It was Good Friday (traditionally a good day for crowds)
Keighley needed to win to make sure of the Second Division title (IIRC)

Honestly, they filled a large part of our East Stand, like I said there's no reason for me to lie about it.

OK well you didn't mention it was Good Friday or paint that scenario, I suppose that is semi-feasible.

Oh yeah I forgot those details....

Stunned.....a RL paper paints London RL in a positive light and the HKA Massive are all over it like a rash

Did people used to mistake London Broncos for an American football team?

One question.


Why?

Just doesn't make sense - American football teams tend to draw crowds.

Because the club failed miserably to market themselves.

That's why the M18 was built, to avoid the tolls!

Myth 5: There would have been no SL without London
Myth 6: There would be less sponsorship in SL without Quins

Number 6 is a myth because.....?? You obviously don't know much about sports marketing from either side of the fence. Sky have made it fairly clear that Quins are important to their valuation of RL in England - just as they (under the Foxtel brand) have overtly done with the Melbourne Storm. Sky aren't doing that because they care about RL - they do it because it adds to their revenue from advertisers. Those very same advertisers being businesses that may choose to sponsor individual teams or the sport as a whole.

TBH if I had money to throw at anything in SL, it would be on promotion and marketing in London - starting with all the junior clubs. I'd rather focus on building support in kids who may stick with the game than try to tempt a few people to a game who may go for a bit of a novelty.

Sky probably foolishly thought that people in London would have been interested in following a RL team, the old build it and they will come mentality. If the Broncos hadn't been willing to back london would Sky have pulled the plug on the whole SL concept if London weren;t in a position to enter (which arguably they weren't and still aren't)? Of course not English SL was predominantly a means to an endl for News Ltd to get its hands on Australian RL. If anyone can give me a direct quote from a Sky representative that says " we pay more money becasue there is a London team in Sl" then i am more than happy to bust the myth.

If I am a sponsor do you really think I am going to get excited by 3,000 fans turning up for a game in London? Again if there was a proveable direct correlation between Quins and TV viewers in the South (ie when Quins are on Sky do the ratings in the South go up massively compared to when two Northern teams are on?) then again the myth will be busted.

I await some evidence that debunks either myth or the ones previously mentioned.

Firstly.....BSKYB didn't use ESL to get at Australian RL. WTF Murdoch is used to getting what he wants...but if it makes you feel better by saying a northern pastime was the gateway to the second largest sport 12,000 miles away, so be it.

Next up and the Irony isn't lost on me, we have gone from "London will never be relegated...SKY wont let them" to 'london weren't and aren't key to the SKY deal"
Try this on......in 2005, when we went to the wall, we could have been ejected from SL there and then. There were no rules in place to do this, but we would have had no money to fight this.....BUT, instead the ESL chairmen voted to not only let us stay in, but also keep all our points. Leigh and Widnes didn't vote against us....even though they could have saved their skins> Why would that be? Would it maybe have something to do with Mr Wood telling all present that without London, the SKY money wouldn't be there?

Sponsorship? I never said it would dry up....but I still say SKY would pay less for ESL with no london...and it would seem that the other ESL chairmane and the RFL agree

It appears that the London Evening Standard is FINALLY getting behind the Quins so hopefully that'll be of some benefit.