Jump to content

37 of 42 back IMG’s proposal


Recommended Posts


1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I must admit, based on Shaw's article, the grading feels rather 'meh'. 

In the history of SL has a 'Grade A' club ever been relegated? 

I'm not sure what problem this is fixing. 

Are we sure Matt Shaw has it correct? I mean he didn’t understand how an asterisk works the other day.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I must admit, based on Shaw's article, the grading feels rather 'meh'. 

In the history of SL has a 'Grade A' club ever been relegated? 

I'm not sure what problem this is fixing. 

It isn't fixing , or actually doing anything 

No doubt they probably wanted to stop P and R , but they've already had to back down , Robert Elstone anybody ? , Except this might cost us a lot more 

Edited by GUBRATS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I must admit, based on Shaw's article, the grading feels rather 'meh'. 

In the history of SL has a 'Grade A' club ever been relegated? 

I'm not sure what problem this is fixing. 

Yeah, it’s suddenly gone a bit that way. I’m hoping B licences aren’t just given out en masse and there’s only a handful, at most, given out. 

Well, no there hasn’t been. Wigan were relegated in 1980 and at least two Super League coaches in 2023 weren’t even born then and another two or three weren’t even a year old. The likelihood of a top club being relegated remains highly unlikely, despite Daryl Powell’s best attempts. That is unlikely to change with IMG’s proposal, certainly not in the short term. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Agbrigg said:

You see Dave both you and Tommy have just made assumptions and given your own interpretations. Not having a go for doing that. However this whole thing is so vague I really cant see how anyone could vote on these proposals. 

You two both made a genuine sensible guess, but how can any club/business vote on vague suggestions. Hats off to Batley and Dewsbury if they at least wanted more detailed facts

You do understand this is a fans forum don't you? And whilst I can't speak for Tommy, I can confirm I wasn't at the meeting where IMG shared more details than these 5 or 6 bullets. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I read it that if a grade A finishes bottom no one gets relegated 

Then that truly is disgusting , you either have full on ' on field ' , or you have full on ' off field ' , mixing doesn't work , so now where the game was split in 2 under the last licencing , it's now fractured into several bits this time 

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

Just now, Jughead said:

Yeah, it’s suddenly gone a bit that way. I’m hoping B licences aren’t just given out en masse and there’s only a handful, at most, given out. 

Well, no there hasn’t been. Wigan were relegated in 1980 and at least two Super League coaches in 2023 weren’t even born then and another two or three weren’t even a year old. The likelihood of a top club being relegated remains highly unlikely, despite Daryl Powell’s best attempts. That is unlikely to change with IMG’s proposal, certainly not in the short term. 

Well Bradford were deffo an A and maybe London also

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

It isn't fixing , or actually going anything 

No doubt they probably wanted to stop P and R , but they've already had to back down , Robert Elstone anybody ? , Except this might cost us a lot more 

Yes, it does look like a climbdown tbh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spidey said:

Well Bradford were deffo an A and maybe London also

By 2014 where either an A? London nearly didn’t even start the 2014 season and Bradford had imploded long before then (though they might not have had an admin at this point). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Then that truly is disgusting , you either have full on ' on field ' , or you have full on ' off field ' , mixing doesn't work

Nah.

Mixing is fine.

Just because you can't imagine it, doesn't make it impossible.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

That's how Shaw's article reads, I agree. 

Yes.

Because Grade A teams are guaranteed a place in Super League.

That's literally the point.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Are we sure Matt Shaw has it correct? I mean he didn’t understand how an asterisk works the other day.

I'd base absolutely nothing on anything he wrote.

  • Haha 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Well Bradford were deffo an A and maybe London also

Only under quite ridiculous criteria , designed to fit around the clubs already in SL at the time , and one or two geographical expansion clubs they wanted 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Then that truly is disgusting , you either have full on ' on field ' , or you have full on ' off field ' , mixing doesn't work , so now where the game was split in 2 under the last licencing , it's now fractured into several bits this time 

I don't disagree on this point. It is an odd system that could see a grade B Championship winner rejected for promotion one year because Leeds finished bottom, but a different Grade B Championship is promoted next year because Wakefield finish bottom. 

The proposal as Shaw explains it is a massive Fudge. 

We either do grading, or we don't. 

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

7 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Well Bradford were deffo an A and maybe London also

 

6 minutes ago, Jughead said:

By 2014 where either an A? London nearly didn’t even start the 2014 season and Bradford had imploded long before then (though they might not have had an admin at this point). 

Neither Bradford nor London were ever an A according to this... 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_League_licensing

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dave T said:

Yes, this whole discussion should be caveated based on that. 

I think it’s safest to go on what we know. That is that there has been overwhelming endorsement for the outline, the broad recommendations and the direction of travel.

Getting angry about imagined situations is absolutely pointless because we simply do not have the detail beyond the statement that category A teams are guaranteed a top tier place. Everything else is conjecture.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we'll have A graders who will be ' safe ' , they were safe already , if by some strange coincidence any of them had gone down , they'd have come straight back up anyway 

Then we'll have the SL B graders who might go down and might just not manage to bounce back ( unlikely , but be very funny if one of them did only for Wire to then finish bottom the following year and deny them their chance to return 😂 )

So will we now see less Championship B graders apart from the ' selected ' ones ? 😉 , Maybe this is where The Cougars are thinking ? , Will the great ' unwashed ' now get a new ' C ' grade ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I think it’s safest to go on what we know. That is that there has been overwhelming endorsement for the outline, the broad recommendations and the direction of travel.

Getting angry about imagined situations is absolutely pointless because we simply do not have the detail beyond the statement that category A teams are guaranteed a top tier place. Everything else is conjecture.

It is interesting that only Shaw seems to be running with the P&R thing in SL. In fact Sky's angle is that relegation is being scrapped. 

The bullet explaining grading is the same as that released a couple of weeks ago, although it does still refer to on and off field. But whilst it clarifies that P&R continues between tier 2 and 3, it still doesn't offer that in writing for SL. 

It'll be interesting to see if anyone else repeats Shaw's claims. Surely he wouldn't be misunderstanding... Would he? 

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

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I think it’s safest to go on what we know. That is that there has been overwhelming endorsement for the outline, the broad recommendations and the direction of travel.

Getting angry about imagined situations is absolutely pointless because we simply do not have the detail beyond the statement that category A teams are guaranteed a top tier place. Everything else is conjecture.

So I was right then ? 😉

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.