IMG Grading Unveiled

[Dovster]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

I think this is the one time the fans are absolutely not taken for granted.. hence all the points that are on offer for fan engagement etc.. While they dont get a say in how the sport is run this whole IMG project shows that, at last, they get the fact you need to engage with the fans to keep them coming along. 

If anything shouted "taking the fans for granted" its been the last 10-15 years of abject apathy from the RFL and many clubs towards the fans and just expecting them to turn up at games because its their club, and turning up for internationals because you have decided to put some on IMHO

I'm not sure what you consider to be fans involvement?. Maybe this, Now this is what were doing we'll discuss it afterwards as we dont really value what you have to say at this time and there is a chance you might disagree.

I can't disagree that somethings need to change as the sport has been run into the ground over the last decade or so.

You seem to have great confidence in the changes that have now been proposed and I don't.

 

[glossop saint]

6 minutes ago, Dovster said:

I'm not sure what you consider to be fans involvement?. Maybe this, Now this is what were doing we'll discuss it afterwards as we dont really value what you have to say at this time and there is a chance you might disagree.

I can't disagree that somethings need to change as the sport has been run into the ground over the last decade or so.

You seem to have great confidence in the changes that have now been proposed and I don't.

 

Finding agreement between 30 odd clubs will be tricky, let alone hundreds of thousands of fans. What involvement would you like?

Edited April 17, 2023 by glossop saint
Missing word

[Dave T]

3 hours ago, gittinsfan said:

I'm yet to be convinced this won't lead to a closed shop SL.Some on here seem to think this will be a good thing for the game but I am not one.

And thats fine. But I don't think either opinion comes with any moral high ground. 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, redjonn said:

well yes but anyone can agree with a system that demands certain standards as per say IMG.  They can have disagreement over how precisely its implemented. for example, of how say a 0.1 extra point score in the IMG grading could decide a club finishing top of championship not being promoted over that bottom club.... or even the bottom SL club not being demoted but the 2nd bottom because the championship club and bottom club have a 0.1 extra grading point.

Surely it is valid to agree with the general grading structure but not with how small differences within a grade B club can determine the outcome.   A tweak of say a club has to be well above in the grading score to overcome being relegated for example or just all cat B are treated same when relation and promotion is consider.

You can agree the principle and disagree about some precise aspects, surely.

I'm not sure how this relates to the posts quoted. The clubs are voting on the principle in reality tweaks have already been made, and will always continue I expect. 

But the point of my post was that nobody has a moral high ground either way, which is what was claimed. 

[Derwent Parker]

5 hours ago, RP London said:

while I know many dont like comparisons to other sports but:

There have been quite a few instances in other sports in the UK where it has gone down to the last matches of a season and if team A wins the league below there will be P&R but if team B or C win then there will not and the bottom team of the league above get a reprieve. (its also happened in RL (early 2000s IIRC) when Huddersfield and others (?) have managed to finish bottom and not go down)

While its not ideal its also not unique. 

no its awful

[Derwent Parker]

3 hours ago, gittinsfan said:

I'm yet to be convinced this won't lead to a closed shop SL.Some on here seem to think this will be a good thing for the game but I am not one.

It will lead to a closed shop and thats what it has been aiming for from the start - they just wont be honest enough to say it because they want it voted in

[Toby Chopra]

21 minutes ago, Derwent Parker said:

It will lead to a closed shop and thats what it has been aiming for from the start - they just wont be honest enough to say it because they want it voted in

They do say it. You don't need to make up conspiracy theories. If we ever get to 12 Cat As then the Superleague, or whatever it's called by then, will only be open to further Cat As. They say this.

But many Tier 2 and 3 clubs will still vote for it either because they know it's a fantasy that their club will reach that level, or because they think the new model actually gives them a better chance of getting on.

Some also think that by strengthening the top tier in this way we can start to rebuild media and commercial revenue which will benefit the whole sport.

Some don't agree with this approach, or think it won't work. That's fine. But they're objecting to the facts that have been presented. There's no conspiracy here, there doesn't need to be. IMG are giving it to us straight.

[Dovster]

1 hour ago, glossop saint said:

Finding agreement between 30 odd clubs will be tricky, let alone hundreds of thousands of fans. What involvement would you like?

Agreed but just because it's difficult doesnt mean it shouldn't be considered. Maybe the clubs should ask their fans opinions before voting.

[Dovster]

3 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

They do say it. You don't need to make up conspiracy theories. If we ever get to 12 Cat As then the Superleague, or whatever it's called by then, will only be open to further Cat As. They say this.

But many Tier 2 and 3 clubs will still vote for it either because they know it's a fantasy that their club will reach that level, or because they think the new model actually gives them a better chance of getting on.

Some also think that by strengthening the top tier in this way we can start to rebuild media and commercial revenue which will benefit the whole sport.

Some don't agree with this approach, or think it won't work. That's fine. But they're objecting to the facts that have been presented. There's no conspiracy here, there doesn't need to be. IMG are giving it to us straight.

Unfortunately Super League doesn't have a great track record of wanting to share their money. Toronto.. Leigh.. Toulouse etc

[Toby Chopra]

5 minutes ago, Dovster said:

Unfortunately Super League doesn't have a great track record of wanting to share their money. Toronto.. Leigh.. Toulouse etc

Tens of millions of pounds of the Sky deals have flowed beyond Superleague in the last decade, and if we can increase revenues it will again. Superleague clubs don't control Rugby League Commercial.

But we haven't raised a penny yet so let's not get ahead of ourselves!

[Angelic Cynic]

12 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

They do say it. You don't need to make up conspiracy theories. If we ever get to 12 Cat As then the Superleague, or whatever it's called by then, will only be open to further Cat As. They say this.

But many Tier 2 and 3 clubs will still vote for it either because they know it's a fantasy that their club will reach that level, or because they think the new model actually gives them a better chance of getting on.

Some also think that by strengthening the top tier in this way we can start to rebuild media and commercial revenue which will benefit the whole sport.

Some don't agree with this approach, or think it won't work. That's fine. But they're objecting to the facts that have been presented. There's no conspiracy here, there doesn't need to be. IMG are giving it to us straight.

It wasn't so long ago that a former international coach,and a former international player,stated that 10 Super League clubs should be the limit - this would assist the England national side,and some followers of the sport stated the international game would grow the sport.

As the fans are not consulted - it would seem players and coaches are not consulted,either.

Will the owners of Cat B clubs allow the club to go part time so monies can be spent on the other pillars?

Will Super League clubs,Cat A clubs,allow players to go on loan,dual reg,to part time clubs who are more concerned with off-field matters than improving on-field results?

Will young players hang around when reserves and Academy sides have so few fixtures?

If the standard on the field drops,how will the product be sold to broadcasters?

Is the England logo digitally friendly? 

[JohnM]

Consultation with fans, players, former players etc  does not mean that fans, players, and former players will get any of their myriad ideas and requirements adopted.

[glossop saint]

1 hour ago, Dovster said:

Agreed but just because it's difficult doesnt mean it shouldn't be considered. Maybe the clubs should ask their fans opinions before voting.

It would be an interesting approach. I suspect that the clubs don't for the reasons that RP outlined. Fans don't know the ins and outs for a great many valid and fair reasons, certainly the majority. I suppose the fans voice came from the the survey and it is up to IMG and the RFL to consider this (I actually disagree with many of their stated aims that I think have come from this, I.e. 2 French teams max).

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Jughead said:

is as bad as “let’s throw loads of money at a playing squad to bank £1m in funding for a year”. 

You are basing that on historical data, Leigh look to bucking that trend this season, and maybe Fev (yes Fev) could do it next year and if they do then 2 years will be the new norm, just in time for IMG's system coming into effect in '25. 

[Jughead]

9 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

You are basing that on historical data, Leigh look to bucking that trend this season, and maybe Fev (yes Fev) could do it next year and if they do then 2 years will be the new norm, just in time for IMG's system coming into effect in '25. 

Two years is a horrendous sample size to attempt to justify an opinion. 

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, Dovster said:

Agreed but just because it's difficult doesnt mean it shouldn't be considered. Maybe the clubs should ask their fans opinions before voting.

How are we defining fans here?

How many years attendance of how many games do they need to show before their opinion is valid?

[Harry Stottle]

1 minute ago, Jughead said:

Two years is a horrendous sample size to attempt to justify an opinion. 

It would be if it happened the last 2 years, we have not had one year yet under IMG's method so that is pure speculation that it will work BASED ON NOTHING, but many consider it will work.

[glossop saint]

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

How are we defining fans here?

How many years attendance of how many games do they need to show before their opinion is valid?

To an extent (and I suspect this won't go down well and I will get grief for it), it is the views of those that aren't fans that we need. Part of the aim is to increase the numbers of fans. Whilst we equally don't want to lose any existing fans we need to know what will attract new ones. I think everyone agrees that we want to grow the game. How do we do that? 

[GeordieSaint]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

Tens of millions of pounds of the Sky deals have flowed beyond Superleague in the last decade, and if we can increase revenues it will again. Superleague clubs don't control Rugby League Commercial.

Don’t let facts get in the way of the narrative TC…

Pretty certain the 5yr £200m deal distributed around £15m-20m to the Championship and League 1. 

[Toby Chopra]

5 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

Don’t let facts get in the way of the narrative TC…

Pretty certain the 5yr £200m deal distributed around £15m-20m to the Championship and League 1. 

You're right, but it also gave 20 mln direct to the RFL for the wider game, and 18 mln to foundations, some of which were in the Championship.

That was more money than the second tier and beyond ever received from the Sky deals before by a long way.

There's a debate about what good it did at the semi pro level - I think the community game is where it's really needed -  but the way the game is set up with RLC if we could ever get back to those revenue levels money will flow down.

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, glossop saint said:

To an extent (and I suspect this won't go down well and I will get grief for it), it is the views of those that aren't fans that we need. Part of the aim is to increase the numbers of fans. Whilst we equally don't want to lose any existing fans we need to know what will attract new ones. I think everyone agrees that we want to grow the game. How do we do that? 

This is the thing isn't it, we have a problem in RL that we seem to sell to a very small audience, and repeatedly sell to just them. Then some fans (and this isn’t RL specific) think they have a god given superiority over others because they are part of that small core audience.

We need more casual supporters, fans and engagement.

[GUBRATS]

7 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

 

We need more casual supporters, fans and engagement wearing Leopardprint bucket hats 

[RP London]

5 hours ago, Derwent Parker said:

no its awful

In your opinion.. 

In many others, and important people growing sports, it's vital... 

I don't like it but most of the sports have found this is only a small period of time while those clubs improve themselves to be able to not be the B&C teams that mean there is no relegation.. is that a bad thing long term? I think most people would say, probably not. You don't, you don't mind embarrassing stadiums being in super league etc, it doesn't bother you.. thats fine but it's not good for the league and that's why we are where we are..

Edited April 17, 2023 by RP London

[RP London]

5 hours ago, glossop saint said:

Finding agreement between 30 odd clubs will be tricky, let alone hundreds of thousands of fans. What involvement would you like?

Exactly.. brining the fans in on the conversation with cause nothing to move forward because they, frankly, won't understand it  OR it will get it to do exactly what is happening now because the "electorate" will be influenced by the clubs. 

[Liverpool Rover]

The more I hear Keighleys whinging the more I think that professional sport really isn't for them.