If London can't start the 2014 season they should go with 13 teams and only relegate one team next year. There is no fair way to promote a Championship team under the present system and, at such short notice, no team could even hope to raise a team capable of competing.

Not Featherstone, that's for sure!

Should've had Bradford out, and them, cut to 12

Think you are wrong there mate. Toulouse ? A Welsh team which one I wonder.



Re Fax Ski slope Fev or a Cumbrian team' please





London will be at Barnet FC next season and will be replaced by a team from the Championship the season after. I know which club it is too.

No, please explain why not Fev.

Er starting with Sky wanting a London team well on the evidence of interest by the size of the crowds London have always got then why? How can a sport where the population have no interest be a 'seller' for a TV station? That argument is flawed.

As for money being pumped in well nobody can prove this as we don't get to see where clubs money comes from do we, do you???

Lets be honest if Richard Branson can't make it work then nobody can he pulled out and that tells us a lot!

As for relegation yer London aint finished last (nearly have though) but if they had they were protected from relegation by this obsession with a SL club in London so not a relevant argument that one.

As for players well I agree that it is harder to get players to move down south BUT the overseas player allowances were too high making it counter productive as the idea was to get local lads playing not a boat load of Aussies!

London still has a pro semi team in the Skolars and hopefully a phoenix Broncos in the same league which with good housekeeping could rise into the Championship which if they did I would welcome them.

But my resentment is the RFL wanting a London club in SL at any price when there obviously is not the appetite for it, accept the facts.

I say again does Gaelic football care it is only played in Ireland? No and they get decent crowds and own a huge stadium!

Don't ask me about the merits of it, but SKY apparently wanted it. BTW.....it is easier to sell advertising and sponsorship for a "national" comp rather than a Northern sport.





So basically you have no proof of the "extra" payments that are often claimed but never shown? As for knowing where London's cash comes from.....yes, I do. It is information in the public domain.....as of 2011 we owed David Hughes over 7.5 million quid.....but as hard as you search, you'll never, ever find these back door payments to London....



Branson had no idea what he was buying and like those before and after, he subscribed to the RFL version of marketing 101.....STICK POSTS IN THE GROUND AND ANNOUNCE A KO TIME....







First up, close or "nearly" wins you no prizes and secondly, have you any proof that London were protected? I suggest you look in the same place you search for proof of the "extra" payments..









Local lads playing RL or local RL players.....there is a massive difference. LMS to Saints and Now Clubb to Wigan as well as Dixon being courted by Salford and Wigan is a sign it is starting to work.....but the Fed rule crippled London's chances of being competitive...





Check out the Skolars squad list and tell me how many are products of the London SL sides yoof and academy work.....80%+ is the answer. Without a pro-team, the pathway to professional Rugby in London and the SE isn't league...





Your argument is based purely on crowds at the SL club..........London's presence in SL costs the other clubs about 0.005% of their turn over in lost ticket sales.....the away fans smokescreen has been shown to be exactly that, a smokescreen. Home crowds are London's problem and that isn't down to no interest...that is down to marketing and administration....







WTF

Do you think SKY want a northern sport on their books at the current rate they pay? RL got owned by ing Darts last season and SKY were happy to let the RLWC go.....and as for expansion and not caring, I have 2 words for you that show how it should be done.



MELBOURNE STORM.

Deluded my friend, take a look at what you have put and one big fact stands out a Director pumped in £7.5 million now that says it all!

You are contradicting yourself regards players cos if some of the Skolars players are good enough they WILL get picked up by SL clubs and you have proven a couple in your post.

So what you are saying is its everybody else's fault cos there has not been enough marketing to make London Broncos a success, well the fact is all the marketing in the world sadly won't get a city who have more interest in NFL than RL come to watch, it is and always will be a Northern game is that so bad???

We have to wake up to the fact that in over 100 years it has been tried and tried and still expansion of our game has failed so again does it matter if you look at Gaelic football?

Sky have Scottish football and who watches that outside Scotland?

Oh and now you are also throwing in Melbourne Storm but I will throw back at you Perth!

First up....how are the links to the "extra" payments and "protection from relegation" coming along?





The Skolars are competitive now...they weren't as little as 5 years ago when they were winning 1 game a season. The reason for this? That's right...the development work done by the London SL side.

As for who's fault it is...I say it is 50/50 blame between incompetent management and ownership at the club and the RFL and other SL clubs......as for marketing, if we did any I'd be better placed to judge on potential interest, but when the RFL marketed the WCC warm up game, we got 7,500+ to see Manly...when we did 2-4-1 beers v Leeds we got 6,500. The debate is who should pay for the team and market it when the only real beneficiaries are the game itself?



If most people had your attitude of "we tried, it didn't work, let's forget it" we'd all be speaking German now.



Don't forget now...links to the "extra payments" and "protection from relegation"....there's a good chap





Oh...Perth. Perth will be in the NRL within 10 years and will average between 12k and 16k....the southern states aren't interested, but Perth, Brisbane ii, Central coasts and NZ II will all be part of the comp within 15 years....with proper expansion.



Melbourne were on extra cash for 18 years and the other NRL clubs didn't whine, but you northern monkeys cry like babies because "you think" London get extra cash but you can't prove it...

Good to see some healthy debate over what is clearly an emotive subject regarding the merits of London staying in SL.

It's ironic that previous criteria that kept Fax out SL at franchise time like stadium suitability;community rugby development;reaching required minimum average crowds; being financially solvent, seem to have been overlooked for a number of SL clubs by the same custodians of the game who set the rules in the first place! (and yes currently the latest example looks to be London)

The bigger picture for me is this current farce of having a current SL club with 6 registered players a few weeks ago, being unable to raise a team to play a local annual derby v London Solars, have no ground to play from at the time of writing and are now applying for administration. That is hardly the actions of an elite club!Owing £7.5m to one man is hardly a sound business plan and is simply not sustainable if he removed his funding.

Whichever way you cut it, London and a few others in SL are simply not ticking the current boxes.

So as the revolution starts to take place we need to decide if this current expansion policy, with no main commercial sponsor for the game is the right one, or if we need to take a different direction to ringfence what is left of the game.

Over you you SL clubs and RFL............... you have the future of this great game in your hands!!!!!

What could possibly go wrong?

even the aussies saw this coming www.leaguefreak.com/what-shall-w ... ncos-6201/

even the aussies saw this coming www.leaguefreak.com/what-shall-w ... ncos-6201/