In the 4 years at Griffin Park the average gate was 3,704
The Average gate at The Stoop since 2006 is 3,596.

108 per game down.....not the thousands declared by the naysayer Rupe 1.

Interestingly, up until this season the difference was 17 fans.......and a team that is on a 12 game streak of not winning is entitled to shed a few fans.

If the club do change their name, I hope to god that they spend some serious money on the "M" word....

A few years ago just after we had become Quins I was at the Cats game in Perpignan and all the posters and match programme had us listed as London Harlequins. Also during that weekend my partner was interviewed on local french radio asking the question why not many people travel from london to away games! So if a change of name is required why not recognise our current history and our location? I can then keep both my london and quins shirts for ever.

I just can't understand all these sudden cries of loyalty to the Harlequin brand, what has it done for us? and more important what have they done for us, people get confused with the Union brand, not many of their fans took to us in fact they never wanted us really. Even on our own website when you go to Rugby League merchandise sooner or later the Union brand is pushed in your face, NO! we don't want to be part of that any longer.

Yes stay at The Stoop until we are able to have a stake in a ground but that has to be pushed as hard as possible, if we do get our licence renewed this time the very latest by the next licence application but the name Quins has to go now!

Right so its the Union club's fault we have poor crowds and hardly win at home.

Are you for real?

What did the "Broncos brand" ever do for us? A silly foreign soundng name inherited from an Aussie club and most casual sports fans in the Home Counties didn't even realise which sport we played, mostly assuming it was American football. And we went bust as Broncos.

In my experience most Quins union fans take a positive passing interest in our team; they might not turn up to watch games but look out for the results and want to see us win. The numbers with negative feelings for us are probably no greater than the numbers of anti-union Luddites in our own ranks.


I've never felt this impression myself. If you go to the league merchandise and open enough links eventually you'll see union merchandise, or stuff than can be equally applied to both codes.


Presuamably that's a royal "We", because you certainly don't speak on my behalf, or that of a fair number of others judging from the range of views in earlier posts.

Spot on. I see almost as many Quins RU shirts as I see RL ones when I stand on the platform at Clapham Junction. And although I've not been to a QRU game myself, I certainly bear them no ill will (although I confess to having a good laugh at their expense over bloodgate - a self-inflicted wound if you'll pardon the pun)

People seem to expect a name and a 'brand' to do wonders for us, on and off the pitch, to cure all ills. I hate to break it to some of you, but it requires sticking power, a winning team, and a financial model that washes its own face. Our current precarious financial position, as I keep having to say, is nothing to do with where we play, what we're called and what kit we wear.

Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't Wakefield and Castleford both apply to the local council for funding to build their new stadium(s)? When the council advised they could only afford to help fund one stadium there was talk for them having to merge in order to stay in SL??

With the RFL's help (oh no I mentioned the RFL may help us!!!) could we not propose a plan to the council (which one I don't know) or even Mr Boris Johnson and get help funding the build of a new stadium? If we sell it right and highlight the work the club do in communities blah blah...they may actually put a few quid in to get a stadium built....although it's not too likely until after the 2012 olympics...as any money for sport is going on that!

If we look at doing that in the long term it could work.

No football club with a stadium that meets the SL requirements is going to offer us a 50% share in the ground...no way - so we shouldn't even hope for that.

I think the options are stay at the Stoop or lobby for as many investors and backing as possible to build a new ground. In our present financial position....the Stoop is the only option.

Yes I am for real! always think it is the lowest form of debate when you need to attack rather than just debate, it does not mean we have to agree all the time.

Please tell me what positive the Union club have done for us? they are the ones who benefit and that is why they took us back in the first place as they were desperate then before going back into The Premiership, if we said we were leaving next season I can't envisage any protests Please Don't Go! LOL But it is the Only Option at Present until we can find a ground which we will part own and then make so income from and not be a tenant.

Prince of Denmark, I never feel we have marketed our brand like we should! The London Crusaders had a stupid looking badge/emblem in my opinion! which was dated and looked as if it was more a sponsorship for the Daily Express.

So I take it that you didn't like the Bronco's name, during the time when we moved first time around to The Stoop I felt the brand worked, the place rocked it was around the time of The Club Championship, I also felt that families came along and younger people identified with the what you say American branding were we really took it from the then Aussie owners. In fact we lead the way, because others followed and such as Bradford as the Bulls and Wigan as the Warriors have really worked, but they had real dammed good marketing departments. Currently Wigan are running TV commercials in the North West under the brand Wigan Warriors V Huddersfield Giants THE BIG ONE! this they have done successfully in the past with games against Leeds, Warrington, they go for full size poster boards and usually run a promotion with schools or youth teams to run a cup knock out on the day, just watch out what the attendance that day will be! in fact is is THE BIG ONE! with Huddersfield being on such a good run.

Perhaps we need to send our marketing team during the close season to Wigan for a few weeks training! the BULLS successful period was when the late Peter Deakin was in charge (also later with Sacarens) Peter and myself he pushed me into it did an Australian RL Marketing Course and when we both approached clubs here at first they had the heads in the sand as usual, No that is not for a Northern Game! but thankfully Bradford when with it and Peter and he turned them around off the pitch and then the results came on the pitch.

It is not a Royal we, the opinion about the Harlequins brand is shared by many of our supporters, not all 3,000 are members here! it tends to be a limited number the same names, but I Hope the Club itself and David Hughes do check out opinions. The brand of Quins is not modern and smells too much rah rah! I would go for just being LONDON RUGBY LEAGUE CLUB but we need to start to appeal to young people and families and we need for that some catchy add on to London, St Helens have been the Saints forever and that is the name they are known by and it is not dated.

This is a forum, I read carefully every post, it would be a funny old world if we all agree every time!

I like the name "London Harlequins"- that could catch on! - Would it keep both sides happy in this argument though...not sure??

Dunno mate, might do for some but if we're changing the name then I'm for changing it completely. FWIW London RLFC would be my choice - plain and simple, says where we are and what we are.

London Harlequins, NO! - When we move to a sharing a ground as part owner we would need another change of name. Paul Wilson who wrote the original article in The Guardian has covered it in even more detail in this weeks "League Express!

Only morons can't identify the difference between a League and a Union club. A simple explanation tends to suffice when I am telling someone about my weekend plans.

London RLFC is completley anonymous and unworkable. Nobody knows what RLFC stands for and nobody can associate with it. I wouldn't be surprised if a significant proportion of our current supporters have no idea what RLFC stands for as it is a term that belongs in the 90's and before.You cannot market RLFC. You cannot market London.

Harlequins RL is perfect. Clearly distinguished from the Union club yet has the power of the Harlequins brand. Harlequins Rugby League is also fine.

Then and now are completely incomparible. The Broncos of then was a completely unsustainable venture full of Australian imports and "star" names amongst English Rugby League.