Jump to content

IMG - Vote on Wednesday


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Blind side johnny said:

You say subjective but the proposal says that the criteria will be objective. Clearly you don't believe them.

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? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Just now, Wakefield Ram said:

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? 

What happens is they adjudge them based on the criteria not yet released.

They’re attempting to solve the yo-yo nature of promotion and relegation between the top and second tier, for one. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

You were the one who said they should play RU . Try reading. So stop being deceitful and just say you don’t give a to** . Which is fine it’s just cancerous if you want to regrow the challenge cup. 

I don't care, if Keighley want to go, let them.

If Fev wanted to go to RU, then let them.

Saying these statements is different to saying i want them to go. You shouldn't be so flippant with language Shropo.

I would love the Challenge Cup to be as it once was, but it probably won't. I'm going to wait and see what IMG actually propose rather than criticise and moan though.

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, wiganermike said:

On the face of it yes that would be how it would be expected to work as the initial proposal suggests B grade clubs will exchange places should one in the Championship be graded as stronger than one in SL. In practice you would expect that your hypothetical Featherstone would have been warned at their most recent review (and possibly the one before that) that they were in danger of not meeting required standards/being surpassed by a Championship club and so were at risk of demotion. It is very unlikely that clubs will be demoted/ promoted based on the events of a single season.

It is also possible that some amendment could be made before the proposals are adopted that will allow for expansion of SL by admitting additional strong B grade clubs rather than 1 up meaning 1 must go down (rather than only expanding by adding new A grade clubs). What we will likely see is some negotiation on specifics before the structure is finalised. Using your hypothetical it would be unfair to punish Featherstone if they had continued to meet the standards they had in previous seasons in SL simply because Leigh had also achieved what was asked of them to be elevated to SL.

In a scenario where every club in SL has an A grade the proposals put forward state that any club outside would need to attain an A grade to enter SL. As I said though I wouldn't be surprised to see that slightly amended as an A grade may be too difficult in practice to attain in the Championship (though the clubs won't know that until they are given details of what constitutes the minimum standards for each grade).

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.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jughead said:

What happens is they adjudge them based on the criteria not yet released.

They’re attempting to solve the yo-yo nature of promotion and relegation between the top and second tier, for one. 

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. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Human Punk said:

I couldn't agree more. I was perhaps naively expecting a whole raft of exciting new ideas and proposals to take the game forward in ways I hadn't imagined, no just a stale rehash of a selection of tired old boilers from the last 20 years. Who did IMG have working on this? The intern?

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wakefield Ram said:

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. 

So much the same as now, then? 

Do you think a player would chose Wakefield over, say, Cas or Toulouse over Huddersfield? How many clubs have a realistic aim of promotion to Super League presently? Do you think clubs will allow for players to simply tread water at any club, purely because they cannot get relegated? Do you think that goes on at Wigan, Leeds, Saints, Catalans etc now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours 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?

Unfortunately, yes - Because it didn't save the game from the financial mire it was in - it still is - It saved the few in SL.

Apart from Bradford who have dropped away from SL there are only 3 teams ever won SL in over 25 years.

Nobody apart from Leigh Thanks to Mr Beaumont - [Would like to think he got bored with Leigh and move up here for a change]

Don't know DB - seen him at our ground and on podcasts etc - but know nothing about him other that he is a godsend to Leigh.

But Leigh is the exception, nobody else can compete with the SL teams because of the large amount of CF they get over everyone else, and each year the gap is getting bigger.

Teams trying and failing to reach that high and without a DB are sometimes putting themselves at risk of Bankruptcy.

If the RFL and IMG make money i.e., get more from Sky or another source it will mainly go to SL teams and make the gap worse - so it is probably better to separate fully from the SL.

SL are Fulltime because of that 1.8M CF and nobody else gets that 1.8M CF - so nobody else can afford FT so nobody else can compete with SL - So I do believe as Fleetwood Mack said "they so go their own way"

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

1 minute ago, Colin James said:

Whatever clubs think of as yet vague ideas, I don't think it's a good look for the sport for those who think they aren't tailored for their particular circumstances to start putting out negative statements.

Don't put out vague ideas then , just implement 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Unfortunately, yes - Because it didn't save the game from the financial mire it was in - it still is - It saved the few in SL.

Apart from Bradford who have dropped away from SL there are only 3 teams ever won SL in over 25 years.

Nobody apart from Leigh Thanks to Mr Beaumont - [Would like to think he got bored with Leigh and move up here for a change]

Don't know DB - seen him at our ground and on podcasts etc - but know nothing about him other that he is a godsend to Leigh.

But Leigh is the exception, nobody else can compete with the SL teams because of the large amount of CF they get over everyone else, and each year the gap is getting bigger.

Teams trying and failing to reach that high and without a DB are sometimes putting themselves at risk of Bankruptcy.

If the RFL and IMG make money i.e., get more from Sky or another source it will mainly go to SL teams and make the gap worse - so it is probably better to separate fully from the SL.

SL are Fulltime because of that 1.8M CF and nobody else gets that 1.8M CF - so nobody else can afford FT so nobody else can compete with SL - So I do believe as Fleetwood Mack said "they so go their own way"

Its not central funding, its a share of the TV deal for the league they play in and is televised. The championship have their own TV deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

I don't care, if Keighley want to go, let them.

If Fev wanted to go to RU, then let them.

Saying these statements is different to saying i want them to go. You shouldn't be so flippant with language Shropo.

I would love the Challenge Cup to be as it once was, but it probably won't. I'm going to wait and see what IMG actually propose rather than criticise and moan though.

The CC will never be as it was because the top SL teams only enter with a round left before the quarters when every other RL team has been whittled down to 5.

So, I Picked a date at random 1980 the then first division came in at last 32 hence 18 other teams not 5 had a shot.

Now because of the biased CF and Full-time teams thereof - some matches would be too easy - but the lesser teams would gain from share of gate incomes.

Plus, there is the chance that some SL teams would take each other out giving a slight chance of an upset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

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

it was rather underwhelming.  

What amuses me is that IMG say their has been too much focus on the league format and structure and not enough on improving the product.   Yet all the comment here is about the format and structure.

Of course one can see how the league format and structure could influence the product - although not in any short term.

It seems to me just like the last consultants that copied the Scottish football approach they had previous introduced which was  a failure and here we have IMG regurgitating what they did for Euroleague Basketball which is a European wide league with no UK clubs. A lot more freedom to create franchises and limiting how many teams fans have to support in a country.

So far IMG have not made it clear how your earlier question is answered, namely "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."  and I add in the same geographical area's with exception of a single club expansion focus. Plus significant increased numbers of people watching as distinct from a few percentage points.

Hopefully when more detail comes and they produce a paper on the how then it will be clearer and we will see some of the exciting and innovative idea's they have plus how to compete against the other sporting or entertainment on offer.

 

Edited by redjonn
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, redjonn said:

it was rather underwhelming.  

What amuses me is that IMG say their has been too much focus on the league format and structure and not enough on improving the product.   Yet all the comment here is about the format and structure.

Of course one can see how the league format and structure could influence the product - although not in any short term.

It seems to me just like the last consultants that copied the Scottish football approach they had previous introduced which was  a failure and here we have IMG regurgitating what they did for Euroleague Basketball which is a European wide league with no UK clubs. A lot more freedom to create franchises and limiting how many teams fans have to support in a country.

So far IMG have not made it clear how your earlier question is answered, namely "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."  and I add in the same geographical area's with exception of a single club expansion focus.

Hopefully when more detail comes and they produce a paper on the how then it will be clearer and we will see some of the exciting and innovative idea's they have plus how to compete against the other sporting or entertainment on offer.

 

The question I've asked on here several times 

Exactly how will this create millions of extra for RL and IMG ?

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

20 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

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.

I trust that IMG will have clear goals to get an A grade so clubs like Keighley are probably more likely to get that grade and become a Super League club than at present. But if Keighleys chairman is happy being in the Championship and going no higher because they can never break the ceiling of the big Championship clubs steamrollering everyone else in the name of “sporting integrity” then that’s up to him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/09/2022 at 21:27, Derwent Parker said:

Well, if we can't share CF equally then let's say: -

"A" teams get £1.5 M etc 

"B" teams get £1.1 M etc 

"C" teams get 750k etc

That won't sell cos all SL teams will want their £1.7 M whatever grade they are

Where will the extra £20m a season come from. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Where will the extra £20m a season come from. 

less for championship and league one of course.  as always, the money will go to those that make it. the cash cows in the A grade produce it and they will take the cream and leave the dregs.

welcome to the real world 

IMG is not noted for its work in minor leagues of any sport i recon

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

Unfortunately, yes - Because it didn't save the game from the financial mire it was in - it still is - It saved the few in SL.

Apart from Bradford who have dropped away from SL there are only 3 teams ever won SL in over 25 years.

Nobody apart from Leigh Thanks to Mr Beaumont - [Would like to think he got bored with Leigh and move up here for a change]

Don't know DB - seen him at our ground and on podcasts etc - but know nothing about him other that he is a godsend to Leigh.

But Leigh is the exception, nobody else can compete with the SL teams because of the large amount of CF they get over everyone else, and each year the gap is getting bigger.

Teams trying and failing to reach that high and without a DB are sometimes putting themselves at risk of Bankruptcy.

If the RFL and IMG make money i.e., get more from Sky or another source it will mainly go to SL teams and make the gap worse - so it is probably better to separate fully from the SL.

SL are Fulltime because of that 1.8M CF and nobody else gets that 1.8M CF - so nobody else can afford FT so nobody else can compete with SL - So I do believe as Fleetwood Mack said "they so go their own way"

Again, you do realise why Sky pay this money don't you? 

You seem to be of the impression it's free money that should be distributed equally amongst all member clubs. 

May I suggest you go watch the amateur leagues if the distribution of money to pay players upsets you? Professional sport clearly isn't for you.

  • Like 5
Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

Again, you do realise why Sky pay this money don't you? 

You seem to be of the impression it's free money that should be distributed equally amongst all member clubs. 

May I suggest you go watch the amateur leagues if the distribution of money to pay players upsets you? Professional sport clearly isn't for you.

It's just complete nonsense. Give Sky a £10 million competition and don't be surprised if they start to pay accordingly. 

This was also a good thread about IMG and the announcement. It shouldn't be derailed by fantasist nonsense like this.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/09/2022 at 12:25, MattSantos said:

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.

Has the last word been autocorrected. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

The question I've asked on here several times 

Exactly how will this create millions of extra for RL and IMG ?

I mean you could read the summary thread I wrote about the interview with the IMG president there was a lot of stuff in that interview.

IMG President Podcast

You're asking as if the structure is literally the only thing they're planning rather than the first tangible thing they need to share with the clubs (bluntly the clubs don't need to sign off on the rest of their strategy).

The structure in of itself won't change things but they believe they won't get the best results out of what they're planning without changing the structure at the same time.

You're not going to get a job just by dressing well but it might cost you a job if you don't sort that out.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3

I was born to run a club like this. Number 1, I do not spook easily, and those who think I do, are wasting their time, with their surprise attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

I mean you could read the summary thread I wrote about the interview with the IMG president there was a lot of stuff in that interview.

IMG President Podcast

You're asking as if the structure is literally the only thing they're planning rather than the first tangible thing they need to share with the clubs (bluntly the clubs don't need to sign off on the rest of their strategy).

The structure in of itself won't change things but they believe they won't get the best results out of what they're planning without changing the structure at the same time.

You're not going to get a job just by dressing well but it might cost you a job if you don't sort that out.

Fair enough 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

I mean you could read the summary thread I wrote about the interview with the IMG president there was a lot of stuff in that interview.

IMG President Podcast

You're asking as if the structure is literally the only thing they're planning rather than the first tangible thing they need to share with the clubs (bluntly the clubs don't need to sign off on the rest of their strategy).

The structure in of itself won't change things but they believe they won't get the best results out of what they're planning without changing the structure at the same time.

You're not going to get a job just by dressing well but it might cost you a job if you don't sort that out.

Nicely put

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.