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

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

But it isn't just financials , is it ? 

From the Handbook:

"The definition of match attendance is the average number of fans attending regular season home games in person" (it also stresses this does not include ST holders not present) along with ad hoc audits being taken. IE, the attendance reports used are the HSE reports filed with the LA every match - and therefor can and will be auditable.

Likewise, Digital engagement is being monitored and they are aware clubs could "buy followers", but they have also got systems in place to monitor for that too. IE, if you suddenly get 20k more twitter followers but your engagement with twitter content and links stays the same, its obvious these followers aren't genuine.

Other than finances (which also covers the foundation element of the community criteria), that are clearly auditable and for many clubs present a direct interest in showing everything, practically everything else is publicly available for all to see.

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

I’ll take that as “No, London’s relegation has not been confirmed.”

I'll take that as a " no , I can't " 

[GUBRATS]

40 minutes ago, redjonn said:

if Leigh don't finish bottom does anyone serious think that SL/RFL would have Leigh relegated.  I just think if that was a scenario the grading approach will be put back in its box or seriously changed to rule it out.

Yep I know in theory its possible they would allow it to happen but I doubt they would relegate them.

Hopefully as part of the review and the various scenario's like Leigh and others being seen to be possible that the review will bring in some changes.   If not they are ,,,, well 

Not ' relegated ' , that's what happens within a sporting contest 

' Removed ' ? , quite possibly , but if they review then that means somebody else will be very ,VERY unhappy because of the changes , and will claim unfairness , quite rightly IMO 

[GUBRATS]

39 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It was quite literally a trial run

It should be interesting on here then to hear the squeals of anger when Toulouse are graded 14th ? 

[Chrispmartha]

12 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

You've been told by enough on here , there's no way a club outside can match a club inside apart from financial meltdown , and you know it 

Don’t tell me what I know or don’t know especially when it’s literally unknowable at this stage

[glossop saint]

41 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

We don't really know about Toronto , in their 3 seasons they lost how many times at home ? , was it 2 or 3 times ? 

My point exactly. They didn't lose. Therefore they kept the crowds high and at the same time results meant that they ran through the league. The only way a new club will come in and get to SL is ironically doing the same as Toronto though get promoted for different reasons.

I often wonder if you are being argumentative or contrary just for the fun of it.

[GUBRATS]

40 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Did it feel good to be the smartest person in the room?

Not really no , but I can imagine the anger that will surface in whichever town is on the wrong end of this , and the utter confusion within the support base IMG hope to tap into to build the sport 

" What , you get put in or out due to how many tweets you get ? , seriously ? , F cough " 

[Gav Wilson]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Not really no , but I can imagine the anger that will surface in whichever town is on the wrong end of this , and the utter confusion within the support base IMG hope to tap into to build the sport 

" What , you get put in or out due to how many tweets you get ? , seriously ? , F cough " 

There's a lot more to it than that, and you know it... 

[GUBRATS]

36 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Im not sure what you want me say or do about that? 
 

Leeds have never finished bottom or been below the top division.

We heard squealing when you were in the middle 8 s 

[Chrispmartha]

8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Not ' relegated ' , that's what happens within a sporting contest 

' Removed ' ? , quite possibly , but if they review then that means somebody else will be very ,VERY unhappy because of the changes , and will claim unfairness , quite rightly IMO 

No, relegated means being moved to a lower division, it doesn’t have to mean by virtue of on field results

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

We heard squealing when you were in the middle 8 s 

Again im not sure what you want me to do or say about that.

[GUBRATS]

8 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Don’t tell me what I know or don’t know especially when it’s literally unknowable at this stage

I'll take ' unknowable ' , just very , very ,very , VERY unlikely

[GUBRATS]

9 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

My point exactly. They didn't lose. Therefore they kept the crowds high and at the same time results meant that they ran through the league. The only way a new club will come in and get to SL is ironically doing the same as Toronto though get promoted for different reasons.

I often wonder if you are being argumentative or contrary just for the fun of it.

My point is also they didn't lose , if they had continued the season they would have lost lots IMO , who knows how that would have affected the fans enjoying their beer ?

[GUBRATS]

9 minutes ago, Gav Wilson said:

There's a lot more to it than that, and you know it... 

You won't get the time to explain it , it'll be " so you win the 2nd Division but don't go up ? , why not ? , that's daft , whereupon they'll walk off thinking ' stupid sport ' 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

You won't get the time to explain it , it'll be " so you win the 2nd Division but don't go up ? , why not ? , that's daft , whereupon they'll walk off thinking ' stupid sport ' 

Well they will if you explain it to them! You're constantly bragging about your ability to explain good ideas but folk just not listening!

[GUBRATS]

10 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

No, relegated means being moved to a lower division, it doesn’t have to mean by virtue of on field results

Yes , but it sounds better , saying ' removed ' , a combination of relegated and moved 

[Harry Stottle]

41 minutes ago, Gav Wilson said:

It was, several times. 

Link please.

[GUBRATS]

11 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Again im not sure what you want me to do or say about that.

Sometimes it's better to keep quiet , than to remove all doubt

[GUBRATS]

Tea time , I'll take a breather

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Link please.

MG have previously said that they will look to do a trial run of the grading ahead of 2024 as an example, before it comes in to practice for 2025
 

https://www.loverugbyleague.com/post/img-set-date-for-new-super-league-grading-criteria-release
 

first google search result

[Gav Wilson]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Link please.

"Seven Betfred Super League clubs have been awarded Grade A status in the indicative phase of the new club grading process"

[Gav Wilson]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

You won't get the time to explain it , it'll be " so you win the 2nd Division but don't go up ? , why not ? , that's daft , whereupon they'll walk off thinking ' stupid sport ' 

They will if you're explaining it to them like Eeyore talking to Piglet, aye.

[Hopie]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

It was quite literally a trial run

A trial run that showed the system is flawed. 

The test now is how they adjust or if they decide to go ahead regardless. I don't think the clubs voted in a system on the basis it would be perfect, but I'm sure they thought obvious flaws would be removed.

Given the ultimate decision of 12th v 13th is likely to come down to a fraction of a grading point, and that it will mean millions of pounds of difference for those two clubs, even minor problems with the choice of grading factors or their measurement will have a huge consequence and shouldn't be left in place.

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Hopie said:

A trial run that showed the system is flawed. 

The test now is how they adjust or if they decide to go ahead regardless. I don't think the clubs voted in a system on the basis it would be perfect, but I'm sure they thought obvious flaws would be removed.

Given the ultimate decision of 12th v 13th is likely to come down to a fraction of a grading point, and that it will mean millions of pounds of difference for those two clubs, even minor problems with the choice of grading factors or their measurement will have a huge consequence and shouldn't be left in place.

Genuinely, how is it flawed? Other than "I don't like the system", its done exactly what it was supposed to - show us the strongest clubs to base the immediate future of the top flight around and show other clubs where they are lacking.

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, Hopie said:

A trial run that showed the system is flawed. 

The test now is how they adjust or if they decide to go ahead regardless. I don't think the clubs voted in a system on the basis it would be perfect, but I'm sure they thought obvious flaws would be removed.

Given the ultimate decision of 12th v 13th is likely to come down to a fraction of a grading point, and that it will mean millions of pounds of difference for those two clubs, even minor problems with the choice of grading factors or their measurement will have a huge consequence and shouldn't be left in place.

They voted on this exact system and criteria 

Didnt they also get an amendment made to the catchment criteria?