IMG Grading Unveiled

[Guest]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

That really isn't the issue , essentially you are suggesting they ' buy off ' the lower tiers , does that just make it right ? 

No, I'm not. Explain to me how revenue sharing is buying clubs off? Some of the SL clubs would likely oppose the RFL forcing them to share 20% of the broadcast revenue with lower tier clubs.

I'm not sure you understand what I'm proposing here. It would benefit every club in the Champ and League 1 at the cost of less money for SL clubs. It would work with or without promotion/relegation.

[GUBRATS]

9 minutes ago, NW10LDN said:

No, I'm not. Explain to me how revenue sharing is buying clubs off? Some of the SL clubs would likely oppose the RFL forcing them to share 20% of the broadcast revenue with lower tier clubs.

I'm not sure you understand what I'm proposing here. It would benefit every club in the Champ and League 1 at the cost of less money for SL clubs. It would work with or without promotion/relegation.

Obviously it would , but you stated " an NRL system could work " , so what exactly are you proposing , be ause I've not got a clue now , other than you think giving lower tier clubs some money would be good , which already happens 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Obviously it would , but you stated " an NRL system could work " , so what exactly are you proposing , be ause I've not got a clue now , other than you think giving lower tier clubs some money would be good , which already happens 

I was referring to another comment which talked about it and gave my opinion on that. Are we not allowed to do that anymore? I laid out the proposal clearly. The lower clubs don't get enough money to bridge the gap which has been a regular topic of discussion on here.

I also said more funding and keeping a close eye on how money is spent would also work with P/R.

I think you are just looking for an argument here so I think I'll end it here.

[GUBRATS]

6 minutes ago, NW10LDN said:

I was referring to another comment which talked about it and gave my opinion on that. Are we not allowed to do that anymore? I laid out the proposal clearly. The lower clubs don't get enough money to bridge the gap which has been a regular topic of discussion on here.

I also said more funding and keeping a close eye on how money is spent would also work with P/R.

I think you are just looking for an argument here so I think I'll end it here.

But you hadn't quoted anybody , not even posted on the discussion for days , so how could I know in what context you were posting ? 

Not after an argument , just trying to understand what the point is you were making 

All the best 

[David Dockhouse Host]

BREAKING NEWS The Dockhouse Rugby Show can confirm the following:

RFL Reach Out to Keighley Cougars regarding IMG Proposals

Following the latest IMG "Reimaging Rugby League" meeting in Huddersfield, the RFL have reached out to Ryan and Kaue to listen and understand the very well publicised concerns regarding the IMG proposals.

Chair of the RFL, Simon Johnson met with Ryan and Kaue in central London on Tuesday spending 4 hours in discussions.

Ryan said "The meeting was largely positive. Simon listened to our scepticism and wants to reach a unified position where all clubs can agree to a restructure"

On behalf of the RFL, Simon Johnson agreed to feedback to IMG the concerns and proposals of the Keighley Cougars.

Ryan said "Our key points are that promotion and relegation should be on a 2 up, 2 down model. We tentatively agree that only category A and category B clubs should be in Super League, but that there should not be sub-grading within the A and B categories. We will continue to express our stance on the situation and of course update our fans in due course".

Incase you missed it here is our interview with Ryan and Kaue in which they discuss how they felt during and after The IMG proposals meeting

 

 

[DI Keith Fowler]

3 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

BREAKING NEWS The Dockhouse Rugby Show can confirm the following:

RFL Reach Out to Keighley Cougars regarding IMG Proposals

Following the latest IMG "Reimaging Rugby League" meeting in Huddersfield, the RFL have reached out to Ryan and Kaue to listen and understand the very well publicised concerns regarding the IMG proposals.

Chair of the RFL, Simon Johnson met with Ryan and Kaue in central London on Tuesday spending 4 hours in discussions.

Ryan said "The meeting was largely positive. Simon listened to our scepticism and wants to reach a unified position where all clubs can agree to a restructure"

On behalf of the RFL, Simon Johnson agreed to feedback to IMG the concerns and proposals of the Keighley Cougars.

Ryan said "Our key points are that promotion and relegation should be on a 2 up, 2 down model. We tentatively agree that only category A and category B clubs should be in Super League, but that there should not be sub-grading within the A and B categories. We will continue to express our stance on the situation and of course update our fans in due course".

Incase you missed it here is our interview with Ryan and Kaue in which they discuss how they felt during and after The IMG proposals meeting

 

 

Will give a listen later but by the sounds of it this is very good management of the situation by the RFL. 

[Oxford]

14 minutes ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

 .................  this is very good management of the situation by the RFL. 

We need to immortalise this moment then!

[Derwent Parker]

4 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

BREAKING NEWS The Dockhouse Rugby Show can confirm the following:

RFL Reach Out to Keighley Cougars regarding IMG Proposals

Following the latest IMG "Reimaging Rugby League" meeting in Huddersfield, the RFL have reached out to Ryan and Kaue to listen and understand the very well publicised concerns regarding the IMG proposals.

Chair of the RFL, Simon Johnson met with Ryan and Kaue in central London on Tuesday spending 4 hours in discussions.

Ryan said "The meeting was largely positive. Simon listened to our scepticism and wants to reach a unified position where all clubs can agree to a restructure"

On behalf of the RFL, Simon Johnson agreed to feedback to IMG the concerns and proposals of the Keighley Cougars.

Ryan said "Our key points are that promotion and relegation should be on a 2 up, 2 down model. We tentatively agree that only category A and category B clubs should be in Super League, but that there should not be sub-grading within the A and B categories. We will continue to express our stance on the situation and of course update our fans in due course".

Incase you missed it here is our interview with Ryan and Kaue in which they discuss how they felt during and after The IMG proposals meeting

 

 

Like that idea - you are either an "A" or a "B" etc - no inter grading.

Grading numbers only there to show you how far off the next grade you are?

Therefore all "As" in SL and any "Bs" in SL are still eligible for automatic P&R.

2 up 2 down also brill

Back in late 70s we had 2 big leagues of at least 16 teams each - 30 games no loops required. 15 Home games to generate income.

Not playing all the same old teams every single year. Even worse now with Loops

Not as boring - only time you play different teams now is if you are the 1 team that goes up or down

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, DI Keith Fowler said:

Will give a listen later but by the sounds of it this is very good management of the situation by the RFL. 

Listen to it with an open mind, but I guess you will have already preempted what you think.

[Harry Stottle]

5 hours ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

BREAKING NEWS The Dockhouse Rugby Show can confirm the following:

RFL Reach Out to Keighley Cougars regarding IMG Proposals

Following the latest IMG "Reimaging Rugby League" meeting in Huddersfield, the RFL have reached out to Ryan and Kaue to listen and understand the very well publicised concerns regarding the IMG proposals.

Chair of the RFL, Simon Johnson met with Ryan and Kaue in central London on Tuesday spending 4 hours in discussions.

Ryan said "The meeting was largely positive. Simon listened to our scepticism and wants to reach a unified position where all clubs can agree to a restructure"

On behalf of the RFL, Simon Johnson agreed to feedback to IMG the concerns and proposals of the Keighley Cougars.

Ryan said "Our key points are that promotion and relegation should be on a 2 up, 2 down model. We tentatively agree that only category A and category B clubs should be in Super League, but that there should not be sub-grading within the A and B categories. We will continue to express our stance on the situation and of course update our fans in due course".

Incase you missed it here is our interview with Ryan and Kaue in which they discuss how they felt during and after The IMG proposals meeting

 

 

Good listen that, an honest view from two who actually put money into the sport.

IMG on their proposals "Nobody as done this before in sport"  Ryan " Yes, no bloody wonder".

[DI Keith Fowler]

5 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Listen to it with an open mind, but I guess you will have already preempted what you think.

I will, yes I've made a summation based on the post here by the person who made the show along with the quotes which I can literally read. I'm looking forward to the incredible subtext and underlying themes that you've picked up on. 

[David Dockhouse Host]

On 18/03/2023 at 11:04, The Blues Ox said:

I would have very little complaints if it actually turned out that the gradings were worked out similar to this. I'm very sceptical though although I would still only make it so the top team in the championship was eligable for promotion because for me personally the chance of onfield success is the only thing that is keeping me watching the sport at this level.

 

It's not something you can really look forward to telling the grand kids. "I was there when it was announced we got an extra point for fan engagement back in 2025" does not have the same ring to it as "I was there when we won the Challenge Cup in 2025".

I always though the aim was to have more than 12 teams in the top league.

So if many in tier two become grading A more than one team could go up. So P/R is only whilst we improve grades and increase the amount of 'A's. Once we have 16 in tire one automatic P/R will stop.

It's unlikely we will get 16 grade As anytime soon

[Harry Stottle]

50 minutes ago, David Dockhouse Host said:

I always though the aim was to have more than 12 teams in the top league.

So if many in tier two become grading A more than one team could go up. So P/R is only whilst we improve grades and increase the amount of 'A's. Once we have 16 in tire one automatic P/R will stop.

It's unlikely we will get 16 grade As anytime soon

The criteria bar will have to be set low to obtain 16 'A's that will never happen.

And neither will Promotion and relegation from '25, SL club's will have the advantage over all the lower tier club's with the way the grading points can be accumulated, I will take some convincing that it has not been engineered to do just that.

[The Blues Ox]

The idea in theory may be to try and get 16 teams but I bet theres a number of teams in SL that would gladly see the league reduced to 10 so they can get some extra cash to sqander away.

[Derwent Parker]

23 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

Like that idea - you are either an "A" or a "B" etc - no inter grading.

Grading numbers only there to show you how far off the next grade you are?

Therefore all "As" in SL and any "Bs" in SL are still eligible for automatic P&R.

2 up 2 down also brill

Back in late 70s we had 2 big leagues of at least 16 teams each - 30 games no loops required. 15 Home games to generate income.

Not playing all the same old teams every single year. Even worse now with Loops

Not as boring - only time you play different teams now is if you are the 1 team that goes up or down

Meant to say - back in 70 with leagues of 16 - we had 4 up and 4 down.

If that happened now at least a few more teams would get to see a bit of the money!! and be far more interesting.

Even though the SL teams would probably come back up [seeing that the have been heavily financed by CF for the last 20 years] - it would still mean the top 4 of champ would each get the millions in alternate years, and dont forget the parachute payments?

Now that would be something to aim for MR IMG

[steve oates]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

The criteria bar will have to be set low to obtain 16 'A's that will never happen.

And neither will Promotion and relegation from '25, SL club's will have the advantage over all the lower tier club's with the way the grading points can be accumulated, I will take some convincing that it has not been engineered to do just that.

And so this utter nonsense is easily exposed for what it is. For me the host bringing in two lads from the Keighley cougars was a masterstroke as they have the history and knowledge of the game to be able to de-bunk the IMG nonsense...

If 16 "A"s happened doesn't the reducing SKY money go down two ways i.e less money to be spread further?  And what about the quality player pool that is increasingly dependent on NRL spares. I'd advise anyone who wants to pass their own judgement, listen to the podcast and the Keighley lads excellent responses.....

[Big Picture]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

The criteria bar will have to be set low to obtain 16 'A's that will never happen.

And neither will Promotion and relegation from '25, SL club's will have the advantage over all the lower tier club's with the way the grading points can be accumulated, I will take some convincing that it has not been engineered to do just that.

With even the game's biggest clubs running at a loss most years (Wigan's losses for 2018 and 2019 added up to 2.1 milion £), the bar might have to be set low to obtain any grade As at all.

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

With even the game's biggest clubs running at a loss most years (Wigan's losses for 2018 and 2019 added up to 2.1 milion £), the bar might have to be set low to obtain any grade As at all.

Absolutely right BP, all the time posters who are at pains to point out the success levels and production routes for players whilst paying no attention to their loss making as an organisation. And they're happy as Larry (whoever Larry was) to focus on other sides finances as a means of bashing them. It's easy to see how people hold two contradictory ideas in their head when you read these pages.

[Derwent Parker]

9 minutes ago, Oxford said:

Absolutely right BP, all the time posters who are at pains to point out the success levels and production routes for players whilst paying no attention to their loss making as an organisation. And they're happy as Larry (whoever Larry was) to focus on other sides finances as a means of bashing them. It's easy to see how people hold two contradictory ideas in their head when you read these pages.

Larry?

He was in a 70s Band called the Floaters 

He was a Cancerian and He "liked a woman that loves everything and everybody"

"Ooh, yeah, take my hand
Let me take you to Love Land
Let me show you how sweet it could be
Sharing your love with Larry, listen

Float, float on  etc!!

[Tommygilf]

5 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

The idea in theory may be to try and get 16 teams but I bet theres a number of teams in SL that would gladly see the league reduced to 10 so they can get some extra cash to sqander away.

That's some tinfoil hat stuff. They don't want 10 teams.

[Saint Toppy]

On 18/03/2023 at 11:20, Agbrigg said:

This is not aimed directly at Saints, but these clubs such has Saints have very wealthy backers and yet the seem to demand more and more of the limited cake. They seem also to be happy to starve the lower leagues of any outside finance. When clubs  at the bottom are surviving on scraps, it's hard to imagine how they can grow and achieve the IMG criteria to rise up the pecking order. 

Just my opinion but I think in order for the game to grow in general, the wealth needs spreading wider and not all at the top of the pyramid

Its a very noble idea to have everyone equal and that the money should be shared around all the lower leagues, but the reality is thats just never going to happen. Companies like Sky pay for SL because that's where they see they'll get the biggest returns for their investment.

That aside, there's still the fact that there are a fair number of SL clubs who aren't exactly in a stable financial position to start with. The ones with wealthy owners & backers could probably survive perfectly well with some sort of reduced funding but there is probably a 3rd of the league that couldn't. So you have to ask yourself whats the point of giving some extra to the Championship clubs, knowing too well it still wouldn't be enough to get them on par with the better off SL clubs, when in doing so you bankrupt a 3rd of the current SL clubs ? 

The only way to increase funding for Championship clubs is to increase the overall income into the game as a whole, and whether you like it or not that starts with SL. And this is primarily IMG's whole aim, to make the game more saleable to outside parties.

Based on what we know so far, in the short term there is probably little to no benefits for Championship clubs in IMG's proposals, and you can see why a club like Keighly is getting so upset.  But why have all the other clubs so far backed their proposals ? is it because they can see the longer term aims and potential benefits, are they just pleased that finally there's actually a long term plan ? And while that plan may not be perfect for them its at least better than not having one at all, which is what we've had for a long time with the incompetents at the RFL.

Just bungling along with no plan benefits nobody at all from to to bottom.  

[steve oates]

11 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Based on what we know so far, in the short term there is probably little to no benefits for Championship clubs in IMG's proposals, and you can see why a club like Keighly is getting so upset.  But why have all the other clubs so far backed their proposals ? is it because they can see the longer term aims and potential benefits, are they just pleased that finally there's actually a long term plan ?  

Keighley and Batley make a case that Rugby League works where there is a strong community connection. Places where the whole town are behind the club.  Add to that success on the field and relatively small towns can have relatively big audiences. Saints are an example.

I don't think being left out of any funding at this point in times affects Keighley's new owners point that if their club and others like them can get to Superleague then crowds and interest will  be a lot bigger than those like London get, or Sheffield got  when in Superleague.  The point seemed to be that continuing to fund London clubs and such as Hurricanes North Wales and Newcastle is a waste of funding, and "fake expansion"........

[Agbrigg]

37 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Its a very noble idea to have everyone equal and that the money should be shared around all the lower leagues, but the reality is thats just never going to happen. Companies like Sky pay for SL because that's where they see they'll get the biggest returns for their investment.

That aside, there's still the fact that there are a fair number of SL clubs who aren't exactly in a stable financial position to start with. The ones with wealthy owners & backers could probably survive perfectly well with some sort of reduced funding but there is probably a 3rd of the league that couldn't. So you have to ask yourself whats the point of giving some extra to the Championship clubs, knowing too well it still wouldn't be enough to get them on par with the better off SL clubs, when in doing so you bankrupt a 3rd of the current SL clubs ? 

The only way to increase funding for Championship clubs is to increase the overall income into the game as a whole, and whether you like it or not that starts with SL. And this is primarily IMG's whole aim, to make the game more saleable to outside parties.

Based on what we know so far, in the short term there is probably little to no benefits for Championship clubs in IMG's proposals, and you can see why a club like Keighly is getting so upset.  But why have all the other clubs so far backed their proposals ? is it because they can see the longer term aims and potential benefits, are they just pleased that finally there's actually a long term plan ? And while that plan may not be perfect for them its at least better than not having one at all, which is what we've had for a long time with the incompetents at the RFL.

Just bungling along with no plan benefits nobody at all from to to bottom.  

Just one point, you are correct that the clubs waved this through on a near 100% vote. However now the further details were published last week I am hearing quite a few are having concerns or at least need many of the points explained in much greater detail. 

As far as I am aware there will be a further vote once the clubs get more information. That vote may not get anything near the 100% . It's still not cut and dry

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

2 hours ago, Big Picture said:

With even the game's biggest clubs running at a loss most years (Wigan's losses for 2018 and 2019 added up to 2.1 milion £), the bar might have to be set low to obtain any grade As at all.

Don't worry that seems to have been addressed with 'sustainability' only scoring up to 1.5pts......

[Agbrigg]

Remember the early days of SL when Angela Powers was doing the rounds. Baby changing facilities were the ultimate ground accessory. How can you take IMG seriously without getting a least a couple of points for these