Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:17 pm  

Surreyben wrote:

Actually, they are a household name to any union fan. Richmond are one of the most famous, historic and oldest rugby union clubs in England.

Fair enough. Though I wasn't talking about just Union fans, I meant London sports fans in general. I don't think many young people in London would know much about them, unless they were Union fans, because they're not at the top level of the game, whereas Saracens, Irish, Harlequins, Wasps are household names to people who don't watch or know anything about Union. Myself, I don't know anything about Richmond and I know of the name due to seeing them on a Union league table a few years ago. Anyway, I vote in favour for Harlequins, unless a name change, to something like Thames Harlequins. Surely we're in South west London and not West London as well?


Are we really moving grounds again?! This is why I think supporting this team can be ridiculous at times. We can't simply give something a chance, without changing it up again! We'd be mad to leave the area, considering we have done all the community work and got the local schools playing the game!

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:22 pm  

Surreyben wrote:

Actually, they are a household name to any union fan. Richmond are one of the most famous, historic and oldest rugby union clubs in England.

Most of those who have jumped on the RU bandwagon in the last 10-15 years won't have a clue who Richmond are.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:27 pm  

Dave Lister wrote:

Most of those who have jumped on the RU bandwagon in the last 10-15 years won't have a clue who Richmond are.

If the club is changing its name do you think Richmond is a good idea?.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:30 pm  

gutterfax wrote:

it wouldn't be the first time a "thread" topic on here became a "story" in LE.

There is no evidence to suggest Fullers have any sponsorships with the RFU.

They sponsored the Middlesex Seven's in the past and do have some involvement with club rugby sponsorship. These type of links to "English Rugby" were the main thrust of their defence against complaints of ambush marketing brought by the RFU (as already pointed out by GF).

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:30 pm  

j.c wrote:

If the club is changing its name do you think Richmond is a good idea?.

I'm indifferent.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:33 pm  

I only say we should have that name, because it gives us statibility. Whereas if we're called London, I can't help but think we're going be moving all around the city again. My first choice is Harlequins though.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:35 pm  

Surreyben wrote:

Actually, they are a household name to any union fan. Richmond are one of the most famous, historic and oldest rugby union clubs in England.

I'm sure Scott Quinnel left Wigan for Richmond Union, when Union went professional.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:39 pm  

jeffb wrote:

I'm sure Scott Quinnel left Wigan for Richmond Union, when Union went professional.

And that was pretty much when Richmond collapsed.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 5:40 pm  

Abit like Orrell RU.

Re: Story in Guardian today : Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:20 pm  

Surreyben wrote:

Actually, they are a household name to any union fan. Richmond are one of the most famous, historic and oldest rugby union clubs in England.

But they merged with London Irish and London Scottish to become just London Irish, so that name is now one that exists as a local level team playing against other towns in London and the South East, so a good upstanding name doesn't stand up to much when money is the one doing the talking.