I'd just like to see a short message on the Super League site today from the RFL / SLE saying "We're doing all we can to help them."

Keighley should have got the spot all along.

So the re-introduction of P+R which would attract all these investors in to the game who were staying well away because of franchising is in fact driving away investment from an SL club because of the instability of P+R.

Someone mentioned that that if London are to have a team they will have to have exceptional dispensation about their number of Federation trained players.

Which players from the NRL have not been signed as of now?

The only quality ones whom I know of are Anthony Minichiello and Blake Ferguson. Ferguson's future in the NRL is clouded. Ferguson, if he was signed he would be far and away the best centre in Super League. But he has a court case to deal with sometime in the coming months. And he would probably be a bit expensive. Minichiello (who may yet be re-signed by the Roosters) would be more affordable and give stability in the backline. But he would not come unless he knew that he had some other quality players to make up the team. Then there is Anthony Milford, who wants a release from his contract with Canberra on compassionate grounds -- which entails him going to Brisbane. So I cannot see him being luredf into going to London or Canberra releasing him.

The club needs three quarters, halves and forwards. I cannot see where these players are going to be found, and if they could be it would require a lot of money to be invested and a guarantee of a new quality coach and a new CEO.

Agreed.

Keighley Cougars won the 2nd division in 1994/5 (finished above London Broncos), had an average crowd in the second division that had just overtaken first division Bradford's (c5,500), a squad capable of a top half finish in the then first division - but were denied promotion and excluded from the new Super League. All water under the bridge now of course. But likely Keighley would have been in a much better position now than are London.

Is it just me, or, does anyone else think the RFL are going to offer a SL lifeline to the London franchise?

There’s London going into admin, Wakey selling off the crown jewels, Bradford chopping & changing the money men.

Then there’s the alleged changes to the quota structures & all with a backdrop of certain clubs posturing over Red Halls ineptitude.

I don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes, but I feel something is going down

.

Ah yes... the classic 'you're a troll' comment from someone who can't provide an answer to a question.

It was actually a genuine enquiry on my behalf. You are well known for your outspoken (and usually incorrect) views on all things 'London' and I was curious to know exactly what your club has brought to the world of Super League since 1996. I freely admit to not knowing the ins and outs of that particular franchise but I'm genuinely struggling to think of any positives.

The RFL [i:3pbcb6jchave[/ithrown in our direction if the club is just allowed to die.

Save the club and sort out the rest later.

the only thing more boring than trolling is this -level of trolling.

I think something is going down, but I don't think it's a planned event. Always believe in cock-up over conspiracy, and especially when you're dealing with an organisation of such limited competence and resources as the RFL. I suspect that the approach of the RFL to London's impending implosion has been similar to that of a rabbit watching the headlights come nearer, and their "plan" has been to hope that something turns up. It hasn't.

In a nutshell, the issue is whether the game as a whole wants/needs a top-tier London presence, or not.

At the moment, the RFL has acted as if London is simply A. N . Other club, and its problems are therefore its own. In fact, I'd go further, it's acted as if London is very much a stand-alone "outsider" club, without call on the sort of special beneficial treatment which Red Hall have provided for some other clubs in recent years. As a result, they're simply standing by and watching as London collapse.

The only alternative to this, would be for the RFL to take a strategic decision that a top-tier London presence is key for the game. If they do this, then they have to back up that decision with action, whether that action is guaranteeing no relegation, pumping in a greater "London allowance" for funding, granting a Federation-trained player exemption or whatever.

There are no other alternatives. Either the RFL recognises London's specific issues and offers serious support because it believes London is essential, or it shrugs its shoulders and lets London go to the wall. At the moment, the dishonesty of their position is that they will say that a London presence is vital, but then point blank refuse to do anything substantial to enable that presence to continue.

This is being treated as a tactical issue surrounding one club. It should be seen as a strategic decision regarding the game as a whole. But I don't think there are many strategists at Red Hall, to be honest.

I happen to think we need them. Time will give the younger players in the capital a route to top level rugby league.

Also as and when the economy picks up they might prove a better investment bet so keep them in, if possible.

Then again I am from the South.