IMG Grading Unveiled

[RP London]

10 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Just as I suspected.

EDIT: To clarify, it's a genuine question about what is happening now. What else are they doing - right now? I know they have plans for stuff.

what, you suspected all the information was in the public domain but you couldnt be bothered to look for it so you expected someone else to do the work for you and repeat themselves, again?

Fab.. you do you.. 

[JohnM]

8 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Just as I suspected.

EDIT: To clarify, it's a genuine question about what is happening now. What else are they doing - right now? I know they have plans for stuff.

Just so long as they are ignoring the "contributions" to the debate from the nihilists.

The way it works is this: IMG? Never heard of them, know nothing of them, but I'm determined to oppose anything they come up with.  

[Harry Stottle]

27 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Yes, you keep making this point as if it is remotely important.

I was doing something active for my own curiosity, now I don't expect those who are disciples of the IMG scriptures to take any notice, it does not blend well with their thought process that everyone is aware that there is going to be radical changes and challenges to the structure of our sport. I would love to be proven wrong and IMG are a resounding success for the game but I just dont see this process working.

At the end of the day it is all about selling the concept in whatever shape or form to new audiences, I believe we have missed the boat with that years and years ago, the competition available out there today for peoples time and money is collectively massive and dwarfs RL immeasurably, but good luck with it.

[Click]

7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I was doing something active for my own curiosity, now I don't expect those who are disciples of the IMG scriptures to take any notice, it does not blend well with their thought process that everyone is aware that there is going to be radical changes and challenges to the structure of our sport. I would love to be proven wrong and IMG are a resounding success for the game but I just dont see this process working.

At the end of the day it is all about selling the concept in whatever shape or form to new audiences, I believe we have missed the boat with that years and years ago, the competition available out there today for peoples time and money is collectively massive and dwarfs RL immeasurably, but good luck with it.

Are you suggesting that RL should just give up with trying to improve and get bigger, and should just be happy with the minority sport we are right now?

[Harry Stottle]

7 minutes ago, RP London said:

but thats irrelevant.. it doesnt matter whether people know about it or not. What will matter is the end result when the quality of the comp and presentation is better. How we get there and who knows the ins and outs is not relevant at all.. I dont care how the RFU work with the 6 nations but by god they get it right!

That is a good one (in bold) with these 'spreadsheet' divisions how is that going to improve the quality of the comp and by that I envisage you mean what happens on the field of play.

 

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I was doing something active for my own curiosity, now I don't expect those who are disciples of the IMG scriptures to take any notice, it does not blend well with their thought process that everyone is aware that there is going to be radical changes and challenges to the structure of our sport. I would love to be proven wrong and IMG are a resounding success for the game but I just dont see this process working.

At the end of the day it is all about selling the concept in whatever shape or form to new audiences, I believe we have missed the boat with that years and years ago, the competition available out there today for peoples time and money is collectively massive and dwarfs RL immeasurably, but good luck with it.

IMG are not selling the concept of IMG to rugby league supporters though.

[Archie Gordon]

4 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Just so long as they are ignoring the "contributions" to the debate from the nihilists.

The way it works is this: IMG? Never heard of them, know nothing of them, but I'm determined to oppose anything they come up with.  

You couldn't be more wrong (though you have a very good track record).

I am ever so keen for IMG to bring about a step change in digital, comms, branding, streaming, etc., just as they have done for Euroleague basketball. I think they have the expertise and infrastructure. It could be transformative for the game.

But I am a bit dismayed that IMG's priorities have been to conduct a wholly amateurish fan consultation, followed by chasing themselves down a Super League gradings criteria rabbithole. These are things they are showing themselves to be no better than the RFL at doing.

I am a bit frustrated. I get the sense the IMG supporters are a bit frustrated, too. My feeling is that nobody really thinks the league structure and the make-up of the top 12 teams is the biggie - that TO replacing Wakefield is very important - but after 14 months, that's where IMG seems to have got us to. Meanwhile, we have a TV deal to sort.

[Tommygilf]

34 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Yes, you keep making this point as if it is remotely important.

Its like Liberty Media and F1.

They are undeniably behind the massive uptick in that sport's popularity in the past few years, they took a large interest in the recent regulation changes that have been implemented, they are behind ththey e teams and administrators of the sport taking a whole new approach to how the present themselves and interact (many quite reluctantly).

Most fans, especially the new fans, don't know who they are.

[RP London]

11 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I was doing something active for my own curiosity, now I don't expect those who are disciples of the IMG scriptures to take any notice, it does not blend well with their thought process that everyone is aware that there is going to be radical changes and challenges to the structure of our sport. I would love to be proven wrong and IMG are a resounding success for the game but I just dont see this process working.

At the end of the day it is all about selling the concept in whatever shape or form to new audiences, I believe we have missed the boat with that years and years ago, the competition available out there today for peoples time and money is collectively massive and dwarfs RL immeasurably, but good luck with it.

where does anyone who speaks positively about IMG say that everyone should be aware of what they are doing and who they are? I think that is totally irrelevant. 

What is relevant is whether whatever IMG do is actually successful in getting more eyes on the game and therefore more commercial viability to the sport itself. 

If every supporter knew who was behind it and what they were doing it wouldn't make the slightest difference to whether it worked or not and that is the only metric that counts.

 

[RP London]

7 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

That is a good one (in bold) with these 'spreadsheet' divisions how is that going to improve the quality of the comp and by that I envisage you mean what happens on the field of play.

 

then you envisage wrong. I can see a lot of issues that the game has, as a whole, getting people involved that can raise the commercial profile.. i dont see what is shown on the field of play as a major issue in that TBH.

But we know this, we've had this conversation before about why IMG are getting involved and what they can bring to the sport and how they will be measured.. 

[Harry Stottle]

16 minutes ago, Click said:

Are you suggesting that RL should just give up with trying to improve and get bigger, and should just be happy with the minority sport we are right now?

Hiw much of a minority sport do you think we are Click? Has a team game we have a good number of participants playing the game, and as a paying spectator sport we are up there in top attended sports.

I'm happy with what we have.

[Harry Stottle]

19 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

IMG are not selling the concept of IMG to rugby league supporters though.

Of course not, who said they were?

[glossop saint]

14 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

That is a good one (in bold) with these 'spreadsheet' divisions how is that going to improve the quality of the comp and by that I envisage you mean what happens on the field of play.

 

As with RP London I don't think that the quality is purely based on what happens on the field (I always wonder that when people discuss quality, how do you quantify that). However let us go with a theory of how it would, not necessarily how it will play out but how it will certainly be hoped by those at IMG and the RFL I imagine.

The spreadsheet divisions get those clubs who have the biggest audiences, both TV and in person, biggest catchment, most success on the field of play, best finances, best community foundations in front of the eyeballs of potential new fans, players, investors etc more often and against of clubs of a similar status. This theoretically should mean there is more money coming into the game, a higher profile, increased participation, particularly at junior levels. This will theoretically lead to a greater player pool, with players who want to play this sport as opposed to other sports and so better athletes, having more opportunities. This is how the on field quality is improved. Whether it will or not I don't know, though if the money and player pool continues on the trajectory it seemingly is then surely something should be done?

[RP London]

11 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hiw much of a minority sport do you think we are Click? Has a team game we have a good number of participants playing the game, and as a paying spectator sport we are up there in top attended sports.

I'm happy with what we have.

But what we have has declined and will decline further if we dont develop. We can see that in TV revenue, sponsors etc etc the idea is to try and stop that and reverse it, otherwise what you are happy with will no longer exist..

[Click]

13 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hiw much of a minority sport do you think we are Click? Has a team game we have a good number of participants playing the game, and as a paying spectator sport we are up there in top attended sports.

I'm happy with what we have.

I am sure you are happy with what you have, living in Leigh.

Living in London - I am far from happy with what we have as a sport. We have zero full time teams playing outside of the North (not including France).

Just because we have a few teams and clubs based close to where you live doesn't mean much when the rest of the country is totally oblivious to the sport.

[Tommygilf]

16 minutes ago, RP London said:

But what we have has declined and will decline further if we dont develop. We can see that in TV revenue, sponsors etc etc the idea is to try and stop that and reverse it, otherwise what you are happy with will no longer exist..

Standing still is going backwards.

[Harry Stottle]

12 minutes ago, RP London said:

But what we have has declined and will decline further if we dont develop. We can see that in TV revenue, sponsors etc etc the idea is to try and stop that and reverse it, otherwise what you are happy with will no longer exist..

Has it declined, and if so in what time periods?

It is definatley measurable in the community game that it has declined, but you ain't talking about that.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Has it declined, and if so in what time periods?

It is definatley measurable in the community game that it has declined, but you ain't talking about that.

Doesn't the community game directly reflect the commercial success of the sport as both are reflective of general interest?

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Please explain that to me?

All I have seen up to now is a list of strategic criteria which score points based around what a handful of clubs can perceiveably acheive, is that going to entice the man on the street to go to games, subscribe to TV channels and Streaming services, buy club merchandise, and follow on social media?

All the above can best be acheived with having a winning team on the playing field, and not all can do that.

We’ve been around the houses on this before, and I’ve shared podcasts and other stuff where IMG have described the other stuff they’re doing

At the original announcement last October they openly said that structure isn’t the most important factor, and that if anything rugby league has been guilty of seeing structure as some sort of panacea rather than doing the more important work. But structure is what gets talked about by us, probably because it feels contentious to the marginal clubs, and most likely in part because the RL media can get their heads around it whereas the other aspects feel less direct to them. 

[JohnM]

2 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

My obvious point , and the most expected would have been for me to challenge Leigh having to share ' catchment ' with Wigan , using various parts of the borough to fight my case , but you don't need to be an expert on RL to know that Wigan are the bigger club , get around double the attendances that Leigh get , hopefully we will start to challenge , that is partly what the rebrand was about , and with the way it has been done shouldn't actually detract from Wigans current support , but indeed enhance it 

Any grading based on location is , was , and always will be wrong , and won't ' help ' the sport one iota 

I said I was done on this and I am 

One down...a few to go, yet, though.

[RP London]

35 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Has it declined, and if so in what time periods?

It is definatley measurable in the community game that it has declined, but you ain't talking about that.

Firstly the community game is part of the "whole game" so yes that decline is not good and needs rectifying. We are struggling with sponsors so much that Betfred pretty much sponsor everything and Mushy Peas is a major sponsor. The Teams for the most part have worse sponsors than before, the TV revenue is down its everything we talk about week to week and month to month on here. Unless you are saying that all the things that you and everyone else complain about are actually not what is going on.

[JohnM]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

There are banners on the side of Buses that advertise Washing Powder ............ but they don't sell it!

Leigh and washing powder?

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Standing still is going backwards.

Up to May all SL clubs with the exception of Wakefield (-202) are up on their attendances in '23 compared to '22, Leigh being measured against T.O.  (+>3000) HKR did not submit figs for comparrison but shouldn't imagine they are down, nor would I expect that since May the attendances have fallen fir all clubs.

12 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Doesn't the community game directly reflect the commercial success of the sport as both are reflective of general interest?

What do you think Tommy?

I well remember throughout the 80's when my community club ran junior teams from U'6 to U'16 every year not every other year, intermediate age U'17 and U'19 and 3 open age teams, it is not reflective of those numbers today, and in those days we played in winter not summer, and I would say that today the sport is more commercially successful than it was back then, so not reflective.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Up to May all SL clubs with the exception of Wakefield (-202) are up on their attendances in '23 compared to '22, Leigh being measured against T.O.  (+>3000) HKR did not submit figs for comparrison but shouldn't imagine they are down, nor would I expect that since May the attendances have fallen fir all clubs.

So clubs are progressing and that is a good thing? 

[Harry Stottle]

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

So clubs are progressing and that is a good thing? 

Yeah, who needs IMG?