I am sure (hope) the Skolars thing was meant as a joke!!!

I was only using the comment as a lead in, recognising that my ramblings were way off topic

I wasn't being serious.

OK....why did the partnership now become a tenancy? Was it because we didn't win any trophies? Was it because the Union fans complained? Was it because we didn't sponsor Twickenham Station

?......nope, it was probably for purely financial reasons....can anyone gues where this post was going before I stopped myself



I agree with Curt......the Away strip should be the home one!

My problem is that apart from (paying for) the use of an excellent stadium I'm finding it very hard to see what the supposed benefits of the tie up are. Like others on here I think the away shirt should be adopted as the home- as far as I can see wearing the RU colours has not increased our profile at all. Still having to explain to people that its the RL team I got to watch, and most reply 'Oh I didn't realise there was one!' Whatever benefits there may have been do not seem to have been exploited as far as I can see.

Do you think they would know if there was a Rugby League team in London by any other name - they didn't when we were under our other names. Therefore the fact that you can tell them raises awareness.

They may not have been exploited, but that is not to say they cannot be exploited. Different people run the RU and RL side of the club as you know - the RU have taken Harlequins and made it a ridiculously successful brand. There is no reason why this couldn't happen in RL too, building on their excellent good work. But unfortunately, our club lacks investment/is run by clowns.

I see absolutely 0 benefits in wearing a London Broncos shirt as a home jersey for Harlequins other than it makes a few supporters who followed the Broncos feel a bit nostalgic. In fact, I would suggest it would even make things more confusing. People see a photo of the team in the paper (yes I know, it would take a miracle for us to get in the paper) - people would be confused as to who the hell the team was. If the Harlequins colours were on show, the link could be made immediately.

As The Final Hooter fanzine always used to point out, thee is no such sport as "rugby".



Or like Harlequins Rugby Union Club taking over London RLFC...

Thing is they did know who London Broncos were, they didn't realise they'd become Harlequins! One bloke thought / assumed Broncos had been relegated from the top flight and as such had dropped off the radar! So much for being able to use the best known brand name in rugby !

Agree about the investment (lack of) /club run by clowns!

As for the shirt, I'm not on a nostalgia trip I just think that as a quartered shirt the away looks better than the home (I also thought the same with the Wycombe light blue /dark blue shirt) - fair enough it reflects the club's past but so would a black shirt with a white V.

Rugby = Rugby league + Rugby union. I'm unaware of any other codes.

I think it looks better too, but I don't see any point in using a shirt that has nothing to do with the club as it is now. We need to build on the brand, not go backwards.

No wonder the Quins keep losing with WIN on their shirts. The only people reading it are the opposition.

Subliminal messagetastic