Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:47 am  

Tre Cool wrote:

As an individual all I want is to have a name I can be proud of again. I'm an RL fan and all of the values that RL has are important to me. RU is another sport with another culture which I generally choose to have nothing to do with. In itself a name change won't radically change our fortunes. But it will give me a 100% RL club to support again.

What a bafflingly vain point of view.

I've got no problem with associating ourselves with QRU - initially I did, its true, but I grew out of it - largely because I think the stoop is excellent and also because we've gained a few fans of the type described above, Quins RU fans who have either got STs or come to watch the odd game. What an attitude like this does is tell them that we think we're better than them and we want nothing to do with them. That's not an attitude we can afford with the club in such a precarious position.

On the other hand, I had to laugh when Andy Wilson wrote in his 'set of six' this week that being called Harlequins RL alienated fans of Saracens, Wasps et al. If its that much of a problem for these people, here's an idea - GROW UP! pmsl as well at the idea of such an intercine 'rivalry' in London club rugby union - I know of Surrey Championship cricket clubs who have greater rivalries than that. Its pathetic.

A change of name and ground can't be judged on 5 years, especially 5 years when we've had sod all money. I don't know how many times I can keep going over this.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:32 am  

What's 'bafflingly vain' about a fiercely proud RL fan wanting to support an RL club with it's own identity? All you guys trying to act like you're writing a thesis on metaphysical modernity in the modern sporting marketplace make me laugh. Get your head out of your backsides. We're RL fans and we're all entitled to an opinion. Mine is that I want to support an RL club not a union club.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:14 am  

I loved the Coke Pepsi analogy. It is true without RU co-operation at a local club level the Summer Conference would never have got of the ground to which we are grateful, they must have been grateful for the rent and bar takings, but good on 'em. But Union and League are clean separate things as King Charles once said, you can like either, neither or both, but it sure confuses a lot of people who don't know what rugby is. We should be targeting the soccer fans with whom there is more affinity that RU.

nb I have nothing against Union, as with tennis and golf, I just don't like it, and lord knows I have tried to.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:52 am  

Tre Cool wrote:

What's 'bafflingly vain' about a fiercely proud RL fan wanting to support an RL club with it's own identity? All you guys trying to act like you're writing a thesis on metaphysical modernity in the modern sporting marketplace make me laugh. Get your head out of your backsides. We're RL fans and we're all entitled to an opinion. Mine is that I want to support an RL club not a union club.

I have no issues with your point about supporting a club with it's own identity, where I do have issues is that there is also a point being made that having done this, we would suddenly increase our gates from all those supposed stay away supporters who hate the current identity, and the facts don't support that thesis as for the likelyhood of loads of London Irish, Sarries et all supporters suddenly jumping on board cos we are not longer using their rivals tag..............well I am not holding my breath.

People, regardless of what primary or secondary sports they like, will come along if what is put in front of them is something they can enjoy & is value for money, much like a good few QRU supporters have done for our sport.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:41 am  

The Penguin wrote:

I've got no problem with associating ourselves with QRU - initially I did, its true, but I grew out of it - largely because I think the stoop is excellent and also because we've gained a few fans of the type described above, Quins RU fans who have either got STs or come to watch the odd game.

On the other hand, I had to laugh when Andy Wilson wrote in his 'set of six' this week that being called Harlequins RL alienated fans of Saracens, Wasps et al. If its that much of a problem for these people, here's an idea - GROW UP! pmsl as well at the idea of such an intercine 'rivalry' in London club rugby union - I know of Surrey Championship cricket clubs who have greater rivalries than that. Its pathetic.

A change of name and ground can't be judged on 5 years, especially 5 years when we've had sod all money. I don't know how many times I can keep going over this.

Well we are exactly the opposite then, I HOPED the change of name was going to work and I thought we would bring on board the same major sponsors as the RU Club, but it is has not worked, you say we have had little money, lets put it this way David Hughes and his Bank Manager will not agree when they look at his private accounts!

I rate Andy Wilson as one of our best rugby league journalists, he is from the younger end of the range and looks at everything with a real open mind, I don't always agree with him but that is the same with any sports debate.

IF more money is going to be invested and the RFL are going to put in even more output (depending on us getting another 3 year licence) then we have to get it right this time! we can't risk giving it five years with the Quins brand, we need a complete new re-launch. Yesterday it was reported that we are close to an agreement with Sky for the next period and it is even more money when I was thinking along with many others that they may have made a reduction like with parts of football, we don't know all the facts there may be some conditions?

We are not all going to agree whatever the decision is! but we have got to Unite and get behind the choice made as it could be the last throw of the dice for London with Super League!

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:31 am  

[quote="Homer"] as for the likelyhood of loads of London Irish, Sarries et all supporters suddenly jumping on board cos we are not longer using their rivals tag............

I don't think anyone (barring rupe1 maybe) is saying that BUT from a large number of RU fans of my acquaintance (mostly Reading Irish ) the fact that London's RL team play as Harlequins DOES keep them away at present, and has done since 2006! Whether or not they need to 'grow up' or not as another poster put it is another matter but us being Harlequins does put them off attending - fact!

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:38 am  

Hear Ye! wrote:

Maybe if you went into Oxford Street like those religious nutters and harp on with a tanoy system about us you might reach more people...

Sorry mate but I've now got image in my head of Dave Lister marching up and down Oxford St with the sandwich boards like that bloke years ago (I think he's dead now) - do you remember him ? I think his problem was along the lines of 'less lust from meat , nuts and sitting down!' I remember going past him once while he was in full rant mode saying ' you taxi drivers know what I mean oh yes!'

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:46 am  

Rob from Erith wrote:

I don't think anyone (barring rupe1 maybe) is saying that BUT from a large number of RU fans of my acquaintance (mostly Reading Irish) the fact that London's RL team play as Harlequins DOES keep them away at present, and has done since 2006! Whether or not they need to 'grow up' or not as another poster put it is another matter but us being Harlequins does put them off attending - fact!

It is good to see someone giving feedback the same view I receive from Union fans in the London area I know, regards the name Harlequins RL, no way would they appreciate being told to "grow up" as it is their personal feeling/opinion. IF we had converted just 10% of the regular Harlequins Rugby Union base/match attendees then perhaps we could have just said it is life we have alienated other rugby union supporters, but I would bet we are lucky if we have brought in many more than 100!

At the end of the day there is going to have to be some compromise and that may be staying at The Stoop until we can achieve our own ground or even as part owners which should be the aim for the next licence application submission.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:03 pm  

Rob from Erith wrote:

BUT from a large number of RU fans of my acquaintance (mostly Reading Irish ) the fact that London's RL team play as Harlequins DOES keep them away at present, and has done since 2006!

Rob, were they attendees at Broncos games pre the 2006 change or would they be new supporters?

If I remember correctly, we shared the Stoop with the Irish and Quins during the last season of the first stay there, but I don't honestly remember many Irish supporters [or at least many wearing their colours] coming along at that time.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:06 pm  

jaybs wrote:

It is good to see someone giving feedback the same view I receive from Union fans in the London area I know, regards the name Harlequins RL, no way would they appreciate being told to "grow up" as it is their personal feeling/opinion. IF we had converted just 10% of the regular Harlequins Rugby Union base/match attendees then perhaps we could have just said it is life we have alienated other rugby union supporters, but I would bet we are lucky if we have brought in many more than 100!

At the end of the day there is going to have to be some compromise and that may be staying at The Stoop until we can achieve our own ground or even as part owners which should be the aim for the next licence application submission.

Trouble is thats moving the goalposts a bit............ changing the ground [for which I am in favour] is a different matter to changing our name and staying at the Stoop in the hope it beings in many more seat warmers.

In an ideal world of course we would own our own ground, be branded under our own identity and have enough investors on board in order to help fund a winning side, but all of those steps are unlikely to be achieved at once.

Ps, the Valley was souless.