Jump to content

IMG - Vote on Wednesday


Recommended Posts


13 hours ago, JF1 said:

Not much reference to cat C teams.

I get the impression that if they ignore us,we'll just shrug our shoulders and walk away.

DP,if you think we'll receive £750k,I admire your optimism. Be lucky if it's £75k

 

It did say L1 will still be guaranteed funding.  [Might be just one of those new shiny 50p pieces that they are issuing with KING Charles lll on?] but i did read that

Being Older and hopefully a little bit wiser i can remember before Super league - There were always a couple of great teams and a couple of perennial bad teams,

But there was no vast gap between leagues and teams as there is now. and teams could improve and move up and down leagues over a couple of seasons without bankrupting themselves.

And it was 4 up and 4 down - 16 in each league [approx.] - 30 games and 4 new faces every year [or 12 new faces if you moved] - more entertaining, more variety and with a few exceptions anybody could beat anybody.

There were not as many blowout scores as you see today, matches were always closer which is more entertaining.

The SKY money has been great for a few but bad for the game overall [IMHO]

When it first came in it should have been divvied out equally [ or as close to equal as poss] then we could have brought everybody up together and not just a few.

This is also a reason why the Challenge cup is dead. Because the teams were closer the top teams were brought in earlier which gave more teams chance to play top teams and giant killing chances. plus, a chance to get a bit of cash for amateur teams and the lower teams, but the top teams are only brought in at last minute now.

It's too late now - the chosen few on best part of 2M per season and the bottom on 20K per season - they are unplayable. The money and unfair distribution of it has ruined the game and the gap needs to be closed if possible, that is what i was suggesting.

Best thing that could have happened [IMHO} was for IMG to take the 2 Frenchie's and the top 8 Brits and give them all the Sky money and lock everybody else out of SL and let us all go back to a system of 2 leagues of 14 again.

We will have the challenge cup back [no SL teams] and everybody on equal [o] Sky money.

If someone comes in to cover matches like sky - them great but everyone gets same amount

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

Telling me keighley have the right to disagree is a meaningless statement . We were obviously talking about Keighley thinking this is rigged and you saying you don’t think so.

The rfl get to decide who gets academies using geographic considerations but academy will go towards criteria (don’t be so dense to pretend it won’t)

So theres no reason for Keighley to trust this process then is there?

That's up to them. If they have a view and can convince others, then fine. If the vote goes against them they have alternatives: accept the result or quit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Gerrumonside ref said:

My point on this would be that even with the movement of games, we see in press conferences complaints over the fixtures that accommodate TV in U.K. football.

That suggests to me that even the biggest Premier League clubs are in a relationship whereby they don’t entirely dictate terms.

Whereas maybe in RL the clubs have been almost too powerful.

 

This essentially

Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation:

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JohnM said:

That's up to them. If they have a view and can convince others, then fine. If the vote goes against them they have alternatives: accept the result or quit.

ShropMonster wants them to quit anyway

Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation:

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

Telling me keighley have the right to disagree is a meaningless statement . We were obviously talking about Keighley thinking this is rigged and you saying you don’t think so.

The rfl get to decide who gets academies using geographic considerations but academy will go towards criteria (don’t be so dense to pretend it won’t)

So theres no reason for Keighley to trust this process then is there?

The academy thing is a farce - brought in before IMG.

I must be mega dense, of Osmium qualities if you will, as i don't know what the criteria are yet.

 

My genuine thoughts on Keighley (and indeed my own club) is that if there are clear and achievable targets to become an A license and play in the elite comp, then great. The clubs can do what they want. If they want to empower themselves to go after that target, then great, i hope the elite comp -1 is funded enough for it to be a worthwhile comp. If my club, Keighley or whomever don't want to get after it, then they should call it a day and go amateur.

If the criteria is not clear and not achievable for all, then yes, it stinks and i'll be done with the sport at a club level at the very least so won't care.

 

 

  • Like 1

Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation:

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Ok read it now. If you did a job application under one criteria, aced it and then the criteria was changed so it perfectly matches soneone but you,you’d be furious. Second you can go for another job but Keighley arent going to start playing union are they so it doesn’t work?

If it's proper for other clubs to come out publicly with their stance then it’s just as legitimate for Keighley to come out with theirs. They haven’t done to well under p and r because all their support melted away when people knew it didn’t matter what they did they were barred from the top. Imagine the frustration just as you got everything in place again you are going to get shafted...again

Next season they will probably pull in more than Fev and perhaps more than Bulls, so we should want them to believe in the process as the game needs a strong team in Bradford postcode and it probably can’t ever be the Bulls at the dump.

You applied for that job in 1996. Get over it, look at where Gareth Southgate is now compared to then.

Come on Keighley, do an advert and get over it.

  • Haha 1

Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation:

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ShropshireBull said:

So they can apply to play another sport can they. Also they have got over it by building great momentum and are primed for a playoff run but none of that will matter if they get cheated again. 

Aye. They could go play RU. Good luck to em.

ooh she's fit. I'll not talk to her as she might cheat on me. I don't know anything about her yet, but no. I'll stay here and have a crank.

  • Haha 1

Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation:

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the talk of academies. In soccer the real goal of academies is not to produce players for your own team, but to produce players you can sell on to others. If they produce one player a year that they can sell for a few million job done and the club is in profit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Isnt it easier to say that then coming up with half arsed analogies that are as strong as a paper bag?

I think Keighley should publicly push back so IMG dont get to say everyone else in onboard. You cant regrow the CC by continuing to alienate those outside SL and especially not a club who will probably be averaging higher crowds than all bar Toulouse and Barrow next year. 

Keighley have not been a Championship club for how long? 6/7 years? You were last decent when, 20 years ago? I'm not sure the folk in IMG are upset; i would wager some of the wife's Malteser cake being made in front of my impatient eyes that they'd be happy.

I love the optimism around attendances for a bottom half team next year, so it's a shame you want them to pack in based on stuff you don't know yet.

I'm off for a run in the rain, chat later?

  • Haha 1

Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation:

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Ok read it now. If you did a job application under one criteria, aced it and then the criteria was changed so it perfectly matches soneone but you,you’d be furious. Second you can go for another job but Keighley arent going to start playing union are they so it doesn’t work?

If it's proper for other clubs to come out publicly with their stance then it’s just as legitimate for Keighley to come out with theirs. They haven’t done to well under p and r because all their support melted away when people knew it didn’t matter what they did they were barred from the top. Imagine the frustration just as you got everything in place again you are going to get shafted...again

Next season they will probably pull in more than Fev and perhaps more than Bulls, so we should want them to believe in the process as the game needs a strong team in Bradford postcode and it probably can’t ever be the Bulls at the dump.

They have still publicly had a rant about the organisations that will be making the decisions on grading in the future and have probably done more harm than good to their own cause because of it. If they are sceptical about the proposals due to their own experiences they are entitled to that opinion but a measured diplomatic response would be better than a public rant. Even if only for the public image of the Keighley club.

Something like " we have viewed and listened to these early proposals by IMG for the future of Rugby League and have some concerns over the ways in which these proposals could be implemented and the clarity and transparency of the process involved. We will liaise with both IMG and the RFL to raise and address these concerns before deciding whether to lend our Club's support to these proposals or otherwise."

In the Cougarmania years they did grow considerably and especially given the ongoing travails of the Bulls there is the opportunity for a well run Keighley to grow again. There is the possibility for any club that can achieve sufficient growth to find itself elevated to the top tier under the IMG proposals. The only limit to how high a club like Keighley can climb should be determined by how much the club (business) can grow.

They seem to have assumed that the experience will be the same as in 1996 already. Lots has changed since then, the decision makers that changed the rules and relegated 6 clubs and denied Keighley (and Batley) promotion are all gone. In 1996 both Bradford and Halifax were top 6 clubs in the top tier with the Bulls about to become one of the pre-eminent clubs of the next decade, in 2022 Halifax have been outside the top flight for almost 20 years and Bradford are a pale shadow of what they were. Keighley are in the same division as both next year and have an opportunity to build to get ahead of both. If IMG are looking for a club in that area to elevate then Keighley are in a position where it can be achievable to be the best available option.

They may hold a position of scepticism and mistrust but the tone of their club statement was ill judged at best. The bits about expansion being a particularly poor choice.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wakefield Ram said:

So just to clarify. If there is only one Grade B club in SL, they will be guaranteed relegation irrespective of results?

No, but if during the annual assessments a grade B club in the Championship was judged to be better suited for the SL place than the one in SL then they would exchange places.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Buzzer90 said:

Whatever the reasons, ground, location, owners… Keighley‘s face will never fit in the eyes of the people who make the decisions.  

Exactly the same as it didn’t before, no matter how many years ago. 

I think not. Keighley have exactly the same opportunity as St Helens. They may indeed be on the way to taking the opportunity but have a long way to go yet.  The must get the chips in off their shoulders and rid themselves of the delusion that there is a conspiracy against them.

Edited by JohnM
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

It did say L1 will still be guaranteed funding.  [Might be just one of those new shiny 50p pieces that they are issuing with KING Charles lll on?] but i did read that

Being Older and hopefully a little bit wiser i can remember before Super league - There were always a couple of great teams and a couple of perennial bad teams,

But there was no vast gap between leagues and teams as there is now. and teams could improve and move up and down leagues over a couple of seasons without bankrupting themselves.

And it was 4 up and 4 down - 16 in each league [approx.] - 30 games and 4 new faces every year [or 12 new faces if you moved] - more entertaining, more variety and with a few exceptions anybody could beat anybody.

There were not as many blowout scores as you see today, matches were always closer which is more entertaining.

The SKY money has been great for a few but bad for the game overall [IMHO]

When it first came in it should have been divvied out equally [ or as close to equal as poss] then we could have brought everybody up together and not just a few.

This is also a reason why the Challenge cup is dead. Because the teams were closer the top teams were brought in earlier which gave more teams chance to play top teams and giant killing chances. plus, a chance to get a bit of cash for amateur teams and the lower teams, but the top teams are only brought in at last minute now.

It's too late now - the chosen few on best part of 2M per season and the bottom on 20K per season - they are unplayable. The money and unfair distribution of it has ruined the game and the gap needs to be closed if possible, that is what i was suggesting.

Best thing that could have happened [IMHO} was for IMG to take the 2 Frenchie's and the top 8 Brits and give them all the Sky money and lock everybody else out of SL and let us all go back to a system of 2 leagues of 14 again.

We will have the challenge cup back [no SL teams] and everybody on equal [o] Sky money.

If someone comes in to cover matches like sky - them great but everyone gets same amount

I’m an old fart and I remember those halcyon days pre SL when there was no vast gap between the two leagues as most players played for their local team and were paid win/lose money and had to work 40 hours a week as well.  Also because players wages were relatively similar across clubs it really made little sense for players to move even if their club was relegated so clubs weren’t stripped of their best players.

However, SKY money disrupted this equilibrium, especially when some players went from £300 a win to £30,000 a year.  But that was the price to pay to save the game from the financial mire it was in.

It appears that you are suggesting that - apart from the top 10 clubs  - clubs revert back to those pre SL days and players become part time as no club could afford full time status especially as I doubt a league consisting of part time clubs could negotiate a TV deal.  Is that what you want?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Buzzer90 said:

Whatever the reasons, ground, location, owners… Keighley‘s face will never fit in the eyes of the people who make the decisions.  

Exactly the same as it didn’t before, no matter how many years ago. 

It might if they bring their facilities into this millennium for a start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, wiganermike said:

No, but if during the annual assessments a grade B club in the Championship was judged to be better suited for the SL place than the one in SL then they would exchange places.

So a Grade B club could finish 2-3 places from bottom of SL and then gets relegated on a subjective comparison against another Grade B club?

Devil's advocate here, if both Grade B clubs , Featherstone are in SL finish 10th, Leigh in the Championship and spend a lot of money on club and team and finish top, a committee decide that Leigh are a "better" Grade B so Leigh get promoted and Featherstone relegated?

Or if there's only 14 Grade A clubs and they are in SL, there's no promotion or relegation before the season starts?

**Clubs chosen just to illustrate the point.

These aren't unrealistic scenarios, this is no different to licensing proposal in 20+ years ago. 

Edited by Wakefield Ram
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

I’m an old fart and I remember those halcyon days pre SL when there was no vast gap between the two leagues as most players played for their local team and were paid win/lose money and had to work 40 hours a week as well.  Also because players wages were relatively similar across clubs it really made little sense for players to move even if their club was relegated so clubs weren’t stripped of their best players.

However, SKY money disrupted this equilibrium, especially when some players went from £300 a win to £30,000 a year.  But that was the price to pay to save the game from the financial mire it was in.

It appears that you are suggesting that - apart from the top 10 clubs  - clubs revert back to those pre SL days and players become part time as no club could afford full time status especially as I doubt a league consisting of part time clubs could negotiate a TV deal.  Is that what you want?

Change the number from 10 clubs at the top to as many as the clubs want (ie, its their decision), then yes. That's what i want.

  • Sad 1

Running the Rob Burrow marathon to raise money for the My Name'5 Doddie foundation:

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/ben-dyas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Wakefield Ram said:

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?

To an extent, it is.

We need support across the board to show demand for the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.