IMG Grading Unveiled

[steve oates]

2 hours ago, glossop saint said:

 1. I've not changed anything. 1 Saints Wigan final in last 8 years. That is the 'resultant grand final'. 

As for the rest of the post I don't see any suggestions to change this duopoly. I understand it is not your responsibility but surely you can't pan the current system and the proposed alteration and not expect to be asked how you would fix it.

1. Wigan Saints  and Leeds monopolised the grand finals trophy but as we know Leeds have fallen from their once mighty perch.... However many times Saints have met Wigan in the final is a red herring. You know that...

What we are seeing happening is less talent coming into the game as less grass roots RL is played, which seems to escape this forum. They aren't coming through at Leeds like they used to any more, so it's down to a two horse race. Quality young players that we do still have and overseas stars are bound to want to go to the biggest clubs.

The basics of how to "sort it" was already there when the clubs decided there should be an even salary cap, but having said that there is also the way in which overseas stars come for the money, but also want to win something and will take less money to be heading for a winning team. Top youngsters often look to go to the academies of the best clubs. If you were a superstar Wakey youngster ready to join an academy and I was your dad  I'd be driving you to Saints or Wigan

 

[glossop saint]

12 minutes ago, steve oates said:

1. Wigan Saints  and Leeds monopolised the grand finals trophy but as we know Leeds have fallen from their once mighty perch.... However many times Saints have met Wigan in the final is a red herring. You know that...

What we are seeing happening is less talent coming into the game as less grass roots RL is played, which seems to escape this forum. They aren't coming through at Leeds like they used to any more, so it's down to a two horse race. Quality young players that we do still have and overseas stars are bound to want to go to the biggest clubs.

The basics of how to "sort it" was already there when the clubs decided there should be an even salary cap, but having said that there is also the way in which overseas stars come for the money, but also want to win something and will take less money to be heading for a winning team. Top youngsters often look to go to the academies of the best clubs. If you were a superstar Wakey youngster ready to join an academy and I was your dad  I'd be driving you to Saints or Wigan

 

If you want to look for a monopoly can I suggest that you just look at Saints and leave Wigan out of it. I'll leave the discussion on monopolies or whatever there. I've agreed I want more variety, though every stat shows that there has been much more variation than a 2 horse race such as the SPL.

I agree very much with your diagnosis. Not enough players of a good enough quality. I won't argue that it is not a '2 horse race' yet again as we can go around in circles yet again. I agree that we risk losing more players to NRL. The question is how do we change both of those things. Bigger player pool and more money within the game to keep the players. Personally for me that means expansion though I know a lot on here disagree. I don't like a few aspects of the IMG proposals and the lack of focus on expansion is one of these things. Though their proposal is a compromise. Something which some people aren't willing to see and instead come up with a conspiracy theory that it is all done for the current SL clubs to lock them in.

Your example of the salary cap is a great example of how pretty much every solution has pros and cons. I definitely agree that that is a potential problem with the cap. Ironically 2 of the current potential new stars are were playing for Wakey earlier this season but won't be next in Hall and Murphy. Though I do get the impression that you are moving the goalposts of the discussion into salary cap and not the IMG proposals. A big discussion can be had on the salary cap, some of which I suspect we will agree on, but that is not really anything to do with the IMG proposals.

[steve oates]

15 hours ago, glossop saint said:

If you want to look for a monopoly can I suggest that you just look at Saints and leave Wigan out of it. I'll leave the discussion on monopolies or whatever there. I've agreed I want more variety, though every stat shows that there has been much more variation than a 2 horse race such as the SPL.

I agree very much with your diagnosis. Not enough players of a good enough quality. I won't argue that it is not a '2 horse race' yet again as we can go around in circles yet again. I agree that we risk losing more players to NRL. The question is how do we change both of those things. Bigger player pool and more money within the game to keep the players. Personally for me that means expansion though I know a lot on here disagree. I don't like a few aspects of the IMG proposals and the lack of focus on expansion is one of these things. Though their proposal is a compromise. Something which some people aren't willing to see and instead come up with a conspiracy theory that it is all done for the current SL clubs to lock them in.

Your example of the salary cap is a great example of how pretty much every solution has pros and cons. I definitely agree that that is a potential problem with the cap. Ironically 2 of the current potential new stars are were playing for Wakey earlier this season but won't be next in Hall and Murphy. Though I do get the impression that you are moving the goalposts of the discussion into salary cap and not the IMG proposals. A big discussion can be had on the salary cap, some of which I suspect we will agree on, but that is not really anything to do with the IMG proposals.

I'll go with that all day, thanks for the discussion........

[bbfaz]

121 pages and nobody has convinced the other side of anything.  The criteria are going to be biased, it's completely unavoidable.  My concern is that every time the RFL comes up with a new set of ideas as to how they'll fix the game, it makes things worse.

The unavoidable truth is that Rugby League is played in poor communities and we've lived through times where inequality has become bigger.  The only way to make the game bigger is to get it into communities where there are larger disposable incomes.  If you are going to do that, you need to disassemble the game as it currently exists including the salary cap and everything that is supposed to protect small clubs but actually protects big clubs.

Everything else is a waste of time

[Big Picture]

8 hours ago, bbfaz said:

121 pages and nobody has convinced the other side of anything.  The criteria are going to be biased, it's completely unavoidable.  My concern is that every time the RFL comes up with a new set of ideas as to how they'll fix the game, it makes things worse.

The unavoidable truth is that Rugby League is played in poor communities and we've lived through times where inequality has become bigger.  The only way to make the game bigger is to get it into communities where there are larger disposable incomes.  If you are going to do that, you need to disassemble the game as it currently exists including the salary cap and everything that is supposed to protect small clubs but actually protects big clubs.

Everything else is a waste of time

Nail hit on head there, and that's why IMG won't succeed in this venture.

[OnStrike]

14 hours ago, bbfaz said:

121 pages and nobody has convinced the other side of anything.  The criteria are going to be biased, it's completely unavoidable.  My concern is that every time the RFL comes up with a new set of ideas as to how they'll fix the game, it makes things worse.

The unavoidable truth is that Rugby League is played in poor communities and we've lived through times where inequality has become bigger.  The only way to make the game bigger is to get it into communities where there are larger disposable incomes.  If you are going to do that, you need to disassemble the game as it currently exists including the salary cap and everything that is supposed to protect small clubs but actually protects big clubs.

Everything else is a waste of time

The problem with that is most of these communities with larger disposal incomes are already involved with Rugby Union, Football or something else. It's not a simple thing to get the game into an area where it doesn't currently exist and people are already involved in Union or whatever.

Businesses in these areas (and nationally) are much more likely to want to throw money towards Union or Football as there's more of their fans with disposable income and there is prestige in being associated with them.

I obviously don't have the answers but it's definitely not as simple as get the game into richer areas, although that may be part of it.

[bbfaz]

1 minute ago, OnStrike said:

The problem with that is most of these communities with larger disposal incomes are already involved with Rugby Union, Football or something else. It's not a simple thing to get the game into an area where it doesn't currently exist and people are already involved in Union or whatever.

Businesses in these areas (and nationally) are much more likely to want to throw money towards Union or Football as there's more of their fans with disposable income and there is prestige in being associated with them.

I obviously don't have the answers but it's definitely not as simple as get the game into richer areas, although that may be part of it.

I think I've made a hamfisted point from an original, much-longer post that I seriously truncated.

Essentially, my argument is that there's no money in many RL communities.  Saying these clubs need to go out and market themselves and get better sponsorships is pointless when they're in communities where the economy is shot.  Where something is geographically very much matters in sport and virtually every city or borough that these clubs are in has been in long-term decline.

For instance, Keighley can only try to succeed on the field because there's no way for them to succeed off the field.  Besides, it's a sporting competition, not a corporate dick-measuring competition.  There needs to be an economic resurgence in these places for there to be a renaissance for these clubs.  The only other option is to try to get pro RL into places where there is money and experience tells us that this is not possible with the way they do things right now, otherwise London would have been a success by now.

[OnStrike]

11 minutes ago, bbfaz said:

I think I've made a hamfisted point from an original, much-longer post that I seriously truncated.

Essentially, my argument is that there's no money in many RL communities.  Saying these clubs need to go out and market themselves and get better sponsorships is pointless when they're in communities where the economy is shot.  Where something is geographically very much matters in sport and virtually every city or borough that these clubs are in has been in long-term decline.

For instance, Keighley can only try to succeed on the field because there's no way for them to succeed off the field.  Besides, it's a sporting competition, not a corporate dick-measuring competition.  There needs to be an economic resurgence in these places for there to be a renaissance for these clubs.  The only other option is to try to get pro RL into places where there is money and experience tells us that this is not possible with the way they do things right now, otherwise London would have been a success by now.

Yeah agree with that, put it better than I could.

[Big Picture]

3 hours ago, bbfaz said:

I think I've made a hamfisted point from an original, much-longer post that I seriously truncated.

Essentially, my argument is that there's no money in many RL communities.  Saying these clubs need to go out and market themselves and get better sponsorships is pointless when they're in communities where the economy is shot.  Where something is geographically very much matters in sport and virtually every city or borough that these clubs are in has been in long-term decline.

For instance, Keighley can only try to succeed on the field because there's no way for them to succeed off the field.  Besides, it's a sporting competition, not a corporate dick-measuring competition.  There needs to be an economic resurgence in these places for there to be a renaissance for these clubs.  The only other option is to try to get pro RL into places where there is money and experience tells us that this is not possible with the way they do things right now, otherwise London would have been a success by now.

You argument is essentially the same as what Sean McGuire has said, just in different words.  The game's existential problem is that it must break through in those bigger, more prosperous cities to have a future which isn't the the end of pro RL in Britain, which John Kear said in an interview a few years ago could come about in 10 or 20 years' time.

As I've said before, only a whole new organization built for the purpose of breaking through in those bigger, more prosperous cities could possibly achieve it.  That's an objective which is simply beyond the means of the current setup of RL in Britain no matter what IMG suggests that they do.

Edited April 26, 2023 by Big Picture

[Oxford]

Big cities the El Dorado of contemporary RL nonsense.

It's just beyond the next horizon everyone!

And if this is truly the be all and end all of IMG's strategy, prepare to be disappointed.

[sweaty craiq]

The disposable income for the majority in WN7 is greater than most London boroughs. The North is awash with cash 

[Oxford]

1 minute ago, sweaty craiq said:

The disposable income for the majority in WN7 is greater than most London boroughs. The North is awash with cash 

The world turned upside down!

[Oxford]

2 hours ago, OnStrike said:

I obviously don't have the answers but it's definitely not as simple as get the game into richer areas, although that may be part of it.

No there is no maybe about this idea, you spotted the fatal flaw an idea rich in hope and imagination and low on realism and achievability. It has as much chance of realisation as a Kier Starmer promise or the Tories investing in infrastructure or bringing profits down.

[David Shepherd]

18 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

The disposable income for the majority in WN7 is greater than most London boroughs. The North is awash with cash 

Most Inner London boroughs are third world sh!tholes. I wouldn't be surprised if even WF7 had more disposable income per head that them.

[gingerjon]

21 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

The disposable income for the majority in WN7 is greater than most London boroughs. The North is awash with cash 

The top five boroughs for disposable income are all in London. Three are in inner London.

[Oxford]

26 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The top five boroughs for disposable income are all in London. Three are in inner London.

All a bit like youth and the young .... it simply illustrates cash is wasted on the rich.

[sweaty craiq]

3 hours ago, gingerjon said:

The top five boroughs for disposable income are all in London. Three are in inner London.

That’s because WN7 wealth is diluted by the scabs and scivers from Humbletown

[Oxford]

10 hours ago, bbfaz said:

Essentially, my argument is that there's no money in many RL communities.  Saying these clubs need to go out and market themselves and get better sponsorships is pointless when they're in communities where the economy is shot.  Where something is geographically very much matters in sport and virtually every city or borough that these clubs are in has been in long-term decline.

Only if and until there are riots in the street will that alter in any way and we don't want to frighten the two choices of right leaning government do we?

There's alot in what you say but the leap between where we are now and all these wonderful bigger and richer towns and cities is a bit more involved than doing a moonlit!

If the ambition for this is the U S model of franchise as moveable feasts where if you dislike the town you're in you move somewhere else that's truly sad.

If there are RL fans who'd prefer to lose Wakey but gain Leicester that's sadder.

I don't believe such a transformation is possible in only twelve years.

If we're so unbothered  about those clubs and their fans that we don't mind if we lose them altogether then we're a sport that's not even worth saving in the first place.

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Oxford

[bbfaz]

1 hour ago, Oxford said:

Only if and until there are riots in the street will that alter in any way and we don't want to frighten the two choices of right leaning government do we?

There's alot in what you say but the leap between where we are now and all these wonderful bigger and richer towns and cities is a bit more involved than doing a moonlit!

If the ambition for this is the U S model of francise as moveable feasts where if you dislike the town you're in you move somewhere else that's truly sad.

If there are RL fans who'd prefer to lose Wakey but gain Leicester that's sadder.

I don't believe such a transformation is possible in only twelve years.

If we're so unbothered  about those clubs and their fans that we don't mind if we lose them altogether then we're a sport that's not even worth saving in the first place.

 

Where am I arguing for franchising?  I'm arguing against it.  I'm saying that there two options are a franchise system or having an open system.  I'm for the latter and think it's unfair to marginalise teams.

However, if we are doing franchising - and licensing, grading or whatever you want to call it is franchising - can we do it properly?  Can we apply basic standards across the entire game and then open it to anybody who meets it irrespective of where they are in the country, be it Blackburn, Barking or Bangor?  This system doesn't work.  It was shown not to work before where the great success was Langtree Park (which would have been built anyway) and the failure was the collapse of the London Broncos.

Either way, how is this plan going to fix anything?  It's not transformative enough to have a massive effect but just transformative enough to erode what's left of the semi-pro game.  And then we're not even looking at issues further down, like why the RFL won't let teams in the heartlands go pro or why there's no amateur pyramid.

They're always trying to fix things and expand the game when all I want the RFL to do is just administer the game properly.  Is that too much to ask?

[Oxford]

57 minutes ago, bbfaz said:

Where am I arguing for franchising? 

I think you've confused my reacting to your post with me arguing with your post.

There were themes on here of  franchising, bigger cities and all wrapped up with grading and my comments were about them.

Your ideas about the lack of sufficient monies in RL areas  feeds into this quite clearly.

To answer  your question, "Can it be done properly? "

Of course it can but the implications for outcomes are obvious which is what I wanted to point out.

[steve oates]

On 25/04/2023 at 18:55, bbfaz said:

The unavoidable truth is that Rugby League is played in poor communities and we've lived through times where inequality has become bigger.  The only way to make the game bigger is to get it into communities where there are larger disposable incomes. 

Sorry but you have no idea. Both League and Union where they are played have seen participation drop like a stone over the last couple of decades. Union clubs who used to put 4 teams out now only put one out. I know because I have followed both codes locally for decades. Happily last week there was a Bramley.v.Akkies game on.

The venue was far from being a "poor community", and the players were far away from being poor working class.

The "communities" that play both Rugby Union and Rugby league have seen the game shrink because there is so much else to do in this wealthy largely modern world than play sports, and if sport is your bag there are far more choices and venues and alternative sports to play especially in sports centres. Sports that don't run a risk of serious injury like the two codes of Rugby.  Soccer is no different, hundreds used to turn out locally to play Sunday Football. There is no Sunday football now. But you can get into your community and see is you can prove your theory??

[steve oates]

23 hours ago, bbfaz said:

Essentially, my argument is that there's no money in many RL communities.  

For instance, Keighley can only try to succeed on the field because there's no way for them to succeed off the field.  There needs to be an economic resurgence in these places for there to be a renaissance for these clubs.  T

How do you come to that conclusion?  We are at full employment now?   Have you ever been to the Keighley area? It's hardly dark satanic mills and begging bowels. One reason people don't play that much now is exactly because they want to hold their jobs down and not have to take time off from work with injuries.... 

[gingerjon]

7 minutes ago, steve oates said:

 begging bowels

Don’t mind me, just being childish 

[steve oates]

22 hours ago, Big Picture said:

You argument is essentially the same as what Sean McGuire has said, just in different words.  The game's existential problem is that it must break through in those bigger, more prosperous cities to have a future which isn't the the end of pro RL in Britain, which John Kear said in an interview a few years ago could come about in 10 or 20 years' time.

What? Windsor, Weybridge, sevenoakes, Beaconsfield and Henley?? We have had a presence in those areas through Harlequins, London Broncos, Fulham Kent invicta etc.........

There's no interest in those places, they have been tried and failed......

[DI Keith Fowler]

41 minutes ago, steve oates said:

How do you come to that conclusion?  We are at full employment now?   Have you ever been to the Keighley area? It's hardly dark satanic mills and begging bowels. One reason people don't play that much now is exactly because they want to hold their jobs down and not have to take time off from work with injuries.... 

Full employment has been achieved in the Keighley sector, now to increase the productivity quota comrade.