He basically admitted as such in a different thread!

As far as I'm aware they are a subsidiary of Harlequins RU club, certainly their stadium and other facilities are fully dependent on the RU club. Now let's not kid ourselves here that organisations core product is RU, and it is RU's interests that will come first. The moment the RL side doesn't offer the RU club whatever it is they get from it they will drop them like a brick and they will be gone IMHO. Most RL clubs are at risk also but not from their parent company, rather just the standard rough trading conditions all clubs face. Hence they are not stand alone company/club who only interest is RL. I cannot think of one "heartland club" that is the same. Perhaps Leeds, but they are such strong performers and so viable I see no issue.

I don't understand the second part of the question.

However my small issue with your post was that you said and maybe you didn't mean it that way - "I don't know how people can reasonably be against either London...". - I don't understand
why it's unreasonable to question their validity.

OK, to simplify - if it was a 2 horse race between us and Quins, who do you think deserves to get the franchise most when they are judged against the RFL's criteria?

Semantics.

I don't think I have yet to read on here (or anywhere else) a 'reasonable' argument as to why the London club (or Catalans too) shouldn't be in the league - specifically when they are compared to us.

Pushed for time right now on the other points raised ref stand alone/parent clubs/companies etc, but will reply later in the day.

Its a bit like the mirror opposite of the situation down at Headingley, many rhino fans will tell you they are plowing their hard earned into the tykes.
I don't know how true it is, as i can't see the logic in it, but clearly the people running the show can, so maybe the Harlequins are getting more out of it than just shared facilities.

Certainly any argument against catalan, would be on fairly thin ice, they have worked for all the reasons that London haven't. They have a RL tradition and a passion for the game and they turn up in good numbers. For me the London experiment, has been an abject failure because it could not stand alone without support, because it does not have adequate support, in plain business terms the customer base does not support the business.
The london Argument has always been, "ooh its so difficult to get to the games, and it takes so long, blah, blah, blah" then the simple truth is the team is in the wrong place, it should be somewhere, where the fans can access it more easily (like along the M62 for example), is like building a stadium on the top of Mt Everest, and then complaining only a couple of sherpas turn up on match day!!
I would have said exactly the same about us if we had not been purchased by AG, if no one wants to run the business because it isn't going to be "successful" for whatever reason then you have no business.

I have not got enough facts to make that decision, has anyone outside the panel that judge these things. My argument isn't based on what I consider flawed criteria it's based on whether they are more viable than us. I don't think they are. I'll have a go though using the criteria - see below.

In order for the Championship club’s application to proceed to assessment by the RFL, they had to meet the Championship club minimum criteria. These minimum criteria arec. Club has turnover of at least £1,000,000 in financial year ending 2009 or 2010.
d. Club has an average attendance of at least 2500 in 2009 or 2010.
Provided at least one applicant meets the minimum criteria, a Championship club will be awarded a Super League licence for a three-year period commencing at the start of the 2012 season.

The last two are criteria to get into SL, Harlequins I suspect are struggling to hit these and they are already in SL. We are not.

How are the applications assessed?

Clubs are assessed on criteria in 5 key areas:

a. Commercial, Marketing, Media and Community.
b. Facilities.
c. Finance.
d. Governance and Business Management.
e. Playing Strength and Player Performance Strategy.

The only one of the above we IMO don't have a good chance of beating Harlequins at a guess and it can only be a guess is facilities.

So if there isn't some form of protection available to Harlequins why are so many so sure we will go down. I'm not trying to plug a conspiracy theory, I'm just very curious. If we were to say win the CCup and still go down I'd be even more curious, wouldn't you.

But the RFL do not want us

We only think that, we won't know officially for another couple of months!!!

Which isn't true.

Hope so

It is, ask Dickie Mint

I agree - but you would have to wonder where we are losing out if indeed we are as so many seem to think. I get the feeling that either people like Martyn Sadler either know something or are being very presumptive. As far as I can see we are not out of it according to criteria.

Please don't confuse me with someone what gives a toss, but if it helps at all read his posts.



Well according to the every day postings on here, he is self employed and employs others, he was on £40k per annum 2 years ago, presumably it has risen since then, why should he be barred from a ground we do not frequent, I don't personally eat that muck from kfc so I can't comment on his health, due to his reluctance to stick his hand in his pocket for any causes on here, I doubt he would goto the expence of a pet, unless it was some preditory animal, and as for his mother being ill I was under the impression thats according to the majority on here anyway, that he never had any parents hope that answers your serious question.