37 of 42 back IMG’s proposal

[EggFace]

1 hour ago, tuutaisrambo said:

All I can see happening from the latest IMG Restructure proposals is the chosen SL clubs being slightly more financially stable and the rest of the pyramid falling away to part time.  This is probably the aim to replicate Australia where it's basically 'park footy' outside the NRL.

The difference here is over a century of P&R as part of the sporting culture of the country. And also the fact that RL is the most popular sport in 2 major states in Oz, where as it isn't the most popular sport ANYWHERE in England.

Club RL as a whole currently has 3 interesting parts.

Challenge Cup

Play offs

P&R

I don't see how ditching one of them makes the sport more appealing. People point to the success of a closed shop NRL but even that isn't really that exciting until the last month of the season.

Union has a vast historic International game to compete with PL football.

NFL uses American razzle dazzle and spends billions.

RL's grand plan appears to be to kill off the game outside a handful of big clubs and hope we all just support them instead. 

 

I wish either Rugby League or even Rugby Union in this country had the perfect set up to me and that is the French Rugby Union 

International 

European Rugby Championship Cup

EPCR Challenge Cup

Top 14

Pro2

Federale 1

Look at the growth of French Club Rugby in the past 20 years or so and don't see why both League and Union can't do the same on the club level.

[Adelaide Tiger]

Strewth, it’s Friday night and I am relaxing with a beer.

Then I open this thread and read 9 pages of ifs, what’s and buts …….. with lashings if codswallop!

And to top it all I have just tried to explain to the wife the Duckworth-Lewis Method as to why the Aussies have to score 130 to beat England who scored 112!!

Wow the Aussies are 0-2.

[Blind side johnny]

17 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

So we've agreed to pay IMG to do what ? Exactly?

Probably to do their research before commenting.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Adelaide Tiger said:

Strewth, it’s Friday night and I am relaxing with a beer.

Then I open this thread and read 9 pages of ifs, what’s and buts …….. with lashings if codswallop!

And to top it all I have just tried to explain to the wife the Duckworth-Lewis Method as to why the Aussies have to score 130 to beat England who scored 112!!

Wow the Aussies are 0-2.

She'll be livid when she finds out that it's the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern (DLS) Method now.

[Saint Toppy]

1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

Not really, my worry is instead of providing breathing room for certain clubs to grow sponsors infrastructure in the top flight , a b license with p and r means that every year the club is still short term focussed on not being bottom of the pile.

 

Not sure thats how it will be. While we don't yet know the specific criteria what we do know is that the assessments will be ongoing and they will be based on both on-field and off-field criteria. So the Cat A clubs can't just sit back and ignore their on-field results, chances are if they repeatedly finish at or near the bottom of the league they'll lose their A license and be put down to a B license.

As for the B license clubs, what more incentive could there be to push themselves into getting an A license to then avoid that yearly threat of relegation ? Of course those B license clubs are going to have to work harder in the short term, thats the whole point, the A license clubs have already put a lot of that work in and its now down to the B license clubs to do the same to match them.

[meast]

12 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

So you think Wakey have not been trying ? 

Yourselves like Leigh are fortunate in having modern stadia made available by council/other sport club at a good time , also we both have financial benefactors willing to ' invest ' in our teams 

As I put , it's either ( on pitch ) or ( off pitch ) , not a Mish mash of both 

But to suggest clubs aren't trying is bonkers 

No, I'm not suggesting Wakefield haven't been trying, their results suggest otherwise, they have earned their right to be in SL on the field by virtue of their results.

My point was that this system MAY encourage more clubs, like Wakefield to do a bit more than just win a few games in order to stay up, it MAY challenge ALL clubs to put more resources and emphasis on areas like youth development, which both Wakefield and Huddersfield have been very good at, in comparison to most clubs who I suspect would be graded B, but also in marketing, infrastructure etc to ensure we have strong clubs across the board, not just 4 or 5 with the rest making up numbers and doing the minimum required to just keep staying up.

 

[Niels]

2 hours ago, tuutaisrambo said:

All I can see happening from the latest IMG Restructure proposals is the chosen SL clubs being slightly more financially stable and the rest of the pyramid falling away to part time.  This is probably the aim to replicate Australia where it's basically 'park footy' outside the NRL.

The difference here is over a century of P&R as part of the sporting culture of the country. And also the fact that RL is the most popular sport in 2 major states in Oz, where as it isn't the most popular sport ANYWHERE in England.

Club RL as a whole currently has 3 interesting parts.

Challenge Cup

Play offs

P&R

I don't see how ditching one of them makes the sport more appealing. People point to the success of a closed shop NRL but even that isn't really that exciting until the last month of the season.

Union has a vast historic International game to compete with PL football.

NFL uses American razzle dazzle and spends billions.

RL's grand plan appears to be to kill off the game outside a handful of big clubs and hope we all just support them instead. 

 

I think you have explained this perfectly with a new angle.

I can think of a lot of questions but I am not sure I really understand the details of the plan. So I am wary of saying anything.

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Because association football as a tv proposition in France is dead as every broadcaster knows PSG win the league so noone wants to pay for it.

Amazon has paid €1bn over four years to cover it.

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, meast said:

No, I'm not suggesting Wakefield haven't been trying, their results suggest otherwise, they have earned their right to be in SL on the field by virtue of their results.

My point was that this system MAY encourage more clubs, like Wakefield to do a bit more than just win a few games in order to stay up, it MAY challenge ALL clubs to put more resources and emphasis on areas like youth development, which both Wakefield and Huddersfield have been very good at, in comparison to most clubs who I suspect would be graded B, but also in marketing, infrastructure etc to ensure we have strong clubs across the board, not just 4 or 5 with the rest making up numbers and doing the minimum required to just keep staying up.

 

And as I put , and has been discussed on here , some clubs don't ( aren't allowed ) have academies , some ( like yours and mine ) have been ' gifted ' stadiums that we cannot improve , those without aren't going to find 10 million lying around to build just one small 2,500 seated stand 

In the scheme of things IMGs 10/12 years is a blink of an eye in relation to some of these things 

[JonM]

3 hours ago, tuutaisrambo said:

Club RL as a whole currently has 3 interesting parts.

Challenge Cup

Play offs

P&R

Challenge Cup and Play offs attract worse crowds, pretty much across the board, pretty much every year this century, than regular season games.  Pretty sure they'll have less match sponsorship/ corporate interest too, because they're arranged at short notice. 

 

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, JonM said:

Challenge Cup and Play offs attract worse crowds, pretty much across the board, pretty much every year this century, than regular season games.  Pretty sure they'll have less match sponsorship/ corporate interest too, because they're arranged at short notice. 

 

Better just play a series of friendlies on a ST 

[Adelaide Tiger]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

She'll be livid when she finds out that it's the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern (DLS) Method now.

I will have to leave that discussion with her till tomorrow as we are watching Kwasi being thrown under the old bus.

[Taffy Tiger]

Hi , this is my first post , so please be gentle with me . 

I think it all makes sense if the weighting of the criteria is heavily based on the performance on the pitch

If , for example 75% of grading is based on the on field performance , then teams in , say , the top 6 would be given 75 points , hence it would then be impossible to be relegated . 

Any Category B team would then be awarded a mark based on league position , so a Cat B team finishing top of SL,  would also receive 75 points , down to 11th , where perhaps they may get 50 points , avoiding relegation if they are bottom finishing Cat B team in SL , but still have a Cat A team below them .

From what has been said regarding bottom team down and top team up (ie P/R) if team bottom of SL and top Champ are both Cat B teams , then it would suggest that anyone finishing bottom of SL , may not receive any points for on field performance that season , with the team top of Championship receiving  26 points, as an example . This guarantees that the team who finish top of Championship automatically replaces the team bottom of SL as any off field criteria could only attain an a maximum of 25 points , ensuring that top of Champ replaces bottom of SL , but also ensuring that 11th in SL (with 50 points) couldn't be relegated , similar to how things are now.

The numbers I have given above , are of course only given as an example to try and demonstrate how grading could work to ensure P and R takes place for teams on bottom of SL and top of Championship , IF both are Cat B.

In the above example , a 75 point grading would result in an automatic Cat A grading , so teams scoring below 75 points on field could make it up to 75 with off field criteria , giving every team a chance to reach the required grade over time. 

Edited October 14, 2022 by Taffy Tiger

[gingerjon]

30 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

825 million over three years for the most of the game. https://www.sportspromedia.com/news/ligue-1-tv-rights-amazon-canal-lfp/

That´s down from the 825million per year they were going to get with their old deal. That´s a 1.8 billion pound loss over three years and Canal telling them next time we aren´t interested . So they will have one bidder who knows they only have one bidder for a comp that increasingly noone gives a toss about. 

You're right, three years not four. My error.

They had four bidders it looks like.

My vague point was that France RU's domestic strength doesn't really have that much to do with Ligue Un, except that domestic French soccer has never been that strong - even when PSG were bobbins. The big money contracts in French RU predate PSG's rise.

[Harry Stottle]

8 hours ago, gingerjon said:

That assumes that attendances are one of the criteria - we don't know the criteria yet - and that they will carry enough weight to make a difference between Category A with its guaranteed top tier place, and Category B.

I am just watching the special news bulletin, re the sacking and promotion of a new Chancellor and the next step to do a U turn by the Prime  Minister and government.

Why do I say this, because I can see some comparisons with Ms Truss and her 'suggested' financial policy for the country, all the Tory membership had was an idea of these 'ideas' would work, now they have been put in place the frailties have surfaced, now IMG have done the same thing and put their proposals forward, I have highlighted the above because I think it so relevant, once the criteria is disclosed a U turn could come about in the vote that really matters.

[idrewthehaggis]

4 hours ago, tuutaisrambo said:

 

Club RL as a whole currently has 3 interesting parts.

Challenge Cup

Play offs

P&R

I don't see how ditching one of them makes the sport more appealing.

 

IMG talk wisely about fostering "Peaks."

But I find it curious they are convinced in dropping Magic. Although judging by that fans questionnaire it might be replaced by a 7/9s tournament.

Personally i'd try out a 7/9s weekend first to see if it's got motion, than drop the media attracting/money making Magic. 

If you want "peaks" then it's already there-

Opening round, World Club challenge, Easter rivals round, Magic, Challenge Cup semi finals (at one venue) and Final, closing round/Hub cap presentation, Grand Final.

Add the mid season international (hopefully a Bastille Day clash in France), possibly a 7/9s weekend and October internationals/World Cup.

And then there is themed rounds-heritage/veterans/family etc.

IMG are surely tasked in promotion for this plenitude.

[Sitona]

What’s the point of a mid season 7/9s? Most clubs wouldn’t want to risk injuries in a meaningless competition. Can only see it as an academy competition as a showcase of young talent.

[idrewthehaggis]

21 minutes ago, Sitona said:

What’s the point of a mid season 7/9s? Most clubs wouldn’t want to risk injuries in a meaningless competition. Can only see it as an academy competition as a showcase of young talent.

Well if you recall that questionnaire spoke about such a tournament based on regional, rather than club teams ala the Hundred.

Not sure about that?

 

Edited October 14, 2022 by idrewthehaggis

[Cheadle Leyther]

20 hours 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 

Wasn’t in the IMG report the ultimate aim was to get 14 clubs with A licences giving us 26 matches with the much preferred 13 home fixtures. But what if we get to 16 A’s. That gives 30 fixtures. Do we then have the opposite problem of loop fixtures?!!

[EggFace]

2 hours ago, ShropshireBull said:

Because association football as a tv proposition in France is dead as every broadcaster knows PSG win the league so noone wants to pay for it. In England, you are up against the most commercially succussful association football league in the World.

Every sport in UK will be better off when the 4-5 Big teams in Prem create a European Super League, all the money in the english pyramid immediately collapses and other sports will find some space. 

Do you think a European Super League happen after the last time ?....fingers crossed.

[wiganermike]

6 minutes ago, Cheadle Leyther said:

Wasn’t in the IMG report the ultimate aim was to get 14 clubs with A licences giving us 26 matches with the much preferred 13 home fixtures. But what if we get to 16 A’s. That gives 30 fixtures. Do we then have the opposite problem of loop fixtures?!!

As we use a playoff system to determine which team is the champion and such a scenario would not involve relegation there would be no necessity for every club to play every other twice. If the decided upon ideal figure was 26 league fixtures then we just stay with that. Each team would play 11 teams twice and the other four teams once. The use of playoffs compensates for differing fixture schedules causing teams (perceptively) to finish higher or lower due to easier or harder fixture lists.

[Sitona]

17 minutes ago, idrewthehaggis said:

Well if you recall that questionnaire spoke about such a tournament based on regional, rather than club teams ala the Hundred.

Not sure about that?

 

That would still have injury risk to expensive players. The goal being to win Superleague or stay in Superleague, losing top players to injury in a competition where they are not playing for their home club could be financially disastrous.

 

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Cheadle Leyther said:

Wasn’t in the IMG report the ultimate aim was to get 14 clubs with A licences giving us 26 matches with the much preferred 13 home fixtures. But what if we get to 16 A’s. That gives 30 fixtures. Do we then have the opposite problem of loop fixtures?!!

They’ve said conferences if they get too many top tier clubs.

[idrewthehaggis]

17 minutes ago, Sitona said:

That would still have injury risk to expensive players. The goal being to win Superleague or stay in Superleague, losing top players to injury in a competition where they are not playing for their home club could be financially disastrous.

 

Don't get me wrong, I agree. It would be a daft jolly at somewhere pretty/convivial for the weekend than anything serious.

Those gradings?

Probably A list-Wigan, Saints, Catalans, FC, Leeds, Toulouse, Warrington (7)

Probably B list- Salford, Huddersfield, KR, Leigh, Wakefield, Castleford. (6)

Possible B list-York, Bradford , Featherstone, London, Newcastle, Halifax, Widnes  (7)

Suggested needs to be an A Lister,

Salford-academy, more revenue control at AJ Bell stadium. (if not the ground)

Cas and Wakey-new grounds

KR and Fartown - probably already on the cusp.

Leigh- academy, keeping Degsy off Twitter.

[mrfranco]

37 minutes ago, idrewthehaggis said:

Leigh- , keeping Degsy off Twitter.

I've put a like just for that last line there. Made me laugh, anyway