IMG Grading Unveiled

[gingerjon]

7 minutes ago, The Daddy said:

Yep, Keighley (the owners) have started a campaign to 'Retain' promotion and relegation 

 

Graphic design is their passion.

[MattSantos]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

He's blasting the elite part, because whilst this is a whole game solution, this won't turn Apples (eg Hunslet) into Oranges (eg Wigan).

If clubs buy into reaching the criteria for each then they will improve their positions on every front. But everywhere has a ceiling.

If's a whole game solution, why aren't the community clubs etc included. 

It isn't a whole game solution. It can't be as that's too broad and too massive. It's an 'elitist' vision for RL. You said it yourself in your own words..  

I'm not arguing either cause here, but lets be clear on what it is and isn't.

[gingerjon]

9 minutes ago, Bearman said:

The assesers at Workington and Whitehaven are at this moment shouting "come by" and Yan,Tan, Tethera  as they fight over the local population

"Are you or are you not a jam eater?"

"Yes."

[The Daddy]

Wasn't Keighley against SL too? 

[Jughead]

I’ve been bored so on the performance aspect, I’ve had a go at it. I’ve ranked teams 1-36 based upon their final rankings over the last three completed seasons (2019, 2021 and 2022) and then found an average and ranked them as such;

4 points- Anyone with an average of 12 or less

3 - Anyone with an average of 12.01 to 19

2 - Anyone with an average of 19.01 to 26

1 - Anyone with an average of 26.01+

With that in mind, the clubs are ranked as follows;

5 points - St Helens

4.25 - Wigan and Warrington

4 - Catalans, Leeds, Castleford, Salford, Huddersfield, Hull, Hull KR, Wakefield

3.26 - Leigh 

3.1 - Featherstone

3 - Halifax, York, London Broncos, Batley, Bradford, Toulouse

2.1 - Sheffield, Whitehaven, Barrow

2 - Widnes, Dewsbury, Swinton, Newcastle

1.1 - Workington, Keighley

1 - Oldham, Rochdale, Doncaster, North Wales, Hunslet, Midlands, London Skolars, Cornwall. 

Edited March 9, 2023 by Jughead

[Harry Stottle]

49 minutes ago, The storm said:

Nobody can seriously complain about this

Yes they can and I think they will and it will reflect in the voting in April, I strongly doubt that there will be 37 votes for it this time.

[MattSantos]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

 

So, is it a whole game solution? Yes, probably. Because it is designed with a rigid focus on income and growth. That means more money for the RFL to invest in growing and safeguarding the game - which is its purpose. It isn't pretty. It is a bit brutal. It is absolutely essential or else we won't have a game at all.

This bit i can understand, but until they're clear and transparent plans around the redistribution of wealth to the wider game, then it isn't a 'whole game solution'. It's currently safeguarding the status quo and that's the only way the selfish chairman (understandably to a degree) will vote for it*. Those with a shout will vote it in as what's the alternative? More messing around with structures etc.

 

*Is it still to be voted through or is this 100% it?

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Jughead said:

I’ve been bored so on the performance aspect, I’ve had a go at it. I’ve ranked teams 1-36 based upon their final rankings over the last three completed seasons (2019, 2021 and 2022) and then found an average and ranked them as such;

4 points- Anyone with an average of 12 or less

3 - Anyone with an average of 12.01 to 19

2 - Anyone with an average of 19.01 to 26

1 - Anyone with an average of 26.01+

With that in mind, the clubs are ranked as follows;

5 points - St Helens

4.25 - Wigan and Warrington

4 - Catalans, Leeds, Castleford, Salford, Huddersfield, Hull, Hull KR, Wakefield

3.26 - Leigh 

3.1 - Featherstone

3 - Halifax, York, London Broncos, Batley, Bradford

2.1 - Sheffield, Whitehaven, Barrow

2 - Widnes, Dewsbury, Swinton, Newcastle

1.1 - Workington, Keighley

1 - Oldham, Rochdale, Doncaster, North Wales, Hunslet, Midlands, London Skolars, Cornwall. 

I don't know whether to praise you or pity you.

[MattSantos]

2 minutes ago, Jughead said:

I’ve been bored so on the performance aspect, I’ve had a go at it. I’ve ranked teams 1-36 based upon their final rankings over the last three completed seasons (2019, 2021 and 2022) and then found an average and ranked them as such;

4 points- Anyone with an average of 12 or less

3 - Anyone with an average of 12.01 to 19

2 - Anyone with an average of 19.01 to 26

1 - Anyone with an average of 26.01+

With that in mind, the clubs are ranked as follows;

5 points - St Helens

4.25 - Wigan and Warrington

4 - Catalans, Leeds, Castleford, Salford, Huddersfield, Hull, Hull KR, Wakefield

3.26 - Leigh 

3.1 - Featherstone

3 - Halifax, York, London Broncos, Batley, Bradford

2.1 - Sheffield, Whitehaven, Barrow

2 - Widnes, Dewsbury, Swinton, Newcastle

1.1 - Workington, Keighley

1 - Oldham, Rochdale, Doncaster, North Wales, Hunslet, Midlands, London Skolars, Cornwall. 

You've wasted your time. It doesn't work like that.

 

 

[Derwent Parker]

1 hour ago, Barley Mow said:

I'm not sure to be honest.

I'm still reserving judgement on the grading system as a whole - but then in general terms I do still favour on field based P&R.

Catchment is probably the element I'm struggling with most:

Performance - I'm all for that being important, it's competitive sport.

Finances & Stadium - Even within on field P&R I would favour strict standards for clubs' finances and facilities which should have to be met for progression.

Fandom - Accepting that this isn't on field P&R, we all want more fans for our sport. Encouraging clubs to increase numbers is sensible.

Catchment - All of the others are things that clubs can improve upon. That is supposed to be the aim of the proposed system, clubs are to be encouraged to improve themselves through these criteria. However the catchment areas are ultimately defined, without relocating, a club can't really do anything to improve their score on this. 

My opinion if they want to protect top teams and guarantee all 'A' teams are in SL - OK

BUT- if there is a 'B' team in SL and a 'B' team wins Champ them P&R should kick automatically as normal[no exceptions] , when all SL are A teams then you need to be an A etc

[gingerjon]

Just now, MattSantos said:

This bit i can understand, but until they're clear and transparent plans around the redistribution of wealth to the wider game, then it isn't a 'whole game solution'. It's currently safeguarding the status quo and that's the only way the selfish chairman (understandably to a degree) will vote for it*. Those with a shout will vote it in as what's the alternative? More messing around with structures etc.

 

*Is it still to be voted through or is this 100% it?

Still to be voted through.

And, to be fair, it has always been stressed that it is about generating more income and visibility for the game as a whole - hence things like women's RL being mentioned very early on in the piece (and now clarified by Aaron Bower) - so that has been in there from the start.

And, being blunt, crumbs is all that anyone in League 1 has been getting (and it appears some in the Championship too) so what's to be lost by agreeing with this?

The details will be in that further handbook that we haven't yet seen and may not see until the vote is taken.

But, TBH, even if, for whatever reason, this doesn't get voted through, we are already seeing a fair few clubs shaken up and acting in more professional ways to improve both income and matchday offer. The direction of travel is set - providing the game doesn't flinch.

[ELBOWSEYE]

6 minutes ago, Jughead said:

I’ve been bored so on the performance aspect, I’ve had a go at it. I’ve ranked teams 1-36 based upon their final rankings over the last three completed seasons (2019, 2021 and 2022) and then found an average and ranked them as such;

4 points- Anyone with an average of 12 or less

3 - Anyone with an average of 12.01 to 19

2 - Anyone with an average of 19.01 to 26

1 - Anyone with an average of 26.01+

With that in mind, the clubs are ranked as follows;

5 points - St Helens

4.25 - Wigan and Warrington

4 - Catalans, Leeds, Castleford, Salford, Huddersfield, Hull, Hull KR, Wakefield

3.26 - Leigh 

3.1 - Featherstone

3 - Halifax, York, London Broncos, Batley, Bradford

2.1 - Sheffield, Whitehaven, Barrow

2 - Widnes, Dewsbury, Swinton, Newcastle

1.1 - Workington, Keighley

1 - Oldham, Rochdale, Doncaster, North Wales, Hunslet, Midlands, London Skolars, Cornwall. 

Tolouse? 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

23 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I see Keighley's chairman has "blasted" the plans for the elite of the game as elitist...

[Jughead]

4 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

You've wasted your time. It doesn't work like that.

 

 

I didn’t say I was right or that’s how they’d do it. You wasted your time with that post. 

[Jughead]

1 minute ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Tolouse? 

3. 

[MattSantos]

Performance. Is it based on the league or playoffs?

If the league, then is that weird given the playoffs?

If playoffs, how are losers ranked? Semi final losers for example - Joint 3rd or 3rd and 4th based on league positions?

 

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

If's a whole game solution, why aren't the community clubs etc included. 

It isn't a whole game solution. It can't be as that's too broad and too massive. It's an 'elitist' vision for RL. You said it yourself in your own words..  

I'm not arguing either cause here, but lets be clear on what it is and isn't.

That is silly.

[MattSantos]

1 minute ago, Jughead said:

I didn’t say I was right or that’s how they’d do it. You wasted your time with that post. 

So what was the point?

We're all wasting time. Is anyone enjoying this?

 

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Non of this will make any difference at all a couple of years from now.

 

P

Why is that Paul, could it be that IMG will be history?

[MattSantos]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

That is silly.

Why? You usually write extremely long posts, so why not in this instance?

I'm just asking you to make your mind up, is it a proposal for the elite game or a 'whole game solution'? 

[del capo]

8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes they can and I think they will and it will reflect in the voting in April, I strongly doubt that there will be 37 votes for it this time.

Don't forget the voting structure at Full Council Harry.

SL clubs only need 4 from the Champ or L1 for it to pass . I imagine that there are enough who fancy their chance under the new proposed regime..

It will sail through..............

[Harry Stottle]

17 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Yes they should . That makes much more sense or we operate a alving for SL or doubling for Champ clubs. Plenty of historical evidence clubs promoted double crowds so that how it should be weighted. 

 

I think Sky will say P and R or go find a tv deal somewhere else as well. Making a huge amount of fixtures worthless. 

We have reached common ground this time Salop.

[Tommygilf]

Just now, MattSantos said:

Why? You usually write extremely long posts, so why not in this instance?

I'm just asking you to make your mind up, is it a proposal for the elite game or a 'whole game solution'? 

Its silly to suggest that community clubs would be involved in this format. 

It is a proposal for the whole game that naturally focuses on the elite levels (all 3 leagues) - because their success determines the success of the rest of it. No interest there, no community game. Everyone grows which benefits everyone else in the vicinity.

[Damien]

I'm just catching up on this but it's pretty much as expected. I'm not sure on the catchment criteria but I suppose it depends on how it would work. I can understand it being used as a tick for new areas where RL isn't played but I'm uneasy about it being used to favour someone already being part of the club over someone else trying to join.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, del capo said:

Don't forget the voting structure at Full Council Harry.

SL clubs only need 4 from the Champ or L1 for it to pass . I imagine that there are enough who fancy their chance under the new proposed regime..

It will sail through..............

Like I say, League 1 gets peanuts now. Why wouldn't they vote to maybe get a few more peanuts in the future?