IMG - Vote on Wednesday

[gingerjon]

3 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Or Wigan in 1980. Any self respecting RL fan should know that at least

It's still 42 years. That's quite a long time.

And in the rather ridiculous days of four-up, four-down.

[Gomersall]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It's still 42 years. That's quite a long time.

And in the rather ridiculous days of four-up, four-down.

We need 4 up 4 down back. That’ll keep the Cat. B teams on their toes.

[GeordieSaint]

18 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't think having 20 Grade A clubs is the problem you are presenting it as. That would mean that the game has been hugely successful.

Be careful Dave… starting to sound like Sadler’s panacea idea!

[Derwent Parker]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Indeed.

And on-field performance is a part of it. We don't yet know how big a part but it's in there.

So Batley would score higher on that, wherever they finished in SL 22, than any side in the Championship.

How can you compare on-field performance between "B" teams - you can only do that for teams in same league.

But you can't compare on-field performance between "B" teams in different leagues.

So, if a SL "B" team is second bottom only winning 4 games in season [playing harder matches] can't really be replaced by a Championship "B" team is second Top only Losing 4 games in season [playing easier matches].

[Tommygilf]

14 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Or Wigan in 1980. Any self respecting RL fan should know that at least

I did think that! 

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

How can you compare on-field performance between "B" teams - you can only do that for teams in same league.

But you can't compare on-field performance between "B" teams in different leagues.

So, if a SL "B" team is second bottom only winning 4 games in season [playing harder matches] can't really be replaced by a Championship "B" team is second Top only Losing 4 games in season [playing easier matches].

You do realise that is the entire and sole premise of promotion and relegation as a system to decide who makes up the top decision?

Edited September 29, 2022 by Tommygilf

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Pulga said:

I'm not sure what the problem is. Geography will come into it. Of course it will be a concern for the smaller of the clubs clustered together. You simply can't have 2 or 3 clubs within a stone's throw. It just doesn't make sense. 

I think some clubs will come to the conclusion that they'll have to merge or miss out by themselves.

If you think that if say Leigh merge with Wigan, Widnes with Saints or Warrington, Fev with Cas or Wakefield that it will be hunky dory and the fans will follow think again, you would be taking these clubs out of their spiritual home, you will probably go into some silliliquey about the mergers in Australia and the same reaction was from the fans there in the mergers, but I would say there is a massive cultural difference in the attitudes of people belonging to places that are many years older than places with not much history.

[Toby Chopra]

27 minutes ago, Damien said:

I would like to see expansion and clubs outside the traditional areas. However, at this moment in time I would like to see a strong league with every club spending up to the cap and beyond. I think achieving that simple goal would do wonders for the competition. I think 12 clubs, and ideally 14 clubs doing that, is better for Super League than plonking a shell of a club in London (in the guise we see now with no real financial clout).

For me a key driver has to be the financials of clubs because if they are strong financially everything else can be achieved through minimum standards (hopefully and the grading process). If a club can commit to spending the salary cap, and where there are doubts around the dependency on an owner provide a bond, then I think they should be in regardless of location. If that means Leigh doing that courtesy of Beaumont, or if indeed Toulouse can commit to that, instead of London then so be it.

Yep, I agree. 

Look at the sort of financial guarantees the Dolphins are having to provide in the NRL. If an owner can come up with a UK-appropriate version of that, happy days, I'm all for it and the proposed system seems to allow it, even encourage it. 

But saying "you're in cos you're in a big city" has been shown to fail and I'm glad we've (seemingly) moved on from that. 

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

You do realise that is the entire and sole premise of promotion and relegation as a system to decide who makes up the top decision?

Promotion and relegation is natural and ordained by god.

Moving teams up and down divisions based on comparisons of end of season performances is satanic.

[The Future is League]

26 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't think having 20 Grade A clubs is the problem you are presenting it as. That would mean that the game has been hugely successful.

20 A Grade clubs is not going to happen in my life time. 10 at most

[Dave T]

Just now, The Future is League said:

20 A Grade clubs is not going to happen in my life time. 10 at most

I suppose the challenge is Grade A isn't really a thing. 

But you're right. If we consider Grade A to be premium clubs. 

We will always have stronger and weaker clubs. Old Grade A would just become Grade B. You'd benchmark and raise standards. It's a non-issue. 

[fighting irish]

17 hours ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

Dave Woods on the BBC saying the ‘Super League’ branding likely to be scrapped.

Something that represents the whole of the game likely to come instead.

As for the other details it seems a fudge between those who want franchising and those who want P and R.

Is this something they nicked as an idea from European basketball?

I’m all for not re-inventing the wheel when it comes to creating things but how successful has the model been?

Alphamax Football !!!

With regard to your second point I think IMG are telling clubs to put mechanisms in place to build the clubs assets for the medium to long term and not gamble all their available resources on a squad they hope will get them promoted.

This strategy and the commitment to it, will allow B grade clubs to build in, stability and sustainability and grow to a Super Club (and the surrounding grass roots, infrastructure) over time.

There-in lies the rub.

No-one wants to do the right thing because it involves delayed gratification.

You know that big ''grown-up'' habit we tell our kids to develop for a better future.

If you get any information on the Euro Basketball, I'd be eager to see/hear it? 

[Pulga]

14 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

If you think that if say Leigh merge with Wigan, Widnes with Saints or Warrington, Fev with Cas or Wakefield that it will be hunky dory and the fans will follow think again, you would be taking these clubs out of their spiritual home, you will probably go into some silliliquey about the mergers in Australia and the same reaction was from the fans there in the mergers, but I would say there is a massive cultural difference in the attitudes of people belonging to places that are many years older than places with not much history.

Yes, the 13 year head start in England has really added to these feelings of nostalgia....

 

If teams don't want to merge then that's fine. Stay a category C team. 

Edited September 29, 2022 by Pulga

[gingerjon]

18 hours ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

I’m all for not re-inventing the wheel when it comes to creating things but how successful has the model been?

Some figures are in here.

There's dozens of equivalent articles from the past few years.

https://basketnews.com/news-175443-euroleague-reportedly-projects-to-reach-100-million-in-turnover-next-year.html

[Jughead]

John Davidson saying “several Super League clubs are behind the proposal” and Featherstone have publicly backed it. I imagine both London’s are probably behind it and so will the two French sides. 

 

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Some figures are in here.

There's dozens of equivalent articles from the past few years.

https://basketnews.com/news-175443-euroleague-reportedly-projects-to-reach-100-million-in-turnover-next-year.html

It's interesting stuff, although I think there is some real lack of transparency there around numbers, with floating % used for many things. 

But I think somebody linked to an article that a new 10 year agreement has been reached, which suggests this has been a success. I think if we extend in a decade then we'd have to assume it is good news. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Jughead said:

John Davidson saying “several Super League clubs are behind the proposal” and Featherstone have publicly backed it. I imagine both London’s are probably behind it and so will the two French sides. 

 

York are supportive too. 

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

York are supportive too. 

York are exactly the sort of club this is aimed at IMO. 

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's interesting stuff, although I think there is some real lack of transparency there around numbers, with floating % used for many things. 

But I think somebody linked to an article that a new 10 year agreement has been reached, which suggests this has been a success. I think if we extend in a decade then we'd have to assume it is good news. 

Yes, that's basically a Serious About RL level bit of reporting. There is somewhat more fudging about numbers because some of the teams are Real Madrid and Barca and the taxman might be reading - and there's ongoing issues with FIBA and other European domestic leagues, international competitions and the like because basketball is a massive global sport.

The boil-down in any version though is, genuinely, improving teams, bigger audiences, more money and a league which people are clambering to join.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

These changes will benefit lower clubs far more than the Wigans and Leeds of the world.

 OR OTHERWISE totally putting on my Cherry and White specs, when (not if) Leigh win promotion on Sunday, before this announcement there was a clear view and stratergy that had to be acheived and that was to consolidate in SL by not finishing lower than 11th position next season and build from there, they could very possibly accomplish that but on field performance is not what will be required in the future to maintain a seat at the top table will it?

[Roughyed Rats]

7 minutes ago, fighting irish said:

Alphamax Football !!!

With regard to your second point I think IMG are telling clubs to put mechanisms in place to build the clubs assets for the medium to long term and not gamble all their available resources on a squad they hope will get them promoted.

This strategy and the commitment to it, will allow B grade clubs to build in, stability and sustainability and grow to a Super Club (and the surrounding grass roots, infrastructure) over time.

There-in lies the rub.

No-one wants to do the right thing because it involves delayed gratification.

You know that big ''grown-up'' habit we tell our kids to develop for a better future.

If you get any information on the Euro Basketball, I'd be eager to see/hear it? 

Of course it all depends on the criteria and whether it's within reasonable reach. Let's make an assumption that stadium capacity is one of the criteria. For the sake of ease, let's use the criteria used for licensing when first implemented back in 2009, which was 10,000. Only 8 clubs out of the 25 Championship and League 1 clubs would meet this and many would consider it unachievable; so is there anything to play for? Perhaps this is just way of surreptitiously trimming down the number of professional clubs. 

[Dunbar]

I want to see what impact this new approach to structure has on the pitch.

The one thing that I find immensely frustrating in modern Rugby League in the UK is that we seem to always need a reason to win and if that reason is not there fans, and indeed clubs, disconnect from the idea that winning a match matters for the sake of winning - surely what sport should be about.

We hear it all the time with fans describing a match as meaningless (because play off / relegation places have been confirmed) or clubs fielding sides full of kids because they have decided that this is a game they can't be bothered to try and win.

My fear is that teams being guaranteed top tier status will only inflate this attitude with clubs and fans deciding that games become meaningless if there is nothing to play for.  This drives an apathy which can infest the whole sport. 

(None of the above is about the players - they try every game, they have to, Rugby League is a tough and unforgiving game.  It is about clubs deciding that some games, that their fans pay good money to attend, can be treated as superfluous to the season and they simply don't need to be won).

[Pulga]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

 OR OTHERWISE totally putting on my Cherry and White specs, when (not if) Leigh win promotion on Sunday, before this announcement there was a clear view and stratergy that had to be acheived and that was to consolidate in SL by not finishing lower than 11th position next season and build from there, they could very possibly accomplish that but on field performance is not what will be required in the future to maintain a seat at the top table will it?

Make sure you get to as many games as you can next year mate. You may not see Leigh in the top flight for at least 12 years after 2023.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Gomersall said:

I must have dreamt seeing Hull win every game in the old second division in the late 1970s then

And early 80's and don't forget how they were saved from relegation by the Gateshead merger.

[Dave T]

10 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

 OR OTHERWISE totally putting on my Cherry and White specs, when (not if) Leigh win promotion on Sunday, before this announcement there was a clear view and stratergy that had to be acheived and that was to consolidate in SL by not finishing lower than 11th position next season and build from there, they could very possibly accomplish that but on field performance is not what will be required in the future to maintain a seat at the top table will it?

TBH Harry, nothing can be said that will make you see any benefits - and that's fine, you have your preference that we retain a simple P&R based on the ladder. It's a valid preference, but one the sport has decided doesn't really work for it. 

But I think you threw the word strategy in to make P&R appear more strategic than it is. 

There isn't anything anyone can say that will convince you this is the way to go, just as nothing will convince haters of P&R that is right. 

Sometimes in life we just don't get what we want.