There is a guy running the Quinssa stuff called 'the Prof' whom heads the organization I think and I have been forwarded on the disparaging comments about RL by people like Paul Roberts in the past when he worked in the Post room and had a bit of spare time on his hands.



I will see if Paul has the emails still, he sent them to my old work account, but you'd be surprised how rude in a semi-offical capacity the stuff was - I know a few of us got one email, Nigel, Mike Wreford etc.



I don't need to evidence everything I write, though if someone will forward on a link to the emails they send I'd pick them out pretty easily... the stuff I'm thinking about was one in particular about the vulgarity of our supporters at RU for cheering and shouting and not following the unwritten social code but I've seen a fair few divisive comments, funnily enough he didn't want to know when I wrote to him!



There is a big difference between someone like Wire Quin or myself moutihng off on a forum and an anti-RL supporter who is clearly influential heading up the RU association and being openly critical towards RL. Please send on the links to the Quinssa emails before you say it is imagination again. I don't mind the Union club at all - I just think they were much less committed to true partnership than was believed and they could have stepped in to buy Lenagan out as the agreement was.



As for us being more successful, that to me is relative.



I would suggest that if Super League were to break down into two leagues of ten that we would be very lucky indeed to get a place at the top table and yet only a few years back we were in the top ten every year. The Union club could have invested then - and perhaps we could be as strong as teams like Catalans and Huddersfield. No investment was made when we needed it.



With respect, you would have to be silly to think we would have done any better v St Helens in the opening game... they had SL legends like Wellens, Lyon, Long, Cunningham, Roby & Sculthorpe plus top players like Albert, Talau, Gilmour, P Anderson and V Anderson in the squad, it was the nucleus of a squad that won everything... league, cup, grand final, world club challenge, team of the year etc.



Where things went wrong in my view was our inability to take down the likes of Wakefield, Salford and Castleford in the following weeks, meaning that most floating supporters drifted away seemingly forever.



The Quins experiment is nearly over now, I'm glad it is over, perhaps it could have worked but the Doctor Frankenstein's like Lenagan, Evans etc have all gone leaving us with the abomination.



Cheers

Mark

jaybs, I didn't mean that people that dislike RU are idiots (I'm not mad keen myself) I think that people that come on here knocking other peoples sports are daft.



Each to their own in sports and everything else come to that (as long as it's law abiding).



Mark - I've met the Prof and I would be very surprised if he was the author of any RL hate mails. Mate, you've got it wrong. There are a few people that don't want us at the Stoop but for the most part, they couldn't care less about us unless we are being a nuisance.



I think we should all back off having a go at our landlords and their fans who for the most part, don't deserve it.

Mods - can someone lock this thread before anybody says anything further that might entail them getting their arsses sued?

Not unique to League despite what the "flat-earthers" would have us believe.



Now call me a heretic but I think that this "re-branding" consultation a red herring, designed to divert attention away from poor on the field performance toward on off the field drama of a few "Quins" brand is killing RL in London ranters. I reckon it's worked. Some times this forum has resembled the letters pages of League Express.



The "Quins" brand isn't killing RL in London, having a e team, lack of leadership on day to day issues and falling for the "flat-earthers" obsession regarding attendances has done us more harm than good.



Finally, we appear to have solved the lack of leadership issue in the appointment of Gus Mackay as Chief Executive.



He has shown that working with a media partner the numbers of bums on seats can be driven up via low cost methods ie promotions. Secondly, get some quality players in, which appears finally to be be happening, driven it appears by a differing recruitment ethos by the current coach to that of the previous incumbant.



Now in 2012 put the 2 together and with the rub of the green and a bit more extensive locallised marketing to "recruit" some more locals and you have the making of a potentially half decent season, buy our standards.



In fact I'd go as far to say that this time next year we could be expecting to be fighting at the business end of the season for a play off berth rather than indulging in yet another woodspoon avoidence exercise.



Keep the faith..............

... the point is Loyal Londoner, that we were taken on as a "partner" but the Quins supporters associations doesn't even acknowledge a Rugby League team exists on the home page or anywhere else on the site that could have been helpful.. are we Quins or not? They have made no effort and the supporters are disparaging, this is the general state of snide remarks made: www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read ... 0,12530725 This club were never really open to the concept of a dual club Now that we have got fed up with the lethargy and decided we may as well be our own this is also seen as a bad move I cannot see any negatives from having our own identity again, it is not as if there are thousands of RU supporters who will somehow cast us off, they are just entirely indifferent bar a couple of hundred at most I agree we are arguing about the colours of the deckchairs on the Titanic when there have been three years of stagnation, but at last the iceberg seems to be melting

... the point is Loyal Londoner, that we were taken on as a "partner" but the Quins supporters associations doesn't even acknowledge a Rugby League team exists on the home page or anywhere else on the site that could have been helpful.. are we Quins or not? They have made no effort and the supporters are disparaging, this is the general state of snide remarks made: www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read ... 0,12530725 This club were never really open to the concept of a dual club Now that we have got fed up with the lethargy and decided we may as well be our own this is also seen as a bad move I cannot see any negatives from having our own identity again, it is not as if there are thousands of RU supporters who will somehow cast us off, they are just entirely indifferent bar a couple of hundred at most I agree we are arguing about the colours of the deckchairs on the Titanic when there have been three years of stagnation, but at last the iceberg seems to be melting

Quote markrammond="markrammond"... the point is Loyal Londoner, that we were taken on as a "partner" but the Quins supporters associations doesn't even acknowledge a Rugby League team exists on the home page or anywhere else on the site that could have been helpful.. are we Quins or not? They have made no effort and the supporters are disparaging, this is the general state of snide remarks made: www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read ... 0,12530725 This club were never really open to the concept of a dual club Now that we have got fed up with the lethargy and decided we may as well be our own this is also seen as a bad move I cannot see any negatives from having our own identity again, it is not as if there are thousands of RU supporters who will somehow cast us off, they are just entirely indifferent bar a couple of hundred at most I agree we are arguing about the colours of the deckchairs on the Titanic when there have been three years of stagnation, but at last the iceberg seems to be melting'" Wow, is that the best you could find to back your story up !!

Quote markrammond="markrammond"... the point is Loyal Londoner, that we were taken on as a "partner" but the Quins supporters associations doesn't even acknowledge a Rugby League team exists on the home page or anywhere else on the site that could have been helpful.. are we Quins or not? They have made no effort and the supporters are disparaging, this is the general state of snide remarks made: www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read ... 0,12530725 This club were never really open to the concept of a dual club Now that we have got fed up with the lethargy and decided we may as well be our own this is also seen as a bad move I cannot see any negatives from having our own identity again, it is not as if there are thousands of RU supporters who will somehow cast us off, they are just entirely indifferent bar a couple of hundred at most I agree we are arguing about the colours of the deckchairs on the Titanic when there have been three years of stagnation, but at last the iceberg seems to be melting'" Wow, is that the best you could find to back your story up !!

I wrote it and it wasn't silly. Sure Saints were a good team and we couldn't have expected to beat them. Problem was that our team wasn't of a standard that could compete with them at all. To get the QuinsRL venture off to a good start, we =#FF0000had to compete. We weren't capable of that and should have known it. I'm sure that fixture was chosen to give the new venture a bumper send-off. Back-fired totally. Next season, let's start with a home game against Widnes, Wakefield or Bradford [

.

No, things had already gone wrong - those results just perpetuated the trend that was started in the first game.





Now I'm with you.

I agree with you Lambeth Quin, I too feel that the re-branding is a red-herring (possibly dreamt up as a way of justyfying a new SL license for a failing London club). I'm up for keeping the faith and looking forward to next season.



Mark, the link you have posted has some positive remarks re QRL and I think the majority of the posts on that thread are entirely reasonable, imo. Also, you say that their board doesn't mention RL but it does have a link to this board on the bottom left of their home page.



Furthermore, as you seem to be thin-skinned re what you perceive to be snide comments, then you'll forgive me for feeling that you are being "snide" referring to me as "Loyal Londoner". Either that or you are taking the complete pi$$.

"To support the activities and enterprises of the Harlequin Football

Club (hereinafter called “the Club”) both on and off the field; to

promote and facilitate the interest and activities of members of the

Association in their support for the Club; to represent the interests of

its members to the Club."



That is taken from the constitution of Quinssa. We ain't Harlequin Football Club. That is why they don't have much to do with Quins RL. Fair enough to my eyes.

Quote markrammond="markrammond" They have made no effort and the supporters are disparaging, this is the general state of snide remarks made: www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read ... 0,12530725 '" Erm, I actually wasted some of my time reading that, and seems like a load of mainly reasonable people being mainly reasonable. What's your beef? Maybe the Union club could have done more, but they're not a charity. Fact is as usual we royally stuffed this one up alone - no attempt at marketing beyond the sporadic half ars*d, and appalling performances on the field. We needed different outcomes in those two facets of the business, and might have had a chance. Any new name will also fail unless both are addressed (and we'll waste yet more time/resources starting from scratch yet again...). Brand has never been the main issue for this company, it's a massive straw man - it is, and has always been, poor execution.

Quote markrammond="markrammond" They have made no effort and the supporters are disparaging, this is the general state of snide remarks made: www.rugbynetwork.net/boards/read ... 0,12530725 '" Erm, I actually wasted some of my time reading that, and seems like a load of mainly reasonable people being mainly reasonable. What's your beef? Maybe the Union club could have done more, but they're not a charity. Fact is as usual we royally stuffed this one up alone - no attempt at marketing beyond the sporadic half ars*d, and appalling performances on the field. We needed different outcomes in those two facets of the business, and might have had a chance. Any new name will also fail unless both are addressed (and we'll waste yet more time/resources starting from scratch yet again...). Brand has never been the main issue for this company, it's a massive straw man - it is, and has always been, poor execution.

161 games played as Harlequins Rugby League, 100 of these were losses with 56 wins and 5 draws. Points difference of

-1,417 and a seasons average of 19.5 competition points are all factors in why the club have failed to pack'em in since 2006. I doubt very much that our jersey or name had as bigger influence than the depressing stats above