IMG Grading Unveiled

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, glossop saint said:

Have IMG ever singled out anyone as an example?

I think the popularity comes from how he has done it, not what he has done. Though that is probably a discussion for a separate Leigh specific thread.

I don't know, you said  "are IMG not encouraging other clubs to 'do a Leigh'?" I just asked you to clarify, if it was just a turn of phrase fair enough.

[glossop saint]

12 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I don't know, you said  "are IMG not encouraging other clubs to 'do a Leigh'?" I just asked you to clarify, if it was just a turn of phrase fair enough.

Sorry. Yes. A turn of phrase. 

[Chrispmartha]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yeah, who needs IMG? 

We have IMG and they may be having an influence on the clubs, your owner has said Leigh have certainly done things because of IMGs involvement.

[Chrispmartha]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

But he's thick and easily influenced isn't he, I have seen that from many posters on these pages.

Yes I will conceded that he has used IMG's name on occasion, but this rebrand has not happened overnight, would you think that the increase in attendances would have been so good if the team weren't posting the results they are doing?

The rebrand doesn’t look like it took a night ill give you that, it looks like it took much less than that.

Its bizarre Harry your own club has said that they have done certain things because of IMGs involvement but you think its a bad thing?

[yipyee]

On 14/07/2023 at 07:45, Spidey said:

Are pitch dimensions part of any criteria?  Currently Odsal has special dispensation to host RL games due to it being lower than the minimum (as are a few others) -  will that be taken into account?

From what I read no they are not. Its more about spectator engagement than being about technicalities 

[steve oates]

21 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

I don't believe they have had much influence.

Can I add a "me too" as well

The rise of the Leopards is wholly down to Derek.

[Chrispmartha]

6 hours ago, steve oates said:

Can I add a "me too" as well

The rise of the Leopards is wholly down to Derek.

Whose saying it isn’t?

The point being some of the things he has done are partly down to IMG’s involvement.

 

https://www.seriousaboutrl.com/derek-beaumont-reveals-how-img-were-behind-controversial-rebrand-75852/amp/

 

“I just felt that if you were IMG or an investor looking from the outside in, you have to accept that that looks like a bigger club than ours in its history and so on and so forth.”

 

https://www.leighjournal.co.uk/news/23130776.derek-beaumont-explains-reasons-leigh-leopards-re-brand/

 

 

[The Blues Ox]

Fantastic to see Leigh getting to Wembley, something that would have been really unlikely for them under any sort of scoring and franchise system. A great example of how a club can get promoted and thrive given a fair chance.

[Anita Bath]

Wonderful…..its feeling like 1971 all over again. 

 

But could they go all retro for Wembley and wear red and white hoops…..please. Well not if the opposition wear red I suppose.

[Barley Mow]

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportlatest/23682436.bradford-bulls-consider-reducing-capacity-odsal/?ref=rss

Bradford Bulls look at reducing the official capacity at Odsal - the ground won't change, the terracing will still be there just not able to be used.

What it will do is help them with the utilisation element of the grading as they would fill a larger percentage of the official capacity without needing to attract more spectators.

[Archie Gordon]

19 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportlatest/23682436.bradford-bulls-consider-reducing-capacity-odsal/?ref=rss

Bradford Bulls look at reducing the official capacity at Odsal - the ground won't change, the terracing will still be there just not able to be used.

What it will do is help them with the utilisation element of the grading as they would fill a larger percentage of the official capacity without needing to attract more spectators.

Rational behaviour.

[wiganermike]

6 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportlatest/23682436.bradford-bulls-consider-reducing-capacity-odsal/?ref=rss

Bradford Bulls look at reducing the official capacity at Odsal - the ground won't change, the terracing will still be there just not able to be used.

What it will do is help them with the utilisation element of the grading as they would fill a larger percentage of the official capacity without needing to attract more spectators.

I'm sure they won't be the only club to attempt to game the system to sneak a few more points (or fractions thereof) if they do go down that route and are able to improve their IMG rating as a result. Choosing to close part of the ground in order to improve the percentage of capacity being used seems like a loophole that needs closing. If not then what's to stop almost all clubs closing off stands or terraces to improve their score for utilisation, no matter how small the gain in the grading score.

[Dave T]

7 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportlatest/23682436.bradford-bulls-consider-reducing-capacity-odsal/?ref=rss

Bradford Bulls look at reducing the official capacity at Odsal - the ground won't change, the terracing will still be there just not able to be used.

What it will do is help them with the utilisation element of the grading as they would fill a larger percentage of the official capacity without needing to attract more spectators.

Where does it say any of that in the article? 

[eal]

Perhaps a good plan for Odsal is bulldozing most of it and renovating the still standing sections? Easier to maintain 10,000 seats than 25,000 seats.

[Damien]

55 minutes ago, eal said:

Perhaps a good plan for Odsal is bulldozing most of it and renovating the still standing sections? Easier to maintain 10,000 seats than 25,000 seats.

They don't have 25,000 seats to maintain. Or 10,000.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

On 05/07/2023 at 10:48, The Phantom Horseman said:

Two further issues that have surprised me looking at the new IMG document.

Under "Stadium", the Facilities score seems to be either 1.5 if you meet SL standards on a prescribed range of issues, and 0.5 if you don't. That's it.

So if you play in a crumbling, ill-kept ground or a neat, well-developed, well-appointed ground that doesn't have 1 of (say) a 40-seat director's box, 200 sponsors's seats, or a 2,500 square metres broadcast parking area, you get the same grading. There seems to be no incentive whatsoever to actually improve the crumbling stadia.

Also, "Stadium Utilisation" doesn't mean what I thought it would. I thought this would mean how much the stadium was utilised overall ie how many games it staged and what extraneous use it achieved. But no, it means what percentage of capacity is filled on average. This seems to make it worthwhile for clubs to actually look at ways of reducing their capacity - knock a stand down here, write an area off as unsafe there.

Oh.....

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportlatest/23682436.bradford-bulls-consider-reducing-capacity-odsal/?ref=rss

[The Phantom Horseman]

3 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Oh.....

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportlatest/23682436.bradford-bulls-consider-reducing-capacity-odsal/?ref=rss

I didn't want to be the one that pointed this out...

[idrewthehaggis]

On 27/07/2023 at 08:29, Barley Mow said:

https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/sport/sportlatest/23682436.bradford-bulls-consider-reducing-capacity-odsal/?ref=rss

Bradford Bulls look at reducing the official capacity at Odsal - the ground won't change, the terracing will still be there just not able to be used.

What it will do is help them with the utilisation element of the grading as they would fill a larger percentage of the official capacity without needing to attract more spectators.

This is not good, if not desperate. 

[Agbrigg]

Makes perfect sense to me. They have a tiny  pitch, so why not build a tiny stadium around it. 

[sam4731]

Don't know if these questions have been answered before but I was wondering if anyone knew the outcomes of these scenarios?

- Team has an 'A' grade in year 1 and finishes mid table. Only just slips into a 'B' grade for year 2 and is relegated. Manages to improve enough in other areas to get their 'A' grade back in year 3 but doesn't win the championship grand final. Do they get their super league place back?

- Team has an 'A' grade but finishes bottom. Obviously they can't be relegated but are Team 11 relegated instead or is there no relegation that year?

- Team wins the Championship grand final but have a 'C' grade. Obviously can't be promoted but do the runners up go up or is there no promotion that year?

[glossop saint]

44 minutes ago, sam4731 said:

Don't know if these questions have been answered before but I was wondering if anyone knew the outcomes of these scenarios?

- Team has an 'A' grade in year 1 and finishes mid table. Only just slips into a 'B' grade for year 2 and is relegated. Manages to improve enough in other areas to get their 'A' grade back in year 3 but doesn't win the championship grand final. Do they get their super league place back?

- Team has an 'A' grade but finishes bottom. Obviously they can't be relegated but are Team 11 relegated instead or is there no relegation that year?

- Team wins the Championship grand final but have a 'C' grade. Obviously can't be promoted but do the runners up go up or is there no promotion that year?

My understanding (which is not necessarily right but IMG/RFL do not seem to have come out to specifically clarify this, presuming as they are avoiding a backlash from those who don't like the answer) is that there is no P and R in the traditional sense, or even a none traditional sense. It will be the the top 12 scoring teams, not that the bottom B gets relegated and top B gets promoted. I might be wrong and there have been RL journalists with different explanations as to how it will work however unless I have missed it, it has not been specifically addressed by IMG. Obviously finishing higher effects your performance points so helps but is just part of the scoring.

[The Blues Ox]

Yeah no promotion and relegation from league positions only via the points system.

[sam4731]

46 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

My understanding (which is not necessarily right but IMG/RFL do not seem to have come out to specifically clarify this, presuming as they are avoiding a backlash from those who don't like the answer) is that there is no P and R in the traditional sense, or even a none traditional sense. It will be the the top 12 scoring teams, not that the bottom B gets relegated and top B gets promoted. I might be wrong and there have been RL journalists with different explanations as to how it will work however unless I have missed it, it has not been specifically addressed by IMG. Obviously finishing higher effects your performance points so helps but is just part of the scoring.

I thought I saw something that said that although it technically got rid of P&R, it was very unlikely that the winners of the Championship grand final wouldn't get promoted.

[M j M]

On 18/07/2023 at 15:23, ATLANTISMAN said:

Right now there are 3 clubs that are well ahead of the game in terms of marketing pre match entertainment (And especially with the Dragons VIP hospitality options) 

 

* Catalans Dragons

* Hull KR

* Leigh Leopards 

What does "VIP hospitality options" have to do with pre game entertainment? They are fundamentally different things and clubs other than those listed are the league's leaders in that area.

[Josef K]

When does this new system start and the old P&R is scrapped!!!!.