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

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

51 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Nobody can read the last few pages of this thread and argue we've not added a new layer of excitement to RL.

I genuinely read that as 'excrement'...

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I hate to say it but when Cas seem so close to been graded as a Cat A club I feel the bar has been set way too low. I'm sorry if they were to do what they have said then using them as a benchmark club feels absurd.

Salford and Huddersfield are 1.2 and 1.5 points off Cat A.

That's right - a bit here and there and both are in the camp of as good as it gets in IMG's eyes.

[RP London]

15 minutes ago, Taffy Tiger said:

Hi Phiggins , to maintain a score , the team in question would have to match their finishing position in 2021 , as the averages are taken on a rolling 3 year basis , therefore Cas would need to finish 7th (big ask) to maintain their 3.09 score , unless of course they win CC 

Is that true? surely it depends on what the other teams around them do.. as it will be a comparison of whatever their final average is against everyone else's final average to get to a 1-36 rank that then has a points value? not so easy as just match what you had before. 

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Salford and Huddersfield are 1.2 and 1.5 points off Cat A.

That's right - a bit here and there and both are in the camp of as good as it gets in IMG's eyes.

Yes, instinctively that feels high. However, I wonder if they are at a point where that extra 1.2 and 1.5 are really difficult to achieve. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Yes, instinctively that feels high. However, I wonder if they are at a point where that extra 1.2 and 1.5 are really difficult to achieve. 

Fair point.

But, a point I made earlier, if with small improvements you have 7 already plus Huddersfield, Salford, Wakey, Leigh and Cas as Grade A (not out of the question) .....

I'm not overly sure the point of it all and where the massive improvement is for revenue generation to outside sponsors.

Feels like the proverbial with hundreds and thousands sprinkled on it.

Not to say those improvements are not worthwhile of course - but they feel marginal to me.

And it has the added bonus of guaranteeing those clubs SL - which is what they want.

[DemonUK]

2 hours ago, Bulls2487 said:

Aren't all figures rounded up? So 2.3 1.8 and 2.4?

Only if you are a Bradford fan.  I make it an average position of 18th if you add the finishing positions together and divide by 3

[phiggins]

35 minutes ago, Taffy Tiger said:

Hi Phiggins , to maintain a score , the team in question would have to match their finishing position in 2021 , as the averages are taken on a rolling 3 year basis , therefore Cas would need to finish 7th (big ask) to maintain their 3.09 score , unless of course they win CC 

Thanks, so it's just a measure of your own average finishing positions, not how that averages ranks alongside everybody else's average position?

[Big Picture]

22 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Salford and Huddersfield are 1.2 and 1.5 points off Cat A.

That's right - a bit here and there and both are in the camp of as good as it gets in IMG's eyes.

So without fudging, one has to wonder just how few A grades there would be.

[Guest]

Just now, Big Picture said:

So without fudging, one has to wonder just how few A grades there would be.

Fudging - or just a very average bar to achieve?

Toulouse - and I like them - are on 12.97 points. So not far off Cat A either.

[Harry Stottle]

Unless I have missed it I have not seen any comment from Leigh on the Web, I am also on the clubs mailing list and not had anything posted.

Personally I am not to happy with how quiet it has been considering that it must have come as a revelation to the club as much as their grading position has been a surprise to most others, can't help but think this could be the quiet before the storm, albeit I hope not.

[phiggins]

4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Unless I have missed it I have not seen any comment from Leigh on the Web, I am also on the clubs mailing list and not had anything posted.

Personally I am not to happy with how quiet it has been considering that it must have come as a revelation to the club as much as their grading position has been a surprise to most others, can't help but think this could be the quiet before the storm, albeit I hope not.

Not sure what you want them to say. They won't have been surprised by their own score, but the scores of Toulouse and Wakefield will have come as a surprise.

The club should know where they need to improve. I imagine they will want to increase the utilisation score by having a higher average attendance for the season, increase the turnover and do more with the web and social scores. From what I can see, the club don't have an active foundation, which is a big gap. Even just starting one up would make up the 0.25 points lost if the cup isn't retained.

[Harry Stottle]

4 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Fudging - or just a very average bar to achieve?

Toulouse - and I like them - are on 12.97 points. So not far off Cat A either.

I would love to see a full comparative list of all the clubs and their grading points, especially the club you mention.

[Taffy Tiger]

33 minutes ago, RP London said:

Is that true? surely it depends on what the other teams around them do.. as it will be a comparison of whatever their final average is against everyone else's final average to get to a 1-36 rank that then has a points value? not so easy as just match what you had before. 

HI RP L , Cas have a performance rating based on finishing positions in 2021, 2022 and 2023 . We finished 7th , 7th and 11th respectively . At the end of 2024 the average is worked out on finishing positions in 2022 , 2023 and 2024 as it is calculated on a rolling 3-year average , so the earliest year , in this case 2021,  is removed from this calculation . In effect this means that Cas have to finish in the same position as they did in 2021 to keep the same performance score ie 7th , 7th and 11th . We could score higher if we win CC , but unlikely that we will . 

You mention that others around us may determine the points we get , but as I understand it teams are awarded points for where they finish in each individual year as a separate entity ie finish top 4 points , 2nd 3.888 , 3rd 3.777 etc , these are then added up to give a 3 year total and divided by 3 for your average , so it would then follow that if Cas have an average score of 3.09 they would just have to replicate 2021 finishing position (in this case 7th) to maintain a 3.09 score

[Harry Stottle]

28 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Not sure what you want them to say. They won't have been surprised by their own score, but the scores of Toulouse and Wakefield will have come as a surprise.

The club should know where they need to improve. I imagine they will want to increase the utilisation score by having a higher average attendance for the season, increase the turnover and do more with the web and social scores. From what I can see, the club don't have an active foundation, which is a big gap. Even just starting one up would make up the 0.25 points lost if the cup isn't retained.

Hi Higgy, you have confirmed what I said if you read back I said Leigh's Grading Position obviously if we are 12th others have been scored better, more so than Wakey who have had the scoring years in SL, TO have had the same as Leigh just the one year, I mention transparency issues, seems a little strange to me that IMG are averse to disclosing it, even the Editor of the site we are utilising is complaining at the lack of information forthcoming.

Edited October 26, 2023 by Harry Stottle

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, Monkeymagic22 said:

I’d never agree with this process. But at least if you are doing it, make it robust and a transparent process. Some clubs are saying that they haven’t even been visited by anyone as part of the process. Are there no checks, or are the clubs own submission’s just being accepted?. As would be expected if RL, to me, so far this has been pretty shambolic, as illustrated by the Cas farce.

So presumably they have just sat around waiting to be called rather than contacting IMG, RFL, this forum even, and chasing things up. If so, they don't deserve ANY ranking.

Once again, it's not IMG who has the power here. The clubs themselves voted for it.

[doc]

It would be good if all the club's could grab the opportunity, and improve themselves before the real grades come out. 

Meanwhile, I'll start platting some fog.

[Monkeymagic22]

5 minutes ago, JohnM said:

So presumably they have just sat around waiting to be called rather than contacting IMG, RFL, this forum even, and chasing things up. If so, they don't deserve ANY ranking.

Once again, it's not IMG who has the power here. The clubs themselves voted for it.

Yeah, it’s clubs fault. 

[Chrispmartha]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hi Higgy, you have confirmed what I said if you read back I said Leigh's Grading Position obviously if we are 12th others have been scored better, more so than Wakey who have had the scoring years in SL, TO have had the same as Leigh just the one year, I mention transparency issues, seems a little cloak and dagger to me that IMG are averse to disclosing it, even the Editor of the site we are utilising is complaining at the lack of information forthcoming.

I don't think it should be on IMG to publish data, some of which could be sensitive, IMG has said the clubs are entitled to release it if they so wish.

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I don't think it should be on IMG to publish data, some of which could be sensitive, IMG has said the clubs are entitled to release it if they so wish.

Well it is the clubs property isn't it.

I am hopeful that @Martyn Sadler who seems as mystified as anyone can gather the grading criteria from all the clubs and publish it in a comparative form.

[Dave T]

56 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Fair point.

But, a point I made earlier, if with small improvements you have 7 already plus Huddersfield, Salford, Wakey, Leigh and Cas as Grade A (not out of the question) .....

I'm not overly sure the point of it all and where the massive improvement is for revenue generation to outside sponsors.

Feels like the proverbial with hundreds and thousands sprinkled on it.

Not to say those improvements are not worthwhile of course - but they feel marginal to me.

And it has the added bonus of guaranteeing those clubs SL - which is what they want.

I suppose the point is that to get that final nudge in score it isn't small improvements. Salfrod maybe don't have any easy points to pick up on now - it may be that the only way they can do that is to improve finances and get above 7,500 crowds. And if that happens, then they would look like a Grade A club. 

IT should also be remembered that these rankings are not the mechanism for improvement, it is simply a table of the outcomes. The stuff that clubs are doing all year round are what is input into these that shape the table. So if you want to improve your ranking you do need to grow crowds, community engagement, facilities, as well as perform on the field - I don't think that is a controversial system tbh.

I don't think the guaranteeing clubs SL point is that big a deal - let's be honest, they could just setup a closed shop really if they wanted to.

[RP London]

26 minutes ago, Taffy Tiger said:

HI RP L , Cas have a performance rating based on finishing positions in 2021, 2022 and 2023 . We finished 7th , 7th and 11th respectively . At the end of 2024 the average is worked out on finishing positions in 2022 , 2023 and 2024 as it is calculated on a rolling 3-year average , so the earliest year , in this case 2021,  is removed from this calculation . In effect this means that Cas have to finish in the same position as they did in 2021 to keep the same performance score ie 7th , 7th and 11th . We could score higher if we win CC , but unlikely that we will . 

You mention that others around us may determine the points we get , but as I understand it teams are awarded points for where they finish in each individual year as a separate entity ie finish top 4 points , 2nd 3.888 , 3rd 3.777 etc , these are then added up to give a 3 year total and divided by 3 for your average , so it would then follow that if Cas have an average score of 3.09 they would just have to replicate 2021 finishing position (in this case 7th) to maintain a 3.09 score

OK i see where you have got to with that but that's not how I read that they are doing it.. 

They way I've read it they add up the 3 seasons to get an average that average then puts you on a ladder form 1-36 which gives you your grading points. If you, as cas, finish 7th this year that keeps your average finishing position the same. However, another club could have a good year and move you down the ladder, another could have a bad year and move you up it.. gaining and losing you grading points. 

[Chrispmartha]

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Well it is the clubs property isn't it.

I am hopeful that @Martyn Sadler who seems as mystified as anyone can gather the grading criteria from all the clubs and publish it in a comparative form.

Exactly my point, its the clubs property and not IMGs to publish.

Not sure why Martyn is mystified to be honest.

[RP London]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Well it is the clubs property isn't it.

I am hopeful that @Martyn Sadler who seems as mystified as anyone can gather the grading criteria from all the clubs and publish it in a comparative form.

I wouldn't bet on it but you would think a simple case of 36 phone calls to ask would be the minimum.. I just trust our "journalists" to get their teeth into it... I hope I am wrong. Some may well say no but that's OK if we have 28 of the 36 that still gives some good comparisons. 

[binosh]

5 hours ago, LeytherRob said:

I feel like a lot of issues with this system could be solved if they just went with the early suggested plan that grade A's are automatically in SL, grade B's have P&R as normal until there are 12+ grade A clubs. They've ditched straight P&R in order to get stability and ended up with a system where there will be 6/7 clubs sweating on what division they'll be in for 2025. It's going to be even more chaotic than the middle 8's next year and it'll be a nightmare for clubs recruitment plans.

I’ll be honest I was under the impression this is how it would work. Grade A’s guaranteed with Grade B’s still having the element of jeopardy.

[Chrispmartha]

6 minutes ago, RP London said:

I wouldn't bet on it but you would think a simple case of 36 phone calls to ask would be the minimum.. I just trust our "journalists" to get their teeth into it... I hope I am wrong. Some may well say no but that's OK if we have 28 of the 36 that still gives some good comparisons. 

I seriously doubt the clubs will give the info to journalists. Imagine a Callum Walker article if he got hold of the info first, he's already done a sharticle titled "Three incredible gaffes from IMG's rugby league grading D Day"