The IMG Gradings Thread - Post all your IMG Gradings related questions or comments here

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

11 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

From the IMG document - 'in order to score 1.5 the clubs stadium facilities must meet SL minimum standards, if these standards are not met the club will score 0.5.'

As I say, different document or game playing? I don't know. It would be helpful if IMG/the clubs revealed the breakdown.

Yes it's basically a yes/no with essentially no demarcation or reward for steady improvement until all 9 criteria are met.

[RP London]

10 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

I know. I think that is wrong personally. I think it would make the process more transparent and there might be marginally less complaints.

again... more transparent yes but breaking confidentiality of information rules potentially too.. different if a club wants to put it up as its based on their information but for someone else to that would be another matter.. remember these are private companies. 

[glossop saint]

Just now, RP London said:

again... more transparent yes but breaking confidentiality of information rules potentially too.. different if a club wants to put it up as its based on their information but for someone else to that would be another matter.. remember these are private companies. 

Don't get me wrong, I can see why they haven't, and it is up to them. I just think their life would be easier if they did.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

40 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said:

When's the civic reception?

Unlike our fish-fingered cousins, we don't think we have anything to celebrate yet. Take us years to be a Top 4 club, but step by step is what it takes. 

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

I'd be interested to see who was actually awarded the points for the LED lights as the wording in the handbook makes it clear that 3 sides of the ground need to be covered, however several clubs i've seen only have one side of the ground covered(Salford I believe only had one and I'm pretty sure Warrington only have one side too)

An additional bonus score of 0.125 is awarded if a club has LED advertising boards across a minimum of the TV arc (three sides with a content management system):

• 100m length (save for where main dug outs are opposite the TV cameras).

• Full length behind goals.

• 900mm high.

 

 

Why would you pay to put those in if you are not in SL and not on TV?

On the off chance?

[RP London]

Just now, glossop saint said:

Don't get me wrong, I can see why they haven't, and it is up to them. I just think their life would be easier if they did.

totally agree but they're working with what they can.. clubs are going to be very inward looking on this i expect, as we have seen before, becuase they dont like to admit/show where they are failing and its a stick for their own fans to beat them with.. obviously there will be some clubs that see how this can be an incentive and also to show the fans, when they are not spending it on the pitch for example, that there is a reason for them spending the money where they are and it will help them understand that and placate the fanbase a little. 

 

[phiggins]

It's odd that any points at all are given for a stadium that does not meet what they call minimum standards.

[DemonUK]

1 hour ago, Barley Mow said:

I think Leigh will be pretty safe.

Although I have assumed that they keep the 0.25 point bonus for the Challenge Cup (and previous Championship GF) for the three full years.

As you say, if they don't finish bottom of SL, their on-field score increases.

After this season you would also expect their crowds, ground utilisation, finances & social media score for next year to be better than the year they were relegated.

They and Castleford get another year of the built in SL advantages next year - Assuming Cas fill the form our correctly next year, I see it as Toulouse or Wakefield for the 12th place.

They don't keep it.  Trophy/Title wins only count for the current season.  They are going to have to wring every 0.1 they can where they have fallen over in the indicative Gradings.  Finishing 5th again would gain them about 0.3.  Losing the CC win (assuming they don't do it again) costs 0.25.  To get the 3 year average crowd above 7500 would mean they would have to almost sell out the stadium almost every week, so virtually impossible to get the extra 0.5 for that.  Add to that the fact that all games are going to be televised on one platform or another and some wily fans of clubs close in the gradings deciding not to go to away games to keep the home teams attendance down (oh and take their own pies ).

Would be nice to see the breakdown of points to see if the fans can help contribute to an increase in the grading points.  DB, over to you

[Barley Mow]

Just now, phiggins said:

It's odd that any points at all are given for a stadium that does not meet what they call minimum standards.

The minimum standards are different for SL, Championship and L1.

I can see that perhaps there should be no points if you only just meet the L1 standards, but meeting Champ standards should be worth more than meeting L1, and meeting SL standards should be worth more points again.

[Toby Chopra]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Will Leigh get a boost? They will lose the boost they got from the Cup win (unless they win again). A 12th placed finish will rolloff. There is a chance that Leigh's score may go down next year. If Cas' score is adjusted now, Leigh are already 13th.

I expect Leigh's fandom and financials average will improve when 2021 rolls off and is replaced by 2024, and assuming they don't finish bottom the competition points will too. That should be enough to offset the CC win dropping out.

[phiggins]

1 minute ago, Barley Mow said:

The minimum standards are different for SL, Championship and L1.

I can see that perhaps there should be no points if you only just meet the L1 standards, but meeting Champ standards should be worth more than meeting L1, and meeting SL standards should be worth more points again.

It just seems odd that given this system is ultimately to determine how suitable a club is to play in Super League, that you would give points for not meeting SL minimum standards. 

[bamfordsbeans]

I noticed Leeds got the maximum 2.5 for attendances.

Does that mean their crowds over the last 3 years are as good as it gets?

[phiggins]

8 minutes ago, DemonUK said:

They don't keep it.  Trophy/Title wins only count for the current season.  They are going to have to wring every 0.1 they can where they have fallen over in the indicative Gradings.  Finishing 5th again would gain them about 0.3.  Losing the CC win (assuming they don't do it again) costs 0.25.  To get the 3 year average crowd above 7500 would mean they would have to almost sell out the stadium almost every week, so virtually impossible to get the extra 0.5 for that.  Add to that the fact that all games are going to be televised on one platform or another and some wily fans of clubs close in the gradings deciding not to go to away games to keep the home teams attendance down (oh and take their own pies ).

Would be nice to see the breakdown of points to see if the fans can help contribute to an increase in the grading points.  DB, over to you

Wakefield could get a higher on field performance score over the three years for finishing 10th, 12th and Championship / 1895 winners. Than Leigh do for finishing Championship / 1895 winners, 5th / CC winners and wherever they finish next season. It's a bonkers stipulation on the bonus points.

[Dunbar]

I have an idea.

Every year, the two clubs in 12th and 13th position in the gradings have a week to resubmit their paperwork to try and get a better score, we could use it as a relegation battle to satisfy the purists. 

We could even call it 'The Million Pound Email'!

[Guest]

 

plenty of detail on the thread.

Edited October 25, 2023 by Leonard

[Guest]

John Davidson

 

@johnnyddavidson

·

2h

 

IMG were pleasantly surprised that there is 7 A clubs already. They thought there would only be 4 or 5. Their goal is to create 12 A clubs. They are pleased with how the clubs have responded to the grading process.

[JohnM]

The clubs agreed it way back when, over six months ago. They've had ages to collect and present the data.  Thus any club using their money to "go legal" is bound to fail in their action and fail as a club. Their duty to the fans, the clubs, the games, is to make it work. Destroy it now and they really will be hastening the death of the pro-level sport. 

Super League clubs vote to end automatic promotion and relegation | Super League | The Guardian

Clubs and community bodies voted by a majority of 32 to seven in favour of IMG’s proposals.

At a special council meeting in Huddersfield on Wednesday, 26 of the 34 professional clubs in attendance, including every Super League club bar Catalans, who are not entitled to vote, opted for the proposals. That means this will be the final season of conventional promotion and relegation before the professional structure undergoes its most radical overhaul in decades.

 

[binosh]

Am I right in saying that the twelfth placed team will only be relegated if they are a grade B and the winner of the championship is also a grade B that scores higher?

Edited October 25, 2023 by binosh

[RP London]

10 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I have an idea.

Every year, the two clubs in 12th and 13th position in the gradings have a week to resubmit their paperwork to try and get a better score, we could use it as a relegation battle to satisfy the purists. 

We could even call it 'The Million Pound Email'!

This is Rugby League at best its the "Million Pound Fax"

[Taffy Tiger]

2 minutes ago, binosh said:

Am I right in saying that the twelfth placed team will only be relegated if they are a grade B and the winner of the championship is also a grade B that scores higher?

Hi Binosh , yes that is correct , but it wouldn't just apply to the 12th placed club in SL at the end of the season . The only relevance of finishing position in SL . is the points that you will gain for your overall performance score , averaged over 3 years . These will be added to the other criteria to give each club a score out of 20 . You can then ignore SL finishing positions as the score out of 20 will decide who are the top 12 clubs for the following season's SL . So any SL club can still be relegated out of SL , with the exemption of Cat A clubs at the start of the season . There are 7 Cat A clubs at the moment , so if 2024 season was the start of the new IMG criteria then these clubs can't be relegated , irrespective of their score out of 20 .

[The Blues Ox]

1 hour ago, Gav Wilson said:

Good on him. He now knows exactly whats required to improve all aspects of his club, and will try and work hard to achieve that. The system is working as intended. Respect!

 

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

Great response from him and that's exactly how clubs should respond and I hope they achieve what they want to.

 

Isn't becoming a SL club what they have been trying to achieve and they managed that in fairytale fashion this season but under the new grading system it wouldn't be unfair to say they are at least a decade off been anywhere near to achieving that goal again. London's best hope of getting back to SL after this season is probably hoping the new ranking system gets sacked off.

On the flip side we have a forward thinking progressive club that is in real danger of losing their SL status to 2 teams that have been peeing their money up against a wall year after year without making any real improvements. What a sport. 

I actually thought spreadsheet rugby league would be pretty boring but this is far outweighing my expectations. I'm going to be on the edge of my seat for when the true gradings come out next year. Well done IMG.

[Tommygilf]

6 minutes ago, binosh said:

Am I right in saying that the twelfth placed team will only be relegated if they are a grade B and the winner of the championship is also a grade B that scores higher?

As I understand that is one way how it could work.

This would mean for example that whilst Toulouse would have been promoted this year at Wakefield's expense, none of the other playoff candidates would have. 

[The Blues Ox]

10 minutes ago, binosh said:

Am I right in saying that the twelfth placed team will only be relegated if they are a grade B and the winner of the championship is also a grade B that scores higher?

No. 12th placed team could be replaced by a team that finishes bottom of the Championship. But that same 12th placed team could keep their place if they scored more than any of the teams above them. Or something like that. 

 

Had to edit as I presume we are talking actual on the field league placings as if a team is placed twelth in the rankings they would be in SL anyway.

Edited October 25, 2023 by The Blues Ox

[Chrispmartha]

40 minutes ago, RP London said:

again... more transparent yes but breaking confidentiality of information rules potentially too.. different if a club wants to put it up as its based on their information but for someone else to that would be another matter.. remember these are private companies. 

Precisely, there would have been uproar if IMG had just published all the clubs gradings criteria

[Chrispmartha]

10 minutes ago, binosh said:

Am I right in saying that the twelfth placed team will only be relegated if they are a grade B and the winner of the championship is also a grade B that scores higher?

Yes