Damien

We are talking about a RL club. The measure used is fine for this purpose as part of an all round grading of a clubs suitability for SL. We are not talking about an online company that needs to scrutinise every inch of its online presence to the nth degree here.

Its not doing both though is it, is Welsby really that much more known than Newman? As I said it's not like there are any standouts that appeal to the wider public anyway, we aren't hiding a Martin Offiah away here. Newman is an England player as much as anyone else, I really don't get the club mentality when it comes to the England team.

It's the measure all social media uses and as such its the one that makes sense for this digital criteria. If it's good enough as the measure for Facebook, Instagram et al then it's good enough for this. I can only imagine the howls of complaint if this wasn't used as the measure and the criteria went against the industry standard.

It's not meaningless, it's literally the measure that every social media platform uses. If you have a digital criteria it would be extremely odd to use anything else as a measure.

In the world of social media they certainly are counted as engagements.

A pretty great breakdown and explanation from Barrow with insight on how they can improve. Just a snip below but the best breakdown I've seen yet: Below, supporters can see an explanation of how Barrow Raiders scored in IMG’s indicative club grading, as part of the ‘Reimagining Rugby League’ strategy. FANDOM – 5 POSSIBLE POINTS – WE SCORED 3.25PTS Average attendance for league fixtures over the last three years gave us 1.5pts from a possible 2.5pts. In order to achieve the 1.5pts, our average was greater than 1,500. To get 2pts this needs to rise to 3,000 and for 2.5pts the threshold is 7,500. Our plan must be to try to get to 3,000 for an extra 0.5pts. Our digital followers gave us 0.1 pts from a possible 0.2pts. In order to achieve 0.1pts we had a social following above 50,000 across Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, TikTok and YouTube. Above 100,000 followers would get 0.15pts, and above 500,000 would get 0.2pts. Our realistic plan would be to get to 100,000 for an extra 0.05pts Our social following engagement (comments, likes, shares etc) of over 700,000 gave us 0.4pts from a possible 0.8pts. In order to achieve 0.6pts, we would need to get to 2,500,000 and 0.8pts would need over 5,000,000. https://www.barrowrlfc.com/latest-news/barrow-raiders-img-grading-explained/

I don't really see how that is a bad thing. I'm not sure who else you'd choose to use to get any more promotion from a wider market anyway.

Yeah, there was always fireworks for sure!

Yeah I think Morley would be scary in a different way to players like Skerret and far more intimidating. There are probably a fair few players of that era like Skerret who were just pure dirty, all teams had them. However I think a player like Morley could do all the dirty stuff but would also have striked fear into anyone running at them or trying to tackle them.

If only we had a transfer thread for all this stuff where this was posted hours ago.

You could make those arguments and comparisons with Basketball though and the NBA seems rather popular in the US.

But that isn't what fans have been saying.

I'd have absolutely no problem with that. The trouble is even more would moan about those and to have any standards worth their salt we would struggle to even have enough teams for SL. At least this way is more of a carrot and stick approach where failings in one area can be made up elsewhere.

Harry its not always about you. It was a discussion about the actual criteria not the marking of it and not about what you agree or don't agree with. Yet again you are just quoting and droning on because you jumped in with a reply without reading the context of what you were replying to. What people say when replying to each other and not even quoting you is not about you or what you think.

Oh insults again. So why wade into a discussion about criteria then? You obviously didn't read what you replied to and jumped in with both feet as usual.

Well as usual you are wrong You quoted me about setting criteria and said as long as it is correct. What is the correct criteria to you will be different to someone else. That is completely different to how the said criteria is measured.

Correct is a fantasy term. Your view of what is correct will be quite different to someone else.

Its a starting point, from a very low base for the majority of clubs, and is certainly better than having no standards and using no metrics. I would expect these to evolve and improve over time, not for next year though as it wouldnt be fair to clubs to change now and would cause even more complaints.

I wouldn't be particularly bothered if PNG was pushed to the 19th team if that makes more sense and still isn't too far down the line (I want to get to 20 asap). I would though be bitterly disappointed if some sort of fudge happens with the Bears. If the 18th team is someone else then we should really be looking at Perth, NZ2 or another Queensland team. None of these require the Bears.

The two shouldn't be mutually exclusive though. IMG criteria should go hand in hand with the growth of the club.

I think NZ have a really strong team and were very impressive last year in the World Cup and were unlucky not to beat the Aussies. They are far stronger now than in the 2017 World Cup when they looked fairly shambolic and did looked rocked by all the defections and team turmoil. Yes last week Australia looked strong but they should, everything in international RL is stacked in their favour. The other countries aren't allowed to play enough games or prepare properly to stand a chance. They don't get 3 weeks SOO prep and 3 high intensity games and have to instead play for their clubs. Until that genuinely changes we shouldn't be surprised when they lack the cohesive or sharpness of the Aussies.

Smithies will go well in the NRL. His game and style is well suited for it.

Not sure what's easy about getting to a trainer 20+ metres away behind a defensive line.

I think the RU version of that rule is better where they would give away a penalty for touching the ball when it is live in play.