But they are now in the FRench League from where they can be invited to apply to super league without having to meet some criteria set out for championship clubs - eg grand final appearances.

In their interests to go back to france really eh?

I think you are right about getting someone in like Noble. In needs someone who can make them competitive because on paper they don't have a bad squad of players.

A London side in the top 6-8 would be good for the game, but a bottom 4 side with small crowds adds nothing.

Were are all these fans when the bronco's are playing?

And yet they've sold more ST this season in the third league of RL than they did in the top league last season

Odd because I think the teams who have been pulled away from are Halifax, Featherstone, Leigh and others who have as good a chance of SL success as London and have been genuine hot beds of RL for a hundred plus years.

You grow as a game naturally, you don't impose it. The best example of this is Sheffield Eagles - a genuine club which was close but not in a traditional area. Which expanded the game into a bigger city but was close enough to home base to benefit. With both football teams foundering I think this is the team we pulled away from too soon - the money wasted on London and Wales would have built Sheffield a Stadium. Sadly spreading the game to Britains 6th biggest city clearly wasn't good enough for some.

If we'd have stuck with it we'd probably have a midlands team by now - there was once a realistic chance of giving Nottingham a working club - yet somehow someone thought heading north and even further away from the holey grail that London seems to be was a great idea.

If we are going to ever do this, get a plant hat is workable, long term and realistic.

Utter tripe-Leigh are bust, Fax submitted a dreadful franchise submission.

Going back to the M62 is not the answer

Very good points, Sheffield, Nottingham and Cumbria on paper look as viable as London considering we are 30 years into the experiment.

What money is this then?

And London aren't.

Sheffield aren't bust and will be applying for a SL franchise in 2015.

Ironically, Sheffield were sacrificed at the RL alter, somehow deemed as unsustainable and yet they managed to re-form and are doing ok.
They were a good step in the right direction and I agree that natural expansion is always going to be better than imposition.
However, this still doesn't solve the best way forward for London.
Although grass-roots rubgy is doing well in the south east, they are, seemingly, going backwards.

Aren't what?

Well we can argue all day as to whether London get backhanders or not but that's the problem with backhanders - hard to prove either way.

So what about 15 years of Sky money? Does this not count, could another club not have used it better? This is one of the big issues expansionists skirt around - have London justified getting a cut of this money for 15 years. This money is not London's by right or had you just assumed it was?

What about the expense of developing the game in London, some of which is RFL funded or is a percentage of the Sky money.

There are other smaller issues but let's move on.

I'm sure your opinion differs from mine as to whether this money has been rightly used to give London a franchise spot, but let's at least be honest. What can't be denied is more than any other team in SL depend on their Sky money without which they would simply fold never to return probably not even at NL2level. This at a club that never gained promotion on the field to the elite and never looked likely too.

If I could see any sign of London making it I'd back them but it's 30 years - I get your passion and understand your desire to make it work but in life some things are just not meant to be - how much longer before someone flicks the switch. I'm really torn over London emotionally because real people are involved and depend on the club one way or another but economically I find it much simpler.

Seriously? Lots of work to get your crowds above the desired levels.

As for London, when i find out they are on Sky, it makes me want to rub chillis in my eyes. Let them go on their own, if they die they die.

I think they missed a big opportunity by going back to the old London Broncos name and branding. To the outsiders who nothing of the sport or club, the London Broncos could be a group of wannabe cowboys who meet every Saturday in Twickenham! It didn't work before so why is it going to work now after they've just moved away from the rugby unionesque Harlequins RL? I think they should have been braver and gone with 'London Rugby League'. Keep it simple, let everyone know that it does exactly what it says on the tin.

Bust without Sky money and other SL revenues not available to Leigh - do you think Leigh would be bust with Sky money and SL gates. London could not do a Cas or HKR and survive in the lower leagues without continually folding like they did pre SL. All teams would struggle but most would continue to exist.

Accept the reality that London as they exist today are a sole creation of SL and Sky - whether you think that's a good think is a matter of opinion - then you use silly terms like utter tripe.

Oh and by the way I never said the M62 was the answer - I was suggesting logical organic growth outwards from the centre as happens in nature and tends to work - Sheffield then Nottingham then Hemel Hemstead then London. In military terms it means keeping your supply lines short.