You mean the young Katie that is you and Baz?

Hopefully, this might help get people in next week... www.thisislondon.co.uk/esrewards ... m-stoop.do

Hopefully, this might help get people in next week... www.thisislondon.co.uk/esrewards ... m-stoop.do

Lol @ anyone thinking "hundreds of thousands" of kids have been playing RL in London schools for "20+ years".

This is undoubtably "true" as they were being trained in Hull by HKR.

Havn't you been reading these forums?

The results are obvious to see in their first team

Troll

No. Not even close. There might be more than 100 teams in London though. A club might run several teams.

Tbh I thought the article rather over-egged the pudding (probably why John Drake referred to it as "controversial" in the editorial).

E.g.

Fact: Sky figures show that very many people in the south watch RL on Sky Sports
O'Hare's interpretation: All these people are southerners

Fact: Youth RL has a relatively high level of participation in the south
Glossed over truth: Most kids that do play RL, play a much shorter season than would be the norm in heartlands areas.

He did make some good points and tbf there has been a lot of good development at grassroots levels going in London but I think the article gave the impression that the talent conveyor belt in London is more developed than it really is. It is still early days.

Where are these 'James Robys" at Wakefield, Hull KR, Castleford, Salford, Warrington, Huddersfield and so on? If that's the only standard of player that you're allowed to bring through now, then there won't be many decent players coming through in future then.
At least we're actually developing players and playing them, many of your beloved 'traditionial' clubs don't give two s about development, except come licence time when they suddenly have such amazing development and plenty of talent coming through.

And if you think LMS is posh, then you're an idiot. Btw, internationals we had last year, were Clubb, O'Callaghan, Bryan and Krasniqi (Academy). We've also got three players named in the under 16s squad (two of them having "posh" names btw) and another three in the England Academy squad, so get your facts right before spouting rubbish.

Hate to be bitchy Leaguefan (esp about a club I respect) but when the Cougars get into SL you can have a go at us...

*

* And yes, I still stand by your club and sympathise with you been completely screwed over in the 90's, but I just had to reply, sorry.

You will have a long wait.

I actually hope you're wrong though mate - fantastic club who had huge potential pre-SL, one of the definite casualties of the modern era.

must be one of the biggest sob stories of the modern rl era - the fall & rise & fall of a great rl institution...?

I don't know anything about them and if I'm totally honest I had never heard of them before I joined this site.

Have they ever been in the 'big time'?

No, but if Super League places for the 1996 debut season had been decided on achievements on the rugby pitch (rather then preferential treatment....

) the Cougars would have been.

The fickleness of their so called "supporters" when they failed to get into Super League speaks volumes. They had their chance the year after and bottled it.

Why didn't they get in?

Was it a financial thing or was it just because they were rubbish?

They were a fad. There was no long term sustainability in their business plan, nor did they benefit Rugby League as a whole.

The RFL gave London Broncos £10,000,000 and let them in instead, obviously.

Bit harsh calling it fickleness - don't blame those who stayed away afterwards personally. You work so hard to get to the top flight, then to have it taken away. And to know that it was probably your one chance to make it.

Quote ="Dave Lister"They were a fad. There was no long term sustainability in their business plan, nor did they benefit Rugby League as a whole. The RFL gave London Broncos £10,000,000 and let them in instead, obviously.'" I can see why www.chavtowns.co.uk/2005/04/keighley/ Love the quote [iTell a keefli lass she’ll get chlamydia if you shag her and your in there for certain, cos its not often they get flowers.[/i

Quote ="Dave Lister"They were a fad. There was no long term sustainability in their business plan, nor did they benefit Rugby League as a whole. The RFL gave London Broncos £10,000,000 and let them in instead, obviously.'" I can see why www.chavtowns.co.uk/2005/04/keighley/ Love the quote [iTell a keefli lass she’ll get chlamydia if you shag her and your in there for certain, cos its not often they get flowers.[/i

What a terrible attitude from their so called "supporters". Would you ditch Hull KR if they didn't get a license then? Pathetic.

Again I think that's unfair - they had developed an incredible fanbase (for a non-top flight club), and a marketing strategy that clubs like Bradford would take huge inspiration from.
IMO Keighley could certainly have been as big a club as say Cas and Huddersfield. And they would have benefitted Yorkshire and Lancashire clubs (with their away support) more then Quins have tbf.

Yet without London, there wouldn't have been a Super League....

So thats not really 'big' then?

No, but I wouldn't mouth off at a lot of kids who did (some kids can fickle is my point).

Bigger then several clubs (Crusaders, Salford, Quins, Wakey).