IMG - Vote on Wednesday

[clogdance]

7 minutes ago, Jughead said:

I didn’t drink enough last Saturday that I imagined watching a bloke from London win his 5th Grand Final, playing against blokes born in Poland and Swaziland having last year played against a French team made up of five French players, a player born in Cardiff and a player born in Guildford, having also played the 2020 final against a bloke from Kent whilst being alongside teammates from Port Talbot and Liverpool and having lined up against Salford in 2019 alongside a French halfback against a side that had a Cardiff born player and a player born in Oxford. 

Local game?

Wow, that number is so high that I lost count on my left hand. 

[Jughead]

9 minutes ago, clogdance said:

Wow, that number is so high that I lost count on my left hand. 

With that many fingers on one hand you’re either from Pripyat or Yorkshire. 

[Madrileño]

4 hours ago, Buzzer90 said:

https://keighleycougars.uk/kcrlfc-rrl?fbclid=IwAR0ggDhrHhPV8T4DEBwtgT80yejCpbKLYyNYGKWbi2RkHFef2EtrUz0qfCA

In 2022, coming out with that statement is embarrassing.   What sport anywhere in the world operates like that these days??

[Madrileño]

I think the problem that Rugby League has, is that clubs like Keighley is allowed to have a say on how an organisation like IMG can work on the sport.

Keighley cougars have been existing since 1876. 146 years to build up to an average crowd of 870. They have no professional players. How are they allowed to tell anyone what to do? Here in Spain, my local municipality team brings in more fans to watch hockey on roller skates. 

[Liverpool Rover]

On Twitter Rod Studd seems have become increasingly hysterical about it.

[Buzzer90]

17 minutes ago, Madrileño said:

I think the problem that Rugby League has, is that clubs like Keighley is allowed to have a say on how an organisation like IMG can work on the sport.

Keighley cougars have been existing since 1876. 146 years to build up to an average crowd of 870. They have no professional players. How are they allowed to tell anyone what to do? Here in Spain, my local municipality team brings in more fans to watch hockey on roller skates. 

Some terrible takes on here over the last few pages but yours might top the lot.

Please stick to posting about your local hockey team in Spain.

[wiganermike]

37 minutes ago, DOGFATHER said:

38 minutes ago, DOGFATHER said:

I too hope that the gap in funding between SL and Championship can be narrowed, but that is to a certain extent dictated by whatever money the next broadcast deal brings in. Nobody is naive enough to think that cuts will occur below SL before they do in SL if cuts are needed due to broadcast revenue falling.

You say that, but cuts below SL were far greater below, than in SL 

 I intended to type 'naive enough to think that cuts will not occur below SL before they do in SL if cuts are needed' here. Somehow I managed to dumbly miss out typing the word not and so said the opposite of what I intended. I have edited the initial post to correct this. I agree with your reply, when the last deal saw income fall the greatest cuts were below SL. I would expect cuts to be made to allocations below SL before they were made at SL level.

Your quoting of my post allowed me to spot my mistake so thank you.

When assessing the grade B clubs then I would expect ratios to be applied to the metrics being assessed to account for the competition in which a particular club is competing. It would be unreasonable to expect a club in the Championship to be able to attract the same size of crowds or to generate the same amount of turnover as a club of comparable size competing in the higher profile SL. As an example an average attendance of 3000 would be of great concern for a SL club, an average crowd of 3000 in the Championship however would be a strong base from which to build if promoted. I would expect the required targets to attain to gain promotion would be lower than those needed to be met in order to avoid being demoted.

[Madrileño]

1 hour ago, Buzzer90 said:

Some terrible takes on here over the last few pages but yours might top the lot.

Please stick to posting about your local hockey team in Spain.

Thanks for your input. Do you think Wigan agrees with you? Or Leeds? Or St Helens?

Do you think they like being told what they can or can't do, by clubs like Royston Keighley?

"2 up 2 down in every league in every season" one of the most amateurish things I have ever heard

Edited September 30, 2022 by Madrileño

[gingerjon]

6 hours ago, Liverpool Rover said:

On Twitter Rod Studd seems have become increasingly hysterical about it.

It is always the ones you least expect.

[gingerjon]

8 hours ago, Dave T said:

there is generally an attitude in RL that if things aren't as you agree with then it is corrupt. 

And tbh, I'm not sure what we can do about that, 

Call it out.

The rules on this board are a good starting point. Call something corrupt and you better have a signed document saying, "I did a corruption."

[gingerjon]

7 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

So Keighley were gutted last time for nothing under the system that is being proposed 

No. That is a thing that didn't happen and this is not the same system.

Other than that, a phenomenal level of accuracy. 

[Archie Gordon]

6 hours ago, wiganermike said:

When assessing the grade B clubs then I would expect ratios to be applied to the metrics being assessed to account for the competition in which a particular club is competing. It would be unreasonable to expect a club in the Championship to be able to attract the same size of crowds or to generate the same amount of turnover as a club of comparable size competing in the higher profile SL. ...

This is exactly right.

But can you imagine just how complex calculating these weights/ratios will be? 

IMG don't even understand that you need to weight survey responses.

Are you trusting that serious quants modellers and statisticians will be brought in to do the job? On the evidence so far, I'm not.

[Damien]

8 hours ago, my missus said:

tennis, darts, snooker, and golf to name but four.

So no team sports then.

[Damien]

7 hours ago, Liverpool Rover said:

On Twitter Rod Studd seems have become increasingly hysterical about it.

That's what he does.

[JohnM]

10 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

So far we've got licencing ( again ) , but ' transparent ' this time ( yeah right ) , getting rid of the MW , possibly replacing it with a 9s comp , getting rid of loop fixtures between SL clubs and replacing them with 2 legged cup matches against those same SL clubs

And this is going to make IMG millions ? , How ?

Oh and we've restarted the infamous ' stadium race ' 

Well, that's one interpretation of what has been published so far. I guess we need to see what comes out officially by (or after) the October meeting before awarding you the Booker Prize.

[JohnM]

7 hours ago, Buzzer90 said:

Some terrible takes on here over the last few pages but yours might top the lot.

Please stick to posting about your local hockey team in Spain.

Sounds like there are some lessons they could give to some of our clubs, though. No flat caps,  clogs and shawls for a start.

[Dave T]

59 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Call it out.

The rules on this board are a good starting point. Call something corrupt and you better have a signed document saying, "I did a corruption."

Aye, I'm meaning in general. We just need to crack on doing what we feel is right and not trying to please everyone. 

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Aye, I'm meaning in general.  

Coward.

[Harry Stottle]

8 hours ago, Jughead said:

I didn’t drink enough last Saturday that I imagined watching a bloke from London win his 5th Grand Final, playing against blokes born in Poland and Swaziland having last year played against a French team made up of five French players, a player born in Cardiff and a player born in Guildford, having also played the 2020 final against a bloke from Kent whilst being alongside teammates from Port Talbot and Liverpool and having lined up against Salford in 2019 alongside a French halfback against a side that had a Cardiff born player and a player born in Oxford. 

Local game?

I also remember many Welsh lads that were instrumental in the successful international sides we once produced and they were not locals to our sport, they had promise, offered a wage came here and learned the sport. 

[Mr Frisky]

6 hours ago, Madrileño said:

Thanks for your input. Do you think Wigan agrees with you? Or Leeds? Or St Helens?

Do you think they like being told what they can or can't do, by clubs like Royston Keighley?

"2 up 2 down in every league in every season" one of the most amateurish things I have ever heard

How many get relegated from your hockey league? - or do you only have enough teams for one league?

[DOGFATHER]

7 hours ago, wiganermike said:

When assessing the grade B clubs then I would expect ratios to be applied to the metrics being assessed to account for the competition in which a particular club is competing. It would be unreasonable to expect a club in the Championship to be able to attract the same size of crowds or to generate the same amount of turnover as a club of comparable size competing in the higher profile SL. As an example an average attendance of 3000 would be of great concern for a SL club, an average crowd of 3000 in the Championship however would be a strong base from which to build if promoted. I would expect the required targets to attain to gain promotion would be lower than those needed to be met in order to avoid being demoted.

I hope you are right. 

I think the major concern for clubs and fans outside of SL, is down to how many of these proposed changes have been previously tried, and due to a historic lack of transparency, rightly or wrongly, there has been a feeling of bias and corruption in the decision making process which has led to a certain level of skepticism. 

Personally, I do not think clubs should be involved at all in the process, or allowed a vote on such matters. I realise of course, not everyone shares my point of view. To me, giving clubs a vote on such matters, is only inviting self interest in to procedings. The game has employed a firm of experts to do a job, so trust them and let them do what they think is right for the game as a whole, without influence. 

It is a bit like going to the hospital when you're seriously unwell and telling the surgeon how to operate and what to do to fix your symptoms. At the end of the day, it is pretty foolish to think you know better than an experienced and highly trained specialist. 

If you cannot trust them to know more than you, find someone else that you can. The clubs have had there chance to fix the problems, and that is why the game in hanging by a thread.

Edited September 30, 2022 by DOGFATHER

[Barley Mow]

33 minutes ago, DOGFATHER said:

I hope you are right. 

I think the major concern for clubs and fans outside of SL, is down to how many of these proposed changes have been previously tried, and due to a historic lack of transparency, rightly or wrongly, there has been a feeling of bias and corruption in the decision making process which has led to a certain level of skepticism. 

Personally, I do not think clubs should be involved at all in the process, or allowed a vote on such matters. I realise of course, not everyone shares my point of view. To me, giving clubs a vote on such matters, is only inviting self interest in to procedings. The game has employed a firm of experts to do a job, so trust them and let them do what they think is right for the game as a whole, without influence. 

It is a bit like going to the hospital when you're seriously unwell and telling the surgeon how to operate and what to do to fix your symptoms. At the end of the day, it is pretty foolish to think you know better than an experienced and highly trained specialist. 

If you cannot trust them to know more than you, find someone else that you can. The clubs have had there chance to fix the problems, and that is why the game in hanging by a thread.

Personally, I wouldn't want a surgeon operating on me without my giving the go ahead.

I'd listen to their diagnosis and the options and then decide whether to go ahead. I think it's the same for the clubs with these proposals.

Edited September 30, 2022 by Barley Mow

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Barley Mow said:

Personally, I wouldn't want a surgeon operating on me without my giving the go ahead.

I'd listen to their diagnosis and the options and then decide whether to go ahead. I think it's the same for the club's with these proposals.

Indeed. We don't hire a builder to just "improve our home". 

It is right that existing stakeholders have their say, even if we don't like what they say. 

[Roy Haggerty]

13 hours ago, Dave T said:

Expansion, favouritism, flexible rules for one, but not the other. This has to stop.

The above is an utterly depressing line. I don't think I have ever seen anyone in the game bluntly say expansion has to stop. 

Little fish rarely want the size of the pond to be increased. 

[Hemi4561]

10 hours ago, Dave T said:

But if we think it's the right thing to do, ultimately some voices will need to be ignored. 

In your latest post you say that stakeholders should be heard. Are you saying that the should be automatically ignored anyway as you know you really don't want to hear their views. This is the reason some people use words like rigged,  biased, stitch up, etc.

IMG in a series of meetings, along with a set of carefully selected focus groups, come to the "right" conclusions that they know will please those that commissioned them in the first place. They then select tick box criteria based on the ability of the chosen ones to fulfil those criteria, and that the unclean will not be able to fulfil. 

Conspiracy theory? Sounds a bit like Lindsey and Murdoch to me, no wonder Keighley don't like, deja vu

Rugby league family? More like Cain and Abel.