The way the clubs going they will become the worst Championship supported club. Approx 150 at the game on Sunday. I get the feeling they've given up.

Seemed a damn shame a couple of years ago when they got relegated from SL with 20 pts, 10 wins, but a worse 'goal difference' than HKR.

Looked like they were at least putting out a competitive side, only to slide back into the Championship, only now to be subject to yet another nomadic ground move this season.

If you are going on population / attendance to calculate best and worst supported teams in SL then surely London are worst followed by Leeds. Best supported been Cas Tigers followed by Leigh.

I wouldn't go on "population" unless all towns and cities contained only born and bred locals, everyone walked to the matches and watching RL was the only sporting choice.............

So called "support" is also affected by success and private investment fuels that..... We can hail the great support of locals in a small town where their team is succesfull and condemn support levels where a club don't have two pennies to rub together.

Maybe if Jack Fulton had ended up at Featherstone not Cas................

Featherstone are actually a good example of where the figures don't tell the true story. Featherstone's sole source of support is not the village of Featherstone, it's a lot of the former mining areas around it, and the decent sized town of Pontefract. It's only by having that wider demographic pull that they can be an aspirant SL side.

Its very difficult to determine the true population of a place. Hull for example has a very tight local authority area covering the city boundary only, but in reality there are thousands more living in the suburbs and towns such as Beverley around it, its hard to get the true population figure. The country also doesn't know its true population number anyway! there have been millions more applications for EU settled status than was predicted.

London's problem has and I fear always will be moving too often, if they were a Yorkshire team it'd be the equivalent of a team moving from Hull, to Leeds to Middlesbrough, to Donny...and expecting the fanbase that has been built to battle through the traffic, pay for the trains to get them there on a busy Friday night.

Surely it’s Salford?

Thanks for the name check.

IIRC London's problem was that [i"Even Richard Branson could not make it work"[/i so Hughes agreed with Tony Rea that they should give up on the club.

But Hughes could not bring himself to do it. I don't think Hughes expects anything nowadays, he just likes running his own Rugby League club.......

Last time the clubs were "head to head" averages were......

London 2019 season 2,014
Salford 2019 season 3,746

However the Salford figure will include a lot of away fans e.g.

Salford.v.Waarrington 4,879
London.v.Warrington only 2,357

Interestingly London's worst attendance was against Salford 1,445

You have a point here even though it was London......

But you wouldn't take Saints from the population of Merseyside, that is skewing again, unless you take London from every Borough/County they have played in, in this case Surrey !

Leigh, Wigan & Salford do not take their % from population of Greater Manchester, you take from the town or city to get a true reflection of % of population attending.

I would 'guess' in percentage terms that Salford & London are fighting it out to be the lowest.

My maths may be a little out, but over the 20 seasons and some 264 games, London Harlequins RL Broncos averaged 3,436.

What are you basing your ''guess' on here Ste, I'm confused.



Population of Salford - 245k
Population of London - 8.9m

Based on those populations I'd 'guess' London might edge it.



No surprise to see sadsack RuBron chirping up again on this thread with his usual inane waffle.