Exiled Wiganer
-
Posts
10,073 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Exiled Wiganer
-
-
11 hours ago, JohnM said:
Good point. When are clubs checked?
Are the grading scores re-assessed:
Every season?
Every month?
Every game?
Every day?
Every hour?
We (or at least I) don’t know enough to know what was asked, what the position was and what their answers were, but the one thing we do all know that they were checked and within a few weeks of the decision being made they went begging for an advance to keep themselves afloat.
I assume your position is that 1. The test was a good test. 2. It was properly carried out. 3. Salford replied openly and fully. All of which may be true. Or some of it. Or none of it.
If we have got this far, then perhaps we are agreed that your view is as speculative as any contrary view.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Worzel said:
I’m an IMG Ultra, in fact I might have a t-shirt made now, it sounds great.
I‘ve watched the game mismanage itself for 30 years. I’ve watched supporters with the mindset of the shopkeepers in the League of Gentlemen criticise sensible attempts at change, and blame outsiders for failure, for those same 30 years. So frankly if criticising them with rational argument counts as “demeaning” and “defaming” them then I’ll stick that quote on the back of a t-shirt too.
Indeed, I am sure you will stick to hammering anyone who deviates from your view.
Indeed, your response to my longish post honed in on the only part that deviated from your view. Did you even get to read the rest or did the red mist make it impossible to do so?
I have seen the game improve immeasurably from where it was when I first started watching it in the 70s. If you had told me then that we would see multiple 5 figure crowds every week, and have over 50 countries playing our game at some level I would have been doing cartwheels.
What you may see and be annoyed about is the gap between our potential and the reality. In which case, that is laudable, and the only difference is that my strong desire to see our game grow starts from a slightly different place.
It seems to me that the only things keeping me from the ultras club is 1) my perspective on who should do the assessments, how well they have been done and why and 2) the depth of my despair at the way the game has been run in the time during which it has been my privilege to watch it.
-
On 09/01/2025 at 21:31, LeeF said:
Matty Peet. The latest inductee to the IMG Ultras gang
I used that expression, as it succinctly describes the group of posters who appear to attribute nothing but positives to everything and anything IMG do, while demeaning - and indeed defaming - critics. If you don’t like it, then don’t behave like it.
I know what Radlinski and Peet said. They are positive people, who want our game to grow.
I think that:
- IMG are very good indeed at what they generally do, which is secure TV and other deals;
- IMG are perfectly placed to say that in order to maximise revenue the game has to get its act together and to recommend ways in which to do so;
- it is right for the game to dust off its frame the future/objective ratings for clubs: in one form or another we have done this in the past, with some success. In doing that, IMG would be perfectly placed to frame the criteria;
- I would have done the assessments in house. That’s a judgment call, and I can see that others would take a different position. I think Salford’s position supports my argument, but accept that is from a distance.
Someone made the point above around change taking time. I agree, but presumably someone somewhere has an idea as to when we can expect to see some improvement.
It may be never, as the clubs themselves may not be capable of lifting their game, or may not be bothered to do so, given that they only need to be in the top 12. Wakefield, after all, are still yet to meet framing the future standards and were awarded a place.
IMG are an absolutely excellent choice to sell our game, and help us to do so. It is for the game to step up and help them do their job.
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, Wolford6 said:
I stand by what I posted. The figures, as stated, are from the BBC. I don't need any virtue signalling from you ... I have personal knowledge of previous issues involving a friend and a family member.
50% of rape complaints don't go to court ... for whatever reason. If you don't like the stats, take it up with the BBC.
As do I. However, this is not the place to set out the massive gap between the number of sexual assaults committed and the number of charges which are ever brought, let alone the number of convictions secured. You have taken a statistic entirely out of context, which is meaningless and profoundly and to my mind dangerously misleading.
-
2
-
-
We did get her a table at the Catalans game for her 100th, Guasch presented her with a top (she saw , and Rads wrote her a letter. Her all time Wigan team is a strong one.
What is awe inspiring is that she remembers everything with perfect clarity. So, she will happily compare and contrast the many eras she has watched. Her love for our game remains undimmed. Though she is a very bad loser, but hopefully she’ll grow out of that.
-
On 04/01/2025 at 08:17, Wolford6 said:
The Bulls should have just suspended Kevin Appo.
In England and Wales, anyone facing civil or criminal charges is theoretically innocent until proved guilty .. unless the offence has already been admitted.
According to this BBC article, 50% of rape cases are dropped by the victims.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48095118
Poor old Ched Evans was effectively sentenced to five years imprisonment for not commiting rape. Reprehensible behaviour, but not rape.
I was tempted to write a long response around how the system makes it very difficult indeed for someone who has been sexually assaulted to see justice, but will instead suggest that you might care to dig deeper into the charge and conviction rates for these offences.
It is to my mind reprehensible to quote the figure you state without context.
-
8
-
-
It is a long time but… Following a long tradition, I bought my auntie a season ticket for the Piedome. She turns 101 this year and has been going since she is 8 and has virtually never missed a home game.
Moreover, she remembers her own father and grandfather discussing Wigan players before her time so well that there is literally not a single high profile Wigan player from 1895 onwards whom she has not seen or heard about from someone who watched them first hand.
-
11
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, JT RL said:
RFL hand back responsibility for the administration (& growth) of the amateur game to BARLA
Lots of good ideas.
I am one of the few people who still think the 2 leagues of 10 could work (especially if this is a if I ruled the world proposition), so like your 18 team proposal!-
1
-
-
Is this a wish list? I happen to think that things are looking superb across the game globally, compared to any other time in the 50 years I have been following it, but agree we can be much much bigger.
Assuming it’s an If I ruled the world thing then there are 2 things I would do:- look to put in place as many development officers, for all forms of our game, including touch anywhere and everywhere. There would even be grant funding available in a lot of the places we want to grow the game. I would rather 10 London development officers than to watch a London SL team among a crowd only just in 4 figures (and I write that as someone who has spent plenty of years having done so); and
- prioritise France and Wales above all else, and do everything in our power to make them as strong as they can be: historically, both of those have been strong league playing nations (I appreciate that the Vichies paying for rolling around in mud makes Wales’ position far weaker, but they will turn out for our game).
-
2
-
1
-
-
Just now, gingerjon said:
Not lying, but some understanding of why you'd not use IMG's expertise based on what has happened in your experience with them, would be helpful.
Because all that's coming across is a repeated joke about interns and social media hits, and a statement that you'd use them for broadcast deals (as the RFL has in the past) but not for their sports strategy work, for which they are employed by plenty of sports bigger than rugby league. But no reasoning why.
I wrote a note earlier this afternoon which provides the context, and reasoning. Surely you read all of it, rather than simply the part you accused me of making up?
Having re read your post, it looks rather like you are accusing me of lying. I am not.
-
Just now, dkw said:
Do others get angry as you claim, or are you projecting?
This particular poster wrote that he did, so I took him at his word. Which is not projecting. I knew I shouldn’t have used that word. Sorry to have confused you.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, dkw said:
Wheras you lose it if anyone dares to say anything other than negativity towards it, no idea why, it seems disproportionate and may be healthy.
Do I lose it? Or are you projecting somewhat? Maybe you could find someone to read you all the words I have written, including my take on IMG’s role in increasing income for the game. I know it’s a long post, but surely you have a few days off?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:
Is it because it has absolutely no bearing on understanding the IMG/RFL relationship but, if you keep it vague, it might sound like it does?
Cos, if you're going into the whole "I could tell you but then I'd have to NDA you" spiel, I'll just assume it's as valid as anything that comes out of our Leigh correspondent's mouth regarding what he's heard about North American investment whilst in the LSV hospitality.
You can do exactly what you like. You seem to be accusing me of lying. I am not lying, and if it were appropriate to tell you I would happily do so.
-
1 minute ago, gingerjon said:
And yet whenever anyone asks you to elaborate on the context of this, the question gets deleted.
You really are old enough to know why that might be.
-
3 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:
Did these clubs do this pre-IMG?
If so, how did it work out?I am not sure what the questions mean, but if you are asking what clubs did prior to IMG being involved in the game, then for over 100 years they invested time and money in developing players and grounds in which games of professional rugby league can be watched. Saints and Warrington designed and built grounds far better than their historic homes, Wigan, FC and the Giants moved into incomparably better stadia, HKR (I think) redeveloped their stadium. Leeds upgraded theirs, Salford moved into a new one built locally, which in some respects is better than their previous home. I can’t comment on what Cas and Trinity have done, though the sense I have is not a great deal. So, the majority of SL clubs moved into better stadia prior to IMG’s involvement. Similarly, York, Widnes and Halifax (I may have missed many others). There had been substantial capital investment in our game long before IMG counted things.
We can measure the end results - crowds in the SL era are far higher than they were for the 20 years preceding it, and significant support far more broadly spread.
So, it worked out very well indeed.
-
27 minutes ago, JohnM said:
Factual:
https://www.premierleague.com/news/4172032
Conjectural:
The IMG Premier League team moves off the IMG payroll and onto the Premier League payroll.
Conclusion: Told you so. the RFL/IMG deal is rubbish, a failure, won't work, Ultimate Rugby League is the future, like garlic bread and static caravan decking.
You get very angry indeed about anything anti IMG. I have no idea why that should be. It seems disproportionate, and may be unhealthy.
Let me expand on my perspective. I confess to having had professional dealings directly with IMG stretching back to 2017, and have known and loved rugby league for over 50 years. From my knowledge of IMG and our game, what I would have done is ask them to look into what broadcasting/sponsorship deals we can get, and how we should market ourselves. I would categorically have not asked them to carry out the exercise they have just done, as I believe that 1) they will add nothing, 2) the game knows itself and its clubs far better than external accountants and 3) if there is anything which should be done in house it is grading the clubs. The Salford situation is entirely consistent with my take on it.
However, and it is a big however, I can see a point in IMG advising as to how the game should look if it wants to increase revenues from sponsors/broadcasters. If we want them to sell something, then it makes sense for them to have an input into what needs to be done to sell that thing. Who knows they may even have ideas which allow the world to “reimagine” the game. It is not an insane judgement call to say that, as they are taking the lead on how to sell the game they should take on the role they have taken on. My judgment call would have been different, but I can see the argument.
What really puzzles me about the IMG ultras is how they characterise any criticism and any critic of what has been done so far as being insane/obsessed. In particular, I find the hysterical attacks on anyone criticising the process in the light of the Salford debacle off the scale weird.
To finish on some common ground. The primary goal - I assume - is to improve income streams in a competitive market. And time will tell whether IMG can do that. Instead, success may actually be to slow the decline we have seen for years. There will be a time when they are mostly doing what they do well, at which point we will be able to measure their success in pounds, shillings and pence. And I am sure we are in complete agreement that we ultimately want them and the game to succeed in driving forward the greatest game.
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, gingerjon said:
After 20 years.
Would you say the last two decades have been good or bad for the income of top level soccer in England?
I agree with your point 100%. IMG are very good indeed at media rights work. It is also good that the Premier League now has enough talent to bring this in house. League in the UK is many many years away from that.
-
22 hours ago, Tommygilf said:
Salford scored really, really, really badly on the financial aspects of the grading criteria.
They made up for that in every other area.
That is how this system works, and how the sport wanted this system to work.
Without a handout they couldn’t pay their players, within weeks of IMG’s assessment, which included an assessment of their financial standing. You have to have players in a professional sporting competition. All the TikToks in the world can’t compensate for that. So, the outcome of this system would have been an 11 team league, had the clubs - whose precious time was spent sorting this out, when they could have been working on their own clubs - not given them a handout.
These aren’t my opinions, they are facts.
Ah, says you, but this is a great test, which worked exactly as planned!
Mine is that it would be a bad thing for a club to be unable to field a team, and therefore that either the test is rubbish or Salford lied.
We could of course settle this by asking the clubs whether they were concerned about teams being able to play rugby league at all. My money is that the reimagining they thought IMG were promising didn’t involve an 11 team Super League. Though, in fairness, a sporting competition designed around media hits rather than sport does qualify as a reimagining.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, The Future is League said:
IF there finances were in order why did they ask for an advance payment of TV money?
Because they weren’t in order.
However, there is a group of hard core IMG cheerleaders who attribute anything negative around the assessment as nothing to do with the people outside the sport whom we are paying to assess the clubs. It is difficult to get your head around the lengths that people will go to ignore the blatantly obvious: either the test was rubbish, or Salford lied.
-
1
-
2
-
-
What were the social media hit scores?
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, JohnM said:
Exiled Wigner wrote, "they had promised to “reimagine” RL that hadn’t happened."
Radlinski said, it seems, "I think something which was perhaps mistaken right at the start of the IMG relationship was using the word ‘reimagination’.
Exiled Wiganer wrote "promised"
Radlinski said, "I think"
Exiled Wiganer wrote " they had expected IMG to do more than counting stuff"
Radlinski said, "the reality is they’ve encouraged clubs to improve standards and there’s been many examples of investment and infrastructure and digital transformation"
Such misrepresentation of a largely positive view of the project doesn't just weaken Exiled Wiganer's argument, it totally invalidates it.
Re-read all of what he actually said. I am entirely comfortable with my précis, which is why I posted the quote. Had I intended to misrepresent it, that is the last thing I would have done.
Read all of the words, not just the ones that back up your “Everything good is because of IMG!” obsession. Radlinski was, as he always does, doing his best to portray the sport in the best possible light. Nevertheless, he had to highlight that there has been a lot of criticism of the only thing IMG has done, and no wonder given that Salford have no actual money and they missed it.
He highlights that IMG were supposed to reimagine the game, and nothing has happened. This is Radlinski doing his best to sell our game, as is his job and which he does well.
The investment that came about just because of IMG is what exactly? There isn’t any that wouldn’t have happened regardless of who was running the process. He then specifically highlighted counting media hits.
Trinity don’t even meet the Framing the Future standards, and get promoted. I am not surprised they are happy with it.
I appreciate that nothing will shift you from your pro IMG stance, and your visceral dislike of even the slightest criticism.
To go back to the original question - if it is “Now that Trinity are promoted having not done any of the things we promised to do 20 years ago, shouldn’t Trinity fans be delighted with IMG?” then the answer is undoubtedly yes.
-
3
-
-
“IMG have come on board, they’re our strategic partner and next year will be the first year of the grading process which we’ve all been through. It’s got some fans and it’s had some real negative press as well but I think IMG have said all along that it’s not the solution, it’s part of the process.
“Once the objectives have been achieved, which is to create stronger clubs, then they will talk about the next evolution of the sport. I think something which was perhaps mistaken right at the start of the IMG relationship was using the word ‘reimagination’.
“I think people expected a little bit different but the reality is they’ve encouraged clubs to improve standards and there’s been many examples of investment and infrastructure and digital transformation but perhaps it’s not been the reimagination or the dream we first anticipated and I think they would probably say they’re a little bit behind where they would like to be at this stage. From a product point of view it’s still delivering.”Radlinski’s words.
The first stage lead to:
- the winner of the championship replacing the bottom placed club
- Salford being given a licence: within weeks it became apparent they have no money
The process to assess clubs in a variety of ways is by no means novel. The game has done this on numerous occasions. There is no sign of increased central funding or sponsorship.
-
14 hours ago, gingerjon said:
Obviously, needs merging with the IMG thread.
Equally obviously: IMG are having a positive impact on rugby league.
Equally equally obviously: there is a long way to go.
Equally equally equally obviously: there are still some blind folk who will never see, but regard their lack of visual capacity as a badge of honour.
You can write directly to Radlinski at Wigan Rugby, the Piedome, to express your disgust.
-
Radlinski was recently quoted as saying that they had expected IMG to do more than counting stuff and that although they had promised to “reimagine” RL that hadn’t happened.
The “concrete” outcomes so far have seen Trinity, who won the championship, replacing London, who finished last.
Within weeks of being awarded a licence to play in SL, it became apparent that Salford have no money.
But never have social media hits been more counted!!!
-
9
-
IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)
in The General Rugby League Forum
Posted
I thought I would re read your response in case I had barked up the wrong tree.
Do you think it is reasonable to suggest that anyone who deviates from your position is in the same bracket as the League of Gentlemen local shop for local people?
Because they were the actual words you wrote…