Big Graeme wrote:
What money is this then?
Well we can argue all day as to whether London get backhanders or not but that's the problem with backhanders - hard to prove either way.
So what about 15 years of Sky money? Does this not count, could another club not have used it better? This is one of the big issues expansionists skirt around - have London justified getting a cut of this money for 15 years. This money is not London's by right or had you just assumed it was?
What about the expense of developing the game in London, some of which is RFL funded or is a percentage of the Sky money.
There are other smaller issues but let's move on.
I'm sure your opinion differs from mine as to whether this money has been rightly used to give London a franchise spot, but let's at least be honest. What can't be denied is more than any other team in SL depend on their Sky money without which they would simply fold never to return probably not even at NL2level. This at a club that never gained promotion on the field to the elite and never looked likely too.
If I could see any sign of London making it I'd back them but it's 30 years - I get your passion and understand your desire to make it work but in life some things are just not meant to be - how much longer before someone flicks the switch. I'm really torn over London emotionally because real people are involved and depend on the club one way or another but economically I find it much simpler.