Jump to content

IMG Grading Unveiled


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't suspect it will be that close tbh. 

Operationally the difference between Championship and Super League is actually massive. I suppose it is not something I had considered too much until seeing it up close. But even Cas and Wakey are way ahead (particularly off field shockingly) of many aspiring Championship clubs.

I think there are a group of Championship clubs who could be close to the bottom graded SL clubs: Featherstone, Toulouse, Bradford, Widnes, Halifax. But it does look like a lot will be stacked in the favour of the incumbents.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


17 hours ago, GeordieSaint said:

It is SL and these big clubs who attract the big money from SKY, Ch4 etc. You only need to view the amount of times these clubs are on the TV to substantiate that point. 

So whilst I am a firm believer in sharing ‘some’ resource ie TV monies, to the smaller clubs, why should SL share money with the likes of Keighley, Dewsbury et al who are not being paid to be watched on our TV screens? If the answer is fairness or something like that, the cold reality is sport is a business, not a charity. 

Right

So as you state its only SL teams on Sky and smaller clubs are not on TV.

Then its solely down to the SL clubs that the Money from Sky was reduced - nothing to do with the smaller clubs not being as good or playing as attractive rugby which has been said on here previously.

So do you think that's because Sky are getting bored with watching the same teams week in and every year??

Or is it just not as good to watch as you think??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Barley Mow said:

I think there are a group of Championship clubs who could be close to the bottom graded SL clubs: Featherstone, Toulouse, Bradford, Widnes, Halifax. But it does look like a lot will be stacked in the favour of the incumbents.

I would have normally agreed with you, but actually looking at some of those I don't think they come all that close - which is no bad thing if they improve themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

Aren't they only proposing that once there are 12 A grades?

I haven't heard anything to suggest that if we have a group of close B grades (eg Wakefield, Featherstone Halifax), they would all be put into an enlarged Super League.

This,

That does not suit the narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Just because you won't purchase a season ticket doesn't mean it isn't the best for the sport overall, It seems you just want to continue as we are, do you think RL in this country is in a healthy state with the current system?

Well Chris, those questions highlight what the problems are and how issues divide us by what we believe is correct.

Let's say first of all that just 5% 5 in 100 feel the same way about their season tickets that would mean IMG's proposals would need to bring in 5% plus whatever their changes manage to bring in for RL to be better off in the first place.

Almost no sport in this country is in a healthy place at present and the reasons are too many to mention.

I don't think you can assume people want to stay as we are because they're critical if the process and your point about making assumptions in a vacuum is what we're all doing because the process is being revealed in bits and pieces.

7 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

It will be highly unlikely that the grades that determine whether team will move out of SL or up from the Champ will be 'fine margins'

 

2. That the whole point is that it isn't decided by opinions.

Apart from the obvious well he would say tha wouldn't he, both of those statements are just as likely to wrong as they are to be correct.

Edited by Oxford

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Funny you should mention that, but I would bet those were the halcyon days of spectators live in the grounds at RL games, it is those who would make up the modern audiences who choose not to attend, why is that please advise me or give me the excuses.

They were the halcyon days for men now in their 50's and 60's who confuse looking back on their youth through rose-tinted spectacles with a quantitative analysis of relative standards. 

More people watch our sport than watched it then, and the quality of sport on offer from fully professional athletes is far better. And if we do the right things even more people will watch and love it in the future. 

  • Like 4

Apparently this site says I "won the day" here on 23rd Jan, 19th Jan, 9th Jan also 13th December, whatever any of that means. Anyway, 4 times in a few weeks? The forum must be going to the dogs - you people need to seriously up your game. Where's Dutoni when you need him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

Can you explain how having 4 P and R places will help create more depth at the very top of the sport which is what you want? How will it stop Wigan, Saints from winning everything? 

Nothing is gonna stop Saints and Wigan winning everything.

Its going on 30 years of Super League now and only 4 teams have ever won !!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Oxford said:

Well Chris, those questions highlight waht the problems are and how issues divide us by what we believe is correct.

Let's say first of all that just 5% 5 in 100 feel the same way about their season tickets that would mean IMG's proposals would need to bring in 5% plus whatever their changes manage to bring in for RL to be better off in the first place.

Almost no sport in this country is in a healthy place at present and the reasons are too many to mention.

I don't think you can assume people want to stay as we are because they're critical if the process and your point about making assumptions in a vacuum is what we're all doing because the process is being revealed in bits and pieces.

Apart from the obvious well he would say tha wouldn't he, both of those statements are just as likely to wrong as they are to be correct.

Why would he say that? maybe because he has been integral in creating the system.

Whether you believe him or not is entirely up to you but the point of this agreement is that it is in IMGs favour to grow the sport why would they want to do something that does the opposite?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

NO wanting a share of the cake is asking for help/begging etc

Wanting it all - IS GREED

And we should be helping to build the game to the status that it deserves - for all not just 12

That is exactly what this is trying to do, IMG explicitly say that in their early releases etc. 

No matter how many words you put in CAPS it doesn't make it true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if SL clubs are allowed the incumbency advantage, we'll have a closed shop - the fandom and finances gap will be too wide to bridge.

However, if the coefficients are weighted to account for being in SL vs Champ, there really could be no discernible difference between Huddersfield, Leigh, Salford, Wakefield, Featherstone, Widnes and Toulouse.

The latter three might all reasonably expect to make the top 12 - 3 up, 3 down, potentially played out annually.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Would be less boring - but 4 is enough 

It worked fine for years.

In a totally different era.. 

It's like saying "in the age of steam the railways worked perfectly fine therefore bring back steam trains"

It's a false equivalence and causation at its worse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

You haven't seen the full report and how those gradings will manifest - you are making an awful lot of assumptions.

Why do you think I am being dishonest? I don't know what will happen post 25 because I do not know in practice how those grades will ultimately be allocated, and neither do you.

Just because you won't purchase a season ticket doesn't mean it isn't the best for the sport overall, It seems you just want to continue as we are, do you think RL in this country is in a healthy state with the current system?

 

Your own club's owner has stated that the IMG involvement is why they have taken positive steps to grow the club -why can't that be the case for other similar clubs?

Chris I did not say you were being dishonest, if you think I implied that then I apologize.

My take on Sport is that it should be a contest were the result is paramount, if you and others don't then so be it.

Whatever the owner of my club considers the best way forward is his prerogative, I am sure there will be many that agrees with him, but for a lot of games (I will pick and choose) the square of concrete that I occupy will be vacant.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chrispmartha said:

Why would he say that? maybe because he has been integral in creating the system.

I think you not only answered your own question but proved the argument.

2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Whether you believe him or not is entirely up to you but the point of this agreement is that it is in IMGs favour to grow the sport why would they want to do something that does the opposite?

That is correct they only win if it works, but that's nowhere near the same as those ideas you cited. For a category to be given someone would have to decide it's been achieved or not, that's not arguable.

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, steve oates said:

The idea of "Expansion" nowadays is far removed from the reality and the history of the game. Back in 1970 open age amateur RL was just about dead, and Clubs were semi pro on crowds nowhere near those today. 4K watched Leeds..

Real expansion came with BARLA and the rise of the amateur game, and later with SKY money and the professionalisation of the game at top level.  Now we see the SKY money plunging and Amateur RL disappearing  at a rate of Knots.....

The idea Cornwall, West wales, Skolars, London, coventry and  Newcastle  are "expansion" is sadly not true and those holier than thou on here who rage if this is pointed out is poor form. The "lowest home gates of the season" must be coupled with the highest travel cost of the season, running into £Thousands which the Keighley lads pointed out.

The jibe of "a northern game for northern folk" is a silly cheap call. History, Geography and sensible planning and accountancy is likely to put the game back into it's M62 box where it has worked very nicely for 127 years and will hopefully continue to do so......as long as we grasp reality and stop fantasising.........

You're looking at those 127 years of history through rose-coloured glasses there.  As you can read here, in the years preceding SL the British game was in dire straits.  And being stuck in M62-land, based in smallish, unfashionable, economically-disadvantaged towns is the reason why it was in those dire straits.

The TV money has been dropping for the simple reason that the M62-based league the sport has to offer doesn't rate well enough to get more money for its rights.  That's the problem IMG must solve if they're ever going to make money out of their arrangement with the game, but they'll discover in time that there is no solution to it within the constraints of the game's current setup in Britain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Chris I did not say you were being dishonest, if you think I implied that then I apologize.

My take on Sport is that it should be a contest were the result is paramount, if you and others don't then so be it.

Whatever the owner of my club considers the best way forward is his prerogative, I am sure there will be many that agrees with him, but for a lot of games (I will pick and choose) the square of concrete that I occupy will be vacant.

And that's fine if you feel that way Harry, that is your prerogative. But it might not be can't, it might be filled with two other people because your club has put effort into making the club vibrant and sustainable.

As for your take on sport, again that's fine that's your prerogative. but any sport anywhere will have fixtures where the result isn't paramount and people still watch it because they enjoy watching sport.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Oxford said:

I think you not only answered your own question but proved the argument.

That is correct they only win if it works, but that's nowhere near the same as those ideas you cited. For a category to be given someone would have to decide it's been achieved or not, that's not arguable.

It is arguable, we don't know how the grading system is set up, the IMG guy said it will be set up so that it is not based on someones opinion, now until we see how it will be implemented we can't say for sure whether he is correct.

Some people seem to be suggesting the IMG proposals are just set up to maintain the status quo - why would IMG want to do that? the whole point is that if the sport grows they get more money.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

That's obviously IMG's hope too. I'm sure we all hope for the growth of our cubs.

I'm still skeptical about the scheme and haven't been convinced fully be either side of the arguments over the last 44 pages.

I completely understand and agree with your scepticism. I am in the same boat. I just don't think that the multiple p and r places being suggested is any better. In fact I think it is worse.

We need to see more details about the new scheme, which I am sure we will in time. There are many questions to be answered but I like the general idea. The devil is as ever in the detail. My big issue is there needs to be an element of weighting towards none SL clubs otherwise there is no chance of any changing of the teams in the top tier.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, NW10LDN said:

And yet rugby league is one of the least watched sports among young people. How many kids will continue watching once they no longer have to go with their parents? Will they watch at home?

Apologies if already posted, but do you have a link for your source? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chrispmartha said:

It is arguable, we don't know how the grading system is set up, the IMG guy said it will be set up so that it is not based on someones opinion, now until we see how it will be implemented we can't say for sure whether he is correct.

Some people seem to be suggesting the IMG proposals are just set up to maintain the status quo - why would IMG want to do that? the whole point is that if the sport grows they get more money.

Remember it isn't tin foil hat...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

Nothing is gonna stop Saints and Wigan winning everything.

Its going on 30 years of Super League now and only 4 teams have ever won !!!!!!

So what are you arguing? What do you want? Your team to be in the top tier? I assume that you are a Workington fan, well I could actually see this system working more in your favour than straight forward p and r.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

They were the halcyon days for men now in their 50's and 60's who confuse looking back on their youth through rose-tinted spectacles with a quantitative analysis of relative standards. 

More people watch our sport than watched it then, and the quality of sport on offer from fully professional athletes is far better. And if we do the right things even more people will watch and love it in the future. 

You must be younger than you are letting on if you are considering those spectators back then are only in their 50's and 60's now.

Is this process not about engaging more people to be present inside the stadiums, if not why have grading points awarded for catchment areas?

Anyway, I asked why in todays modern world less people engage themselves directly in the stadiums from the time you described.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chrispmartha said:

It is arguable, we don't know how the grading system is set up, the IMG guy said it will be set up so that it is not based on someones opinion, now until we see how it will be implemented we can't say for sure whether he is correct.

Some people seem to be suggesting the IMG proposals are just set up to maintain the status quo - why would IMG want to do that? the whole point is that if the sport grows they get more money.

I don't think anyone is questioning whether IMG are trying to increase income into the game.

The doubters are suggesting that the status quo will be maintained in terms of the clubs in the top flight, and that the criteria are likely to largely ensure that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.