IMG Grading Unveiled

[Big Picture]

55 minutes ago, steve oates said:

1989 Widnes.v.Wigan in the Charity shield    games two biggest sides slug it out

1991 Wigan.v.Penrith in the World club challenge   British best against Australian best

1997 Saints.v.Castleford in Superleague  Fully professional Cas and Saints in the mew Superleague

There were the best teams in significant well contested matches 

There's more of the big time RL clubs playing competitive games in Liverpool , but you can look them up yourself,

Crowds for those matches were 17,263, 20,152 and 12,329 respectively, all of which are less than half of Anfield's capacity and thus not particularly impressive.  None are big enough for us to be able to say conclusively that those matches cut through much beyond the RL fanbase in the Northwest either.

Yes the first two of those involved the biggest and best teams in the British game and the third involved one of the biggest, but it's not correct to say they involved big time RL clubs.  I suggest that in the eyes of the broader public there's no such thing as a big time RL club, the minority of them who know what RL is likely think that all its clubs are small time and that's why those matches didn't draw bigger crowds than they did.

[Big Picture]

13 minutes ago, steve oates said:

In 2016 we took Australia.v.NZ and England.v.Scotland to Coventry in a 4 nations double header hoping in the style of Mr. Big Picture, to promote Rugby League when there actually was a fledgling Coventry Bears RLFC.

That was a success in terms of the quality of the two games, the crowd and the TV presentation. The game hoped this would boost the Coventry Bears. It had no effect at all and the midland Hurricanes are what's left of that great failure. We must keep the game strong where it is strong, that doesn't make anyone across the M62 anti-expansioners.

It may however with respect make expansionists "Dreamers"............

Sorry, but Coventry playing in League 1 at a tiny stadium was not an example of proper follow-up to those Four Nations matches so it's not surprising that the Bears didn't make big inroads that way.  Having a Coventry franchise set up in SL, playing at the same stadium where the Internationals were played is the sort of thing needed to achieve that, but then they'd have to be playing opponents who are big enough names to attract Coventrians to at least come check it out and with the possible exception of Leeds SL doesn't have any of those.

You're missing the whole point about why IMG was brought in: the game is not strong even in it heartland.  It's weak, even there.

Edited March 28, 2023 by Big Picture

[GeordieSaint]

Featherstone appear to be having a whinge now:

 

[Tommygilf]

11 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

Featherstone appear to be having a whinge now:

 

Nothing at all to do with losing to a less fancied rival at the weekend, or distracting from that...

[Fevrover]

18 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

Featherstone appear to be having a whinge now:

 

So giving an opinion is whinging now is it ?  It's a case of iam alright Jack with the safe SL clubs. It's obvious what's coming so why bother trying to get into SL ? Then fan's wonder why this sport is not taken seriously by most of the media and TV.

[Fevrover]

9 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Nothing at all to do with losing to a less fancied rival at the weekend, or distracting from that...

What do you mean Tommy ? Who lost to a rival at weekend? Cheers.

[Mr Frisky]

19 hours ago, redjonn said:

I guess so but not so much with heart condition, or my wife with her walking crutches.... it gets difficult.  we use the lift up and down though. 

Even more reasons to stop half way for some refreshments then?

[Tommygilf]

17 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

What do you mean Tommy ? Who lost to a rival at weekend? Cheers.

Apologies read the wrong fixtures!

[Jughead]

This all after complaining that crowds aren’t flocking in to watch the village club he’s throwing cash at in an attempt at a season in the sun. It all seems a nice deflection when it’s just a reality check that the current model of both the club and the game is flawed and you can only ever throw money at something for so long before something has to give. 

[Fevrover]

17 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Apologies read the wrong fixtures!

 

[GeordieSaint]

40 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

So giving an opinion is whinging now is it?

This bit:

”the same four or five teams dwindling at the bottom of Super League have had their chance already.”

Not according to the metric he wants to see applied - ie P&R between the B clubs. Whilst Wakefield and Castleford have poor infrastructure, the latter for example have been nowhere near relegation. It’s double standards. It’s whinging.

If those clubs are so poor on the wider criteria, if he’s true to his word and builds Rovers up, he won’t have an issue seeing them replace Wakefield et al. 

Edited March 28, 2023 by GeordieSaint

[Fevrover]

3 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

This bit:

”the same four or five teams dwindling at the bottom of Super League have had their chance already.”

Not according to the metric he wants to see applied - ie P&R between the B clubs. Whilst Wakefield and Castleford have poor infrastructure, the latter for example have been nowhere near relegation. It’s double standards. It’s whinging.

If those clubs are so poor on the wider criteria, if he’s true to his word and builds Rovers up, he won’t have an issue seeing them replace Wakefield et al. 

Cas have been relegated twice so you're wrong there. He's trying to build the club up ,take yer red and white specs off.

[Tommygilf]

19 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

So giving an opinion is whinging now is it ?  It's a case of iam alright Jack with the safe SL clubs. It's obvious what's coming so why bother trying to get into SL ? Then fan's wonder why this sport is not taken seriously by most of the media and TV.

In all seriousness, his main, indeed only gripe in this seems to be that the 12th best Super League team will be seen as better on field, barring extraordinary circumstances, than the best Championship team.

I don't actually think that is controversial, its only a logical outcome.

It is especially logical given the whole point of IMG's input into the game is to build strength throughout. An obvious point to that is to not arbitrarily relegate a full time team in favour of a potentially part time one - the sport doesn't benefit from that unless the full time club are barely that.

Take the 3 SL clubs most would see as vulnerable, Wakefield, Salford and Castleford. Wakey have invested in their stadium and wider facilities and are a city without a direct football competitor for the sport. Salford are based in the heart of one of the biggest conurbations in the heartlands, and Castleford have one of the highest average followings in the country. Just binning one of these off arbitrarily for a club that aren't adding to the pot helps how? Note I didn't include Leigh in that.

That is why on field is 25% of an overall grade. Pitting SL no hopers who happen to be have a few blokes willing to outspend a few other people on a squad in the Championship up against the wheel continuously is pointless and, as you say, not to be taken seriously.

[Jughead]

3 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

Cas have been relegated twice so you're wrong there. He's trying to build the club up ,take yer red and white specs off.

Cas haven’t been relegated for something like nearly twenty years. That’s some straw clutching. 

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

Cas have been relegated twice so you're wrong there. He's trying to build the club up ,take yer red and white specs off.

He isn't. He's trying to say "if we get 7.6 and Wakey get 14.9, we should be able to replace them if we win the Championship".

Its wanting to change as little as possible from the current model.

[GeordieSaint]

4 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

Cas have been relegated twice so you're wrong there. He's trying to build the club up ,take yer red and white specs off.

The last time was nearly 20yrs ago (2006). It’s now 2023. Cas have won the League Leader’s Shield, appeared in a GF, and 2 x Challenge Cup Finals since. But that wasn’t my point. It was which metric does he want? He can’t pick and choose which is doing here. Cas et al are there on merit ie P&R. So  his point about “had their chance” is a load of rubbish. 

[Archie Gordon]

I am not sure that Vickers articulates it well but there is a real issue where Club A and Club B may be identical in all inputs except that Club A is in SL with 5k crowds and 150k watching on Sky and Club B is in the Champ with 2.5k crowds and 50k watching on ViaPlay.

No weighting to account for the league you're in and it's going to be a closed shop. Poor old Club B.

Inaccurate weighting and it becomes a farce.

Accurate weighting and Club A and Club B become yo-yo clubs.

[Tommygilf]

7 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Accurate weighting and Club A and Club B become yo-yo clubs.

Which is exactly what IMG do not want to create.

[Monkeymagic22]

If for instance Fev get promoted and Wakey get relegated this season. Wouldn’t this give Fev a better chance of staying up?.

Mind you, I’m sure we’ll find some way of mucking this season up, so probably not a factor

Edited March 28, 2023 by Monkeymagic22

[RigbyLuger]

1 hour ago, GeordieSaint said:

Featherstone appear to be having a whinge now:

 

Martin Vickers has had as many chances as some Super League clubs.

[Toby Chopra]

53 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

In all seriousness, his main, indeed only gripe in this seems to be that the 12th best Super League team will be seen as better on field, barring extraordinary circumstances, than the best Championship team.

I don't actually think that is controversial, its only a logical outcome.

It is especially logical given the whole point of IMG's input into the game is to build strength throughout. An obvious point to that is to not arbitrarily relegate a full time team in favour of a potentially part time one - the sport doesn't benefit from that unless the full time club are barely that.

Take the 3 SL clubs most would see as vulnerable, Wakefield, Salford and Castleford. Wakey have invested in their stadium and wider facilities and are a city without a direct football competitor for the sport. Salford are based in the heart of one of the biggest conurbations in the heartlands, and Castleford have one of the highest average followings in the country. Just binning one of these off arbitrarily for a club that aren't adding to the pot helps how? Note I didn't include Leigh in that.

That is why on field is 25% of an overall grade. Pitting SL no hopers who happen to be have a few blokes willing to outspend a few other people on a squad in the Championship up against the wheel continuously is pointless and, as you say, not to be taken seriously.

Wakey, Salford and Cas all have profound problems and weaknesses, but the grading system proposed by IMG will just keep them going as zombie Superleague clubs, constantly finishing ahead of Championship challengers simply because the incumbents will score higher.

A's should be protected - I'm all in favour of that - but protecting mediocre Bs just locks in failure. The grading weighting needs to be adjusted so a strong championship winner like Fev or Leigh can displace a club like Wakey or Salford. The bar for this not happening needs to be a lot higher than proposed.

But that's easily fixed by adjusting the weightings without jettisoning the whole package.

 

Edited March 28, 2023 by Toby Chopra

[Fevrover]

54 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Cas haven’t been relegated for something like nearly twenty years. That’s some straw clutching. 

He never said in the last 20 years he said never, that's not clutching at straws. If he had said last 20 years then i would have agreed.

[glossop saint]

46 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

I am not sure that Vickers articulates it well but there is a real issue where Club A and Club B may be identical in all inputs except that Club A is in SL with 5k crowds and 150k watching on Sky and Club B is in the Champ with 2.5k crowds and 50k watching on ViaPlay.

No weighting to account for the league you're in and it's going to be a closed shop. Poor old Club B.

Inaccurate weighting and it becomes a farce.

Accurate weighting and Club A and Club B become yo-yo clubs.

I agree except for the last sentence. If that was the case then it wouldn't be accurate weighting. The weighting needs to overcome the advantages of increased funding/away fans/sponsorship etc. However it can't give an advantage. It is a delicate balance.

[GeordieSaint]

3 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

He never said in the last 20 years he said never, that's not clutching at straws. If he had said last 20 years then i would have agreed.

My mistake for the confusion. I missed the word recently (having said “nowhere near” rather than “never”). My bad. 

[Fevrover]

3 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

My mistake for the confusion. I missed the word recently (having said “nowhere near” rather than “never”). My bad. 

No problem it's a forum and we've all got an opinion lol.