chuck more money at it? The Harlequins are trying to compete in a league that they are not ready for, the business is just not right for SL. They get poor attendances and whilst the player development is certainly improving, it's not at SL level as yet. There is no way they should get a franchise and i'd like to see them drop down to say Championship 1 and start to build their business from there.

When we have clubs like Widnes, who (whilst they have had financial problems in the past) have now clearly got everything in place to run an SL franchise, I can't understand why they keep propping up the London experiment. I don't actually have anything against the London club and would love to see them get to the level where they can run a franchise properly, but they are simply not at that level and it would be just ludicrous to keep financing them indefinately with the hope that they will one day make it.

David Hughes hasn't asked for financial assistance-I spoke to him 2 days after his meeting with Woods from the RFL-He is rich enough to fund the club but is unwilling to fund it all as a 35% owner. Lennegan being the owner of 65%.

Why do they need their own ground-Hull FC, Wigan etc dont have

He should buy Lenegans 65% then, everyones happy

If an astute business man with pockets as deep as Branson pulled out from the Bronco's...why do we feel that the bafoons at the RFL know better then he did, and can somehow make it work. Business IQ Branson Versus the RFL...who's your money on?? C'mon get real!!

There are decisions made every year in the RFL that we all simply have to accept and move on from. The RFL have been and tried for many years and it hasn't worked. Wrap up it up and move on, don't go throwing more good money after bad money.

The Challenge cup weekend has just been and gone, and was attended by fans from clubs....big and small. I attended and saw three Quins shirts and not a single London amateur club shirt. It isn't working down there, lets just accept it and move on.

Is that how success is judged these days

Branson is a money maker-No one who owns a sports club makes money generally

I disagree about Harlequins having any effect about the amount of money Sky put into the game. Very very few Southerners watch the game. But I know plenty of people in Cas that would cancel their sports package if rugby league wasn't on. Some even cancel during the off season. So the fear of losing Northerners sky money is more of a factor than having a failing Southern team made up of Northerners with a sprinkling of Southerners and forgieners.

On TV? I'm sure I saw a statistic that the majority of Sky viewers of RL were based in the south.

EDIT: Indeed I did, here: [url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/about/page.php?id=159&areaid=26550 per cent of viewers who watch Rugby League on Sky Sports live in the South of England[/url

I don't undestand why we find it so difficult to get them to turn up to matches then! Something is going wrong somewhere.