As the option for moving away from the Stoop appears to Gillingham or nothing, we need to make clear to the club the strength of feeling such a move would engender.

The Stoop is the best rugby ground in SL bar none and has been our home for 6 years, surely stability counts for something?

Gillingham would be a disaster - stay at the Stoop!

For most fans it would seem that a move to Gillingham would mean that they can no longer support such a move. I don't think we should say the Stoop or nothing. I am in a minority that thinks that the Stoop is a superb 'rugby' ground, but Twickenham is probably one of the worst places to try and build RL in London as history as somewhat proved. The Poll would be better as London or Gillingham, hence my abstention.

[sizeKEEP LONDON IN LONDON[/size

Agree with you Pop Pan.
Can't vote for Stoop or Gillingham but definately vote for staying in London.& I live in Kent.

The wrong question it should have been London or Gillingham! but then again if you look at most polls a loaded question can produce whatever someone may wish, hope that is not the point. No Way should we leave London.

Not voting here. This is just an over-simplification of an existing thread.

No...I agree that The Stoop is the best ground but we are not paying the bills.

Who can blame DH for wanting to save some money...if he can get a better deal elsewhere, I don't blame him for taking it.

Will be very sad to leave The Stoop though.

DH is only working to earn enough to subsidise the Broncos losses.
He cannot sustain these losses when he retires.

If DH is retiring he has to increase his revenue (dificult with the team playing the way it has been) or/and cut his costs.

I love the Stoop and although its a fair journey to get there the facilities are worth it. However, if the rent is unsustainable i accept a move may be necessary to keep us going as im not paying the bills.

Moving to Gillingham will certainly lose a lot of fans from the west side in the same way we lost east side fans when we moved from Charlton. It may be a cheaper rent, but whether their income increases or is even maintained is debatable but it is DH's money and his risk not ours. If he asked me, Brentford or Leyton would maintain our fanbase - small as it is - and makes better economic sense. With a winning team (and we should be mid table with this team) the impact should be greater within London i would think because we have a lot of fans currently not attending because of whats been happening on the pitch (and partly off it as well) who would hopefully return if the team performed to its potential. These fans are unlikely to return to Gillingham.

voted no myself no problems with the stoop as such but i like many others work on a saturday! personly not bothered where we play in LONDON back to sunday games thats all i ask

My view is that, once the Rugby Union club declined to pay the nominal fee to take us on then any ideas around true partnership ended forever and we have been ever since been merely a Tenant. It was always likely from then on that Harlequins RU would want to to extract the maximum they could from our club and even more inevitable that once we ceased to be a brand vehicle keeping their name in the media that they would want a higher price. That is what has happened now. But the ultimatum only has strength if the tenant plays ball. So far we haven't. We've left the contract unsigned. But it could still be signed of course!

There aren't many reasonable supporters who have such love for the Stoop that they couldn't bear to be parted from it under any circumstances. Generally there seem to be groups who favour it and this is more likely to be down to geodemographic factors such as living in south west London, supporting Harlequins RU as well etc. Others see it as a better ground than any football stadium and also there is a certain wistfulness about whether a successful team could or would yield a crowd of a sustainable size keeping the club there. But ultimately it is someone elses ground and I think any true supporter would prefer we are not squeezed too hard and in a dream world would be the Landlord in a reachable, convenient location.

It is almost certain that supporters from within close proximity of the Twickenham Stoop - or even further away from London - will be the most upset about a move. After all is a relatively short distance to travel for supporters from districts around south west London. You'd have to be barking mad if you have a short trip now to want to do a 100 mile round trip. I'd be braying for 'no move' if the club moved to somewhere like Slough or somewhere that would kill me to get there.

I think the middle ground is that there is a degree of tolerance for making an extra effort but obviously there are different degrees of latitude. It seems that almost everyone would be prepared to travel the 10 miles from the Stoop to central London, even if they prefer to stay at the Stoop. Whilst the west Londoners would love to stay in west London of course.

But it seems that there is for many a kind of "Berlin Wall" which stands somewhere between London and Gillingham which they simply won't do. It seems to be more a case of psychological outrage such as when Wimbledon were relocated to Milton Keynes as the time and cost aren't in many cases huge. Some people are opposed even when it is easier for them, cheaper for them and more convenient!

Where is the furthest people will go? I reckon within about 10 miles of central London seems to be the maximum.

Who knows this may all be a bargaining tactic but whatever happens 'Gillingham' seems to be the name on fan's lips even though the majority seem not to want this to be the case.