The reason Harlequins Rugby Union supporters are Not interested in us is still the class bias which anyone who reads their board regularly will clearly see, no way are they going to change! so we are only touch rugby, why do they keep coming taking out talented players then? why does Sky keep pushing money into Super League, amazes me how they read our forum!! they never wanted us in the first place and I think it was more us taking their name rather than using The Stoop! as many say they have no objections to us playing there and more so if we cough up rent!

I think we will find in the end that this is being driven as much by the Rugby Football League and even perhaps Sky as the real last throw of the dice for Super League in London. I have no problems what name we choose long as with are completely divorced from the Harlequins brand. People do not like the American name of Broncos, what are the Bulls, Warriors, Vikings and Crusaders etc, it was just a branding to try and make it more attractive to younger supporters and the new modern strips! I have more problems with some of the stupid ground names they have in the North, Coliseum?? is that because it is falling down!!

Since no-one appears to have taken any notice of it, I'm going to re-quote PTB's post from last weekend. Which is the best argument I've read for staying as Quins.



To borrow a terrible Labour party slogan from the 2005 (?) election - [iforward, not back![/i

a bit naughty Gutters. That as you know was the worst London SL season on record against the worst side ever in SL. Charlton was not ideal, too big, with no community work done. You could also quote the gate against PSG at Charlton, 9,638. Not a bad London side though, I think they would wipe the floor with our current squad.

Or you could quote this season's 1,766 home gate against Crusaders!

Would be nice to have a few of the calibre of that 2001 line up in the squad now!

Sorry can't resist - so apart from all of that , what have Harlequins ever done for us ?? David Hughes - he's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!!

At least eight of them would walk into the current team: Barnett, Roy, Martin, Dymock, Moran, Hetherington, Toshack, Retchless. Most of the rest either left after the first part-season I was a regular (2002) or I didn't see them at all so I can't really judge them.

We have QRU supporters on this board and vice versa, and speaking as somebody who came to like RL having been a QRU supporter in the first instance, I can happily assure you that myself and the group of people I used to go with are as low down the class ladder as anybody else.

I think the reasons as outlined elsewhere on this thread are purely logistical, financial and practical.

PTB's post is very thoughtful and well-reasoned. Personally I feel there are more pros than cons in remaining as Harlequins, certainly if we're going to continue playing at The Stoop, which is as good a stadium as we can hope to have.

I really don't want to revert to being London Broncos, which I always felt was an awful name for any London sports club. I've just grabbed the nearest available dictionary and it's definition is a "wild or half-tamed horse of California or New Mexico" What the f*** is the connection with London there? "London Colts" or "London Stallions" would be similar but more suitable names IMO.

I accept that some of our regular supporters are equally against the Harlequins name, which is fair enough. What I can't understand is why anyone would walk away from the club altogether simply because of the name, as a few appear to have done. If you want to watch Superleague rugby and you live in London or the South East you either watch this club regardless of what it's called, or you travel to Lancashire or Yorkshire. It shouldn't really matter what the name is unless it's going to have a bearing on attracting new support, and I'm not sure it really does. I don't like "Broncos" but I wouldn't walk away because of it, although the thought of yet another change of identity, and starting from scratch yet again, just makes me lose the will to live.

Toshack & Roy



The rest I agree on

I remember the days when there were plenty who posted on our Forum! but now it is the few, I was a member of Orrell RU Club in their hey days but it was a working class area and 90% of the supporters/members were even though they were a top club at the time.

Since we adopted the name Harlequins I joined the RU board but I always got the feeling they were full of themselves, perhaps some felt it raised their status being an Harelquins fan, there will be no tears at us not using their name or wearing their colours, they may miss our income when we achieve our dream!

PTB is a fervent in his opinions as we are and I respect them, I'm not sure new fans will follow a club in London whatever the name! sorry, some may have the opinion I have of Harlequins Rugby Union being real Rah Rah! We are not just walking away, who said that? but does PTB feel we should be a tenant forever and see thus no way of generating income away from match days and on match days directly to our club, if that was the clubs attitude then we don't deserve to succeed! But in the current climate it is only an aspiration to own our own ground but at least be part owner, but we can't sit and wait for it to happen we have to show a business plan and see it happening for the next licence application.

I think this is right. I actually see little point in ditching the Harlequins name whilst we play at the Stoop, but if it is linked to re-branding, marketing, new money and support from the RFL/Sky - then you have to go with it? But as Gutterfax says, if you are going to do it do it properly - really spend some money on marketing get some crowds in? the Castleford game was an excellent example and despite only getting a draw actually showed the team in a good light.

But all the marketing in the world will fail if the team is rubbish? Wakefield was a decent performance, however we need a clear out. And i was encouraged that David H in the match programme was saying the same. We have too many small second rows, we need some real muscle up front. If Briggs comes off as a player i think the backs are almost good enough, its the pack thats the problem.

As for David H, as someone else commented, without him no club! of course he isnt always right and i have been deeply depressed by some of our performances over the past 2/3years - but he wants the club to suceed, maybe now with Mackay, hopefully some new money we can seize a last opportunity?

At least brian2 it is creating about the most debate as fans we have had for a long time.

No man makes all the right decisions! but that is not an excuse for not making them! IF more than David is going to be investing serious money to really attempt to make London work, it has to be done right and we have to leave it to them and the back them.

If we decide to keep the name until we leave The Stoop then I am not going to throw my ball away and sulk! I just really Hope the other side of the argument will feel and act the same, we believe in rugby league and the only way we are going to make it succeed long term is being United!

No to London Broncos, no to Harlequins RL. Both should be banished to the dustbin of time and the 'London' Rugby League club needs to rebrand itself and relaunch itself big time, whatever its guise. The club needs to bring along with it all the existing community work, all the existing corporates and sponsors and all the existing fans and make its self sufficiently attractive to expand these areas. No simple task I know but with good planning and innovative thought we will succeed.

Mentioned in another thread (maybe this one), but I love the idea of London Pride, nickname The Lions, it covers all angles and could stand on its own without looking too Americanized.

Just one problem - Fuller's Brewery thought of it first.

I like ice hockey! Its not a union clubs name. It has the word 'London' in it and it's not a union club's name. Oh, and it's not a union club's name.

I agree to an extent with a sustained period of stability but since we have at best gone sideways, and probably gone backwards under our current name I don't see the harm in starting again and sticking to it for good.

I'd be equally happy for it not to be Broncos though. London Thirteen RLFC or London Eels for me!

London Panthers has a decent ring to it.

I quite agree but I have the copyright on the Poplar Panthers.

Tooting and Mitcham United. Lovely little non-league ground, currently holds 3,500 speccies - and has an open piece of land alongside one touchline. Stick a new stand on it and extend a couple of other parts of the ground and you've got yourself an 8,000 plus capacity. And the owners have just successfully removed a limit on selling it that had been held by the fans. Decent transport, and not far from the current location so community work won't be affected. And the club has money problems so could do with the cash.

Tooting fans (all 300 of them) seem to think the owners might be angling to sell it to AFC Wimbledon.

Just a thought.

Ah back to our roots. Streatham and Mitcham RLFC, 1935 was a good year!

My preferences on name would be -

London Knights
London Colts
London Bulldogs

The Broncos name was good at the time, but I agree that it will stir up notions of failure from those who have followed rugby for a time and as such probably isn't the best way to go. If we're to leave the Quins brand we need a fresh new name to market.

There is a great divide on this thread (admittedly only a few posters though) on whether to stay with Quins or start afresh. Reminds me of an issue that happened years ago at Harlequins...the club effectively split and bang....the London Wasps were formed. This is unlikely to happen here as the resources and fan base in London can only muster one SL team, but unless we all back a route forward and buy in to the vision we'll lose what seems like half the fan base.

It would be interesting to see via a survey (carried out by an independant company) across London where is the largest fan base for rugby league. I'm (and only making a guess) thinking the West/South West London is probably the best place to stay. This has been where we've built a home over the last 15 or so years (spectator numbers could be stronger admittedly) but moving to East London or similar will put off the casual fans that make up the numbers at games presently.

Though casual fans may begin turning up from East London, I think that we'd be starting from scratch completely.

I'd like to see a well designed kit that your average sports fan would pick off the shelf in a sports shop and consider buying. It has to look good - it's amazing how much publicity wearing a shirt in public brings - the more people wearing it about the better. I hope they use a decent kit designer and supplier then put it to vote so that we can get the best strip in the league.

The Exiles marketing was great....the new club needs a similar approach across London...numerous bill boards, adverts in the Metro, Oyster card holders etc building an anticipation of the "London (inset)"...the more people see a brand/logo and the colours - but without knowing at first what it is the more curious they become. We need to set out a straegy now and with the RFL and all partners get out into London!

I know all these points have been raised on here already...but it just seems with a well designed product and joint thinking and approach from the club, RFL and fans...our last chance saloon might work!

Well done on starting Gutters off again by mentioning Oyster cards, he will want us rebranded as the London Shellfish now.

personally [this is tongue in cheek, honest think that if we are using the London part of the name as a given we need to think of a second string that has no possible conotation with any other sport.

So

London whippets.
London Pidgeons.
London Ferrets

Why not Blue Oyster cult - I am sure Boris would sponsor us!

I'm having nothing to do with that wazzock!!

I agree entirely but he may be looking to buy some votes soon!

Another advantage of the Harlequins name - we didn't have to bother with any stupid nickname e.g. 'city reds' 'wildcats'. These are IMO childish and superfluous.

Harlequins, Fulham....both good names