IMG Grading Unveiled

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, Jeff Stein said:

Listened to the podcast. Maybe I missed something but Keighley's position appeared to be

1 IMG's proposals are unfair because there is no meritocracy judging clubs on such things as location 

2 The two London clubs, Midlands, Cornwall and Newcastle should be thrown out because they are not in the heartlands no matter how they are doing on the pitch 

But remember, that isn't tin foil hat stuff at all

[Oxford]

21 minutes ago, Jeff Stein said:

Listened to the podcast. Maybe I missed something but Keighley's position appeared to be

1 IMG's proposals are unfair because there is no meritocracy judging clubs on such things as location 

2 The two London clubs, Midlands, Cornwall and Newcastle should be thrown out because they are not in the heartlands no matter how they are doing on the pitch 

As far as I remember they also included two up two down P&R as if the damage caused to one club wasn't enough.

[MattSantos]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

And yet if the teams that are awarded super league places through this system are those already in super league, when they earned it on the pitch, there will be uproar and people crying fix!

 

BTW I also agree there should be P&R between the grade B's, and have said as much on this thread... but there is a lot of handwringing about P&R when in the next breath those that have benefited because they have performed on the pitch and got to where they were through P&R, like loads want, should be handicapped in the grading to give others a chance.. who have had 125 years to get there with P&R..... I understand many of the arguments and also say I would have some form of weighting for certain aspects but some of the dramatics seem a little overboard..

I think it's unfair to say the sport has had 125 years to get it right. In the early 90s, i feel* as though the sport was doing ok and then 2 things happened which massively changed the sporting landscape in the UK.

1. The formation of the Premier League (on the back of the pack-pass rule changing)

2. Rugby Union became professional.

Following that, we've clearly had huge changes in the commercial and technological world that impacted society and thus sport and again, gut feel only, it felt like we were on the right track with Richard Lewis in charge. Post that era, it's been awful. You could argue it's been terrible, awful, appalling, frightful; hideous, grim, ghastly, shocking, revolting, repulsive, horrid, horrendous, horrifying, repellent.

--

I like IMG and the direction that the sport is going, and in all honesty, if clubs can't get behind it and go bust, i genuinely don't care. I like them because I want 2 things to happen: 1. Proper leadership (i still feel clubs will find a way to be selfish and wheres the International impact etc etc etc, but it's a start) and 2. A simple structure that rewards performance on the pitch more than the current offering suggests.

--

*I was born in 1981, but the Bullock Stand was ace and we were selling out Wembley all the time, so it must have been good. Right?

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Jeff Stein said:

2 The two London clubs, Midlands, Cornwall and Newcastle should be thrown out because they are not in the heartlands no matter how they are doing on the pitch 

Local game for local people.

Imagine having so little respect for the game of rugby league that you don't think people outside your little area could possible enjoy it or contribute to it.

[RP London]

14 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

I think it's unfair to say the sport has had 125 years to get it right. In the early 90s, i feel* as though the sport was doing ok and then 2 things happened which massively changed the sporting landscape in the UK.

1. The formation of the Premier League (on the back of the pack-pass rule changing)

2. Rugby Union became professional.

Following that, we've clearly had huge changes in the commercial and technological world that impacted society and thus sport and again, gut feel only, it felt like we were on the right track with Richard Lewis in charge. Post that era, it's been awful. You could argue it's been terrible, awful, appalling, frightful; hideous, grim, ghastly, shocking, revolting, repulsive, horrid, horrendous, horrifying, repellent.

--

I like IMG and the direction that the sport is going, and in all honesty, if clubs can't get behind it and go bust, i genuinely don't care. I like them because I want 2 things to happen: 1. Proper leadership (i still feel clubs will find a way to be selfish and wheres the International impact etc etc etc, but it's a start) and 2. A simple structure that rewards performance on the pitch more than the current offering suggests.

--

*I was born in 1981, but the Bullock Stand was ace and we were selling out Wembley all the time, so it must have been good. Right?

Dont disagree with much of that, I was being overly simplistic but in response to a lot of overly simplistic reasoning in the style of "without p&r the sport is terrible" yet with p&r its hardly flourising etc

[GeordieSaint]

2 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

Typical SL supporter.

Its easy sitting there Smug calling Keighley a small club. They haven't been funded with Millions for the last 20 odd years.

You wouldn't be saying that if you were also on the outside looking in???

Think i got it right this time

To challenge your point, the majority of big clubs now (Saints, Leeds, Wigan et al) were big clubs before the SKY money came into the game. They’ve remained big clubs, not just because of SKY money, but because they have big fanbases, big commercial revenues and strong external investment.

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. 

[Just Browny]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Do you reckon you will get old enough to receive ageism jokes?

You what

[steve oates]

3 hours ago, Jeff Stein said:

Listened to the podcast. Maybe I missed something but Keighley's position appeared to be

The two London clubs, Midlands, Cornwall and Newcastle should be thrown out because they are not in the heartlands no matter how they are doing on the pitch 

The Keighley lads were saying that there is far more interest in the game in the north, and for clubs trying to make their way forward in the game, being in the north creates a much better "return". 

They said IIRC that in putting money into Keighley, the fanbase grew very quickly. They said that Mr. Perez in putting money into Cornwall RLFC, only got an actual response of 400 crowds which were inflated by said owner (naughty naughty) to 1,000.

I suppose David Hughes has pumped an actual fortune into London when you add it all up. AFAIK Mr. Hughes  hails originally from Oldham. AFAIK Oldham RL are returning to their home town to play at Boundary Park.

The point here would probably be that in doing so with Mr. Hughes at the helm he would make a much greater success of Oldham than he has done London........    Seemed a fair point and remember we have opened literally loads of clubs outside the M62 that all failed.  Need a new thread to list them all!!!

[gingerjon]

Just now, steve oates said:

They said that Mr. Perez in putting money into Cornwall RLFC, only got an actual response of 400 crowds which were inflated by said owner (naughty naughty) to 1,000.

Interesting.

They provide any evidence for that?

[steve oates]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Local game for local people.

That was not the point they made....

[steve oates]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

Interesting.

They provide any evidence for that?

I assume they counted the crowd and then checked what was given to the papers

[gingerjon]

Just now, steve oates said:

I assume they counted the crowd and then checked what was given to the papers

I'll take that as, "No."

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Oxford said:

As far as I remember they also included two up two down P&R as if the damage caused to one club wasn't enough.

You know what coaches say when player's are injured and are unavailable, they simply say that the opportunity has risen for someone else to stake a claim, so on the promotion and relegation issue of 2 club's, it gives the opportunity for 2 club's to have a go at bettering themselves.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, GeordieSaint said:

To challenge your point, the majority of big clubs now (Saints, Leeds, Wigan et al) were big clubs before the SKY money came into the game

Yes they were but can you still include a club who do not own their own stadium and are merely rent paying tenant's?

[Harry Stottle]

5 hours ago, Just Browny said:

Is the answer broken time payments? I think the answer is broken time payments.

 

57 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

You what

A simple question, in response to a posters question "what happened to the game I loved" your reply is above, so what did you mean?

[Jeff Stein]

38 minutes ago, steve oates said:

The Keighley lads were saying that there is far more interest in the game in the north, and for clubs trying to make their way forward in the game, being in the north creates a much better "return". 

They said IIRC that in putting money into Keighley, the fanbase grew very quickly. They said that Mr. Perez in putting money into Cornwall RLFC, only got an actual response of 400 crowds which were inflated by said owner (naughty naughty) to 1,000.

I suppose David Hughes has pumped an actual fortune into London when you add it all up. AFAIK Mr. Hughes  hails originally from Oldham. AFAIK Oldham RL are returning to their home town to play at Boundary Park.

The point here would probably be that in doing so with Mr. Hughes at the helm he would make a much greater success of Oldham than he has done London........    Seemed a fair point and remember we have opened literally loads of clubs outside the M62 that all failed.  Need a new thread to list them all!!!

That's a lot of words to try and disprove what they actually said. And of course they have put their views in action in the past by putting forward a motion to the RL Council that Skolars, Hurricanes and West Wales should be thrown out. 

BTW Hughes is from Swinton and the idea he wouldn't turn a่ heartlands club into a basket case as well is nuts

[Angelic Cynic]

22 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't think 2 up 2 down would work, indeed it would only entrench the teams at the very top, whilst screwing the majority of teams who are up for relegation each year (and of course the promoted teams, who would be even more likely to go straight back down). The only way that doesn't happen is if you heavily restrict the top sides to a level that the likes of Keighley think they can compete with.

The small town game thing is tosh, but I can see why it would suit the owners Keighley to believe it.

"Organic growth" is also tosh. London and the south east has as many RL clubs as parts of the "heartlands" do, yet they still aren't accepted.

The Keighley owners were addressing a single point.

For example - if in soccer,where 2 clubs from the same city are now long established clubs,with a history of success,they can draw on that history.If they were to start soccer,naming it as a regional club,ie West Midlands,it would fail to have a 'local' identity the 'locals' could identify with and may fail to capture a local audience.

They articulated that it would be better for the clubs in London to identify a local area to garner support.No soccer club,in London,is named London.

The 'organic growth' was a reference to Cornwall and Midlands Hurricanes- despite the sterling work undertaken at Coventry.

There is a shortage of community clubs thriving in Cornwall.

The Keighley  Cougars owners are as keen as the rest of us with regards to expansion.

Business people identified and permitted to make decisions about the sport should address the issue.

It seems London may be under the microscope - with the name remaining. 

Well,I suppose the other code has London Irish...

[Harry Stottle]

35 minutes ago, Jeff Stein said:

That's a lot of words to try and disprove what they actually said. And of course they have put their views in action in the past by putting forward a motion to the RL Council that Skolars, Hurricanes and West Wales should be thrown out. 

BTW Hughes is from Swinton and the idea he wouldn't turn a่ heartlands club into a basket case as well is nuts

They went further than that and said London and Newcastle are renowned when the they are the visiting teams for away fixtures, that the home club's usually have their lowest gates of the season, can you refute that claim?

[Derwent Parker]

5 hours ago, RP London said:

And yet if the teams that are awarded super league places through this system are those already in super league, when they earned it on the pitch, there will be uproar and people crying fix!

 

BTW I also agree there should be P&R between the grade B's, and have said as much on this thread... but there is a lot of handwringing about P&R when in the next breath those that have benefited because they have performed on the pitch and got to where they were through P&R, like loads want, should be handicapped in the grading to give others a chance.. who have had 125 years to get there with P&R..... I understand many of the arguments and also say I would have some form of weighting for certain aspects but some of the dramatics seem a little overboard..

I think that statement is ridiculous about the 125 years.

There was 100 years prior to SL where every team was treat equal. Almost all teams had good and bad spells along the way.

Even the great Wigan were in League 2 [Came back up unbeaten following year] but I may be getting mixed  up with Man Utd who did same a couple of year earlier.

But during that time around 24 different teams managed to win the league and 30 different teams won/appeared in the Challenge Cup Final.

Since SL - only 4 teams have won SL and 7 have won CC [Catalan, hull and Warrington and the 4 SL winners]

Same thing every year and boring - A third of the RFL teams paid to be better than the rest.

That is good for them [and well done] but it is not good for the game.

Saints, Wigan and Leeds etc were already great teams and would have continued that way, without the money that has distanced themselves from everyone else.

That money has not made them look better  it has just made everyone else look worse.

I dont blame the teams for this - it should have been shared out equally at the start and brought everyone up together.

Saints, Wigan and Leeds would still be where they are but the leagues would be more competitive. 

This is due to the SKy money being unfairly distributed nothing else. RFLs fault

Its the same teams every year. Boring.

and the IMG plans dont help.

If IMG want to help start LEVELING UP

 

 

Edited March 21 by Derwent Parker

[Oxford]

1 hour ago, Harry Stottle said:

You know what coaches say when player's are injured and are unavailable, they simply say that the opportunity has risen for someone else to stake a claim, so on the promotion and relegation issue of 2 club's, it gives the opportunity for 2 club's to have a go at bettering themselves.

'Arry we stand on different sides of this argument I won't discuss this further which is unlike me but I also didn't want to be rude and ignore your post.

 

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

The Keighley  Cougars owners are as keen as the rest of us with regards to expansion.

Yes. They really are as keen as some on here with regards to expansion.

[Jeff Stein]

18 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

They went further than that and said London and Newcastle are renowned when the they are the visiting teams for away fixtures, that the home club's usually have their lowest gates of the season, can you refute that claim?

Shock news that clubs further away bring less supporters than a club a few miles down the road. Can't get anything past you 

[Oxford]

2 minutes ago, Jeff Stein said:

Shock news that clubs further away bring less supporters than a club a few miles down the road.

Whatever next!

[NW10LDN]

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Local game for local people.

Imagine having so little respect for the game of rugby league that you don't think people outside your little area could possible enjoy it or contribute to it.

Local game for local aging people. English rugby league is in for some bad days if the interest levels among the younger generations don't change.

[GUBRATS]

Just now, NW10LDN said:

Local game for local aging people. English rugby league is in for some bad days if the interest levels among the younger generations don't change.

And yet when I visit clubs there are loads of kids there watching the game