Wakefield Ram

And they're going to run junior teams from 6 years old? And pay for officials? And all the SL players who get loaned out to Championship and L1 clubs? Championship and L1 subsidise the need for Reserve

Super League wouldn't exist without junior rugby, amateur rugby, Championship and League One for both players and officials. Unless there's any players in SL who only took the game up at 18 in a SL Academy.

Another half back!!!!

They probably just had an intern read this Forum and get a copy of the old Framing the Future document.

The proposals don't really do anything to make it easier for promoted clubs to stay up. All it does is restrict the pool of clubs who can get promoted and relegated. SL players might even avoid Grade B clubs because of the greater risk of relegation. Sign for a Grade A club and you're guaranteed to stay SL.

All the proposals have achieved is to guarantee SL status for half a dozen of the biggest clubs and effectively end chance of promotion for a number of smaller clubs. How that is going to drive people through the turnstiles I'm not sure. None of the proposals are new or innovative. The proposals look like classic management consultancy to tell the important people what they want to hear to get them onside before they go for the real money at the next stage.

It was another forum member who posted that. So to ask the question, if a Grade B club finishes 9-10th in SL and a Grade B club is top of the Championship, what happens? Or does the Grade B team only get relegated if they finish bottom? What problem are actually IMG solving with their proposals?

I thought this was the sort of thing IMG would be proposing.

I've no idea either way but someone else posted saying he wanted to stay. Either way he's gone and good luck to him at Hunslet.

Glad it's not just me. I thought IMG were going to reveal their marketing ideas, which is their specialism.

I'll no doubt get slated for my cynicism at these proposals but here's my observations. I have worked with "strategic partners" before. They are not partners they are third parties looking to make as much money for themselves within the terms of their contract. Nothing wrong with that in itself, but always worth bearing in mind that their interests may diverge from interests of the sport. I imagine both sides will have exit clauses so 12 years is meaningless. They have done the classic management consultant job of re-hashing old ideas to please the more powerful people in the organisation - in this case the biggest clubs in SL. Grading - just a re-hash of licencing by another name with a few tweaks to make it seem different. IMHO possibly changing the grading to annually will encourage fringe Grade A/B into more short term spending. The only way clubs can be graded objectively is to apply some minimum criteria like ground size. Everything else will be cyclical on team performance or open to manipulation. Number of season ticket holders? Easy, give them away to kids or sell 1st x 000 at heavily discounted price. Promotion and Relegation - Until you have at least 12 Grade A clubs, there's scenarios which won't work. Not 2 x10 - not surprised -that would have reduced support for their proposals. Challenge Cup Final in May - wow you mean back to where it was more successfully for 80 odd years. Thanks for that insight. An international calendar - thank you for that insight. No loop fixtures - will be interesting how SL clubs react to losing 3 home game revenue. They will have to increase revenue per home game by c25% to make up the difference. Maximum 2 overseas clubs in SL - that's handy there's only 2 in RL. So if Toronto re-formed and got to Grade A, we just demote Toulouse or Catalan if they both are in SL? Or just tell Toronto they can never get in? Again a fairly meaningless sop to please existing SL clubs. Not so much a "re-imagining" of sport more a "re-hashing" of old ideas. Classic management consultant exercise. The last "Joint Venture" I witnessed in a work capacity ended with the client suing the "strategic partner". And they were a big consultancy group. The major issues look like Agreeing the objective grading criteria which cannot be manipulated. Any subjective measures will be open legal challenge. How SL clubs will replace 3 home game revenues Promotion and Relegation when there's Grade B clubs in SL Which of these proposals (apart from an international calendar) is going to make more people want to watch RL? Still predominantly the same players playing for the same clubs in the same stadiums to the same laws.

Demand won't be created by nicer stadiums.

Not really a sound basis for re-structuring a sport - have you got a generous council who'll build you a ground at council taxpayers expense?

The only way is to set minimum standards. Ground capacity Financial stability Anything else like number of season ticket holders, number of non-playing staff etc can either be manipulated or be influenced by on field performance which will be cyclical. For example, you could give very cheap or free season tickets to kids or say you owned a sundeck company, you could second staff to a club. Leigh fans - just a real life example, could be done by any club owner.

Or rather if their local council builds them a new stadium like York council taxpayers did.