Jump to content

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

marklaspalmas
 Share

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 4.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Archie Gordon
Archie Gordon

And herein lies the utter daftness. 3 pretty similar clubs and 2 get £1.5m and a SL place whilst the other is told to go away and improve your attendances, viewing figures and finances in a league tha

Chris22
Chris22

So Newcastle, who barely even exist, are better set for Super League than London. Wakefield get the chance at more points by winning the Championship and 1895 Cup, by comparison to Castleford and

Pulga
Pulga

This is actually good stuff. The criteria is perfectly fine. People saying they "feel" this and that about where certain teams should be need to keep it to themselves. Feelings have gotten the En

Posted Images

Harry Stottle

Harry Stottle

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Making the clubs and in deed SL itself more active with marketing, especially digital can increase attendances.

Performances are not the only metric that gets people interested in watching sport.

You have admitted before that you are not really up on the world of modern marketing techniques so Im not sure those metrics are aimed at people like yourself.

Digital marketing, especially on Social Media is now a very important part of any sport or sports club strategy to increase revenues and exposure and yes attendances.

Well I will remain sceptical till the figures prove me wrong and you very much correct, till then Chris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Griff

Griff

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Taffy Tiger said:

Cas appeal rejected . However it has been agreed that our score would rise to 12.91 , even though the gradings won't be changed at this point. Link to Cas announcement below

 

https://castlefordtigers.com/article.php?id=8831

I dont't know why they bothered. It was an indicative score, no real consequences of getting it wrong, they've just advertised that they've made an error and, if they'd said nothing, they'd have had the comfort of knowing they had an extra point in their pocket for next year.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harry Stottle

Harry Stottle

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

but unfortunatley from next season we go away from been a sport where on the field is the main importance.

This above all that IMG are introducing is what turns me of their system the most, surely if they are as smart as some of our contributors on these pages claim they are they could have integrated the reward of promotion for being the best amongst their contemporaries in the Championship and demotion for being the worst in their SL division, I have this fear that standards without the threat of jeopardy will fall in SL then if that does happen no matter how many clicks are hit or how much digital marketing takes place, social media will reflect this and attendances will fall both pitchside and fireside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harry Stottle

Harry Stottle

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

So, online then?

What as that got to do with it, if that is the easy way people choose or the only way to receive their tickets then there is no alternative, I was told the other day in a telecon to the ticket office at Leigh, that I can not go and pay for and receive my membership in person, I need to do it online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispmartha

Chrispmartha

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

What as that got to do with it, if that is the easy way people choose or the only way to receive their tickets then there is no alternative, I was told the other day in a telecon to the ticket office at Leigh, that I can not go and pay for and receive my membership in person, I need to do it online.

What has people mainly buying tickets on line got to do with digital marketing? Really? Join the dots Harry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Taffy Tiger said:

Cas appeal rejected . However it has been agreed that our score would rise to 12.91 , even though the gradings won't be changed at this point. Link to Cas announcement below

 

https://castlefordtigers.com/article.php?id=8831

This is absolutely untrue and it is shameful of Cas to suggest it.

The RFL have not "agreed" that at all and have stated unequivocally that the score "will not be reconsidered".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taffy Tiger

Taffy Tiger

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, dboy said:

This is absolutely untrue and it is shameful of Cas to suggest it.

The RFL have not "agreed" that at all and have stated unequivocally that the score "will not be reconsidered".

Hi dboy , yes I know , but they have also said that they agree that our score will rise to 12.91 . It's just in the phrasing really . Basically , we have 12.91 points but RFL aren't going to change the gradings that they released . From what they are saying there are other teams who have also appealed their scoring so to just change Cas score would have been unfair to other teams . There may actually be other teams whose score has changed as well (in effect) . At the end of the day these are just indicative scores anyway and meant to be used as a guide for teams  I think from our point of view it's a relief to know that we actually have 12.91 points and so we would now need to find 2.09 extra for Category A at end of 2024 , rather than 2.84 points . 

Edited by Taffy Tiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taffy Tiger

Taffy Tiger

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, dboy said:

No, they have not.

Read the RFL statement. The Home of Rugby League (rugby-league.com)

It's simply Cas stating/assuming that they will score 12.91.

Dishonest.

Hi dboy , you are right from this statement , but Cas have printed this statement and then added about the RFL agreeing that our score would rise to 12.91 . You are right and this (12.91 agreement) hasn't been mentioned in RFL statement . It does seem strange that Cas would have added this to their released statement from RFL if they hadn't been told about the score rising to 12.91 . It does sound as though it was a genuine omission on Cas's behalf though , so it would suggest that even if not awarded , in effect the 12.91 points are there and would have been given had it not been for the data entry error . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taffy Tiger

Taffy Tiger

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is what Cas have released on the end of the RFL statement

 

'As a club we are disappointed that the RFL will not change the gradings, however we are pleased to hear that they have agreed that our score would increase to 12.91. This gives us a great base to work from to push our score as high as we can in readiness for the 2025 gradings.

Edited by Taffy Tiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted

Yes, that's CAS stating that, not the RFL.

If true, and the RFL wanted that info shared THEY would have announced it.

To do so outside of the official statement is utterly unprofessional at best and a misrepresentation of the truth at worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gates1

Gates1

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, dboy said:

Yes, that's CAS stating that, not the RFL.

If true, and the RFL wanted that info shared THEY would have announced it.

To do so outside of the official statement is utterly unprofessional at best and a misrepresentation of the truth at worst.

No it's not.

The RFL statement quite clearly states that accepting the resubmission would increase Cas's indicative score.....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taffy Tiger

Taffy Tiger

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, dboy said:

Yes, that's CAS stating that, not the RFL.

If true, and the RFL wanted that info shared THEY would have announced it.

To do so outside of the official statement is utterly unprofessional at best and a misrepresentation of the truth at worst.

Just seen Gates1 reply . Yes it does say that accepting the resubmission would increase Cas's score . That will explain why we have released the statement regarding increase to 12.91

Edited by Taffy Tiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Gates1 said:

No it's not.

The RFL statement quite clearly states that accepting the resubmission would increase Cas's indicative score.....

Where does it state that the RFL agree the score would be 12.91?

It doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Blues Ox

The Blues Ox

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Click said:

Artificially propped up to 24th..

If we get to a point where all these clubs have completed and achieved all possible points that they can get, RE: finances/stadium and the only thing left that seperates the top 15 odd clubs is their catchment figures then fine. But the majority of them have been around for 100 years and haven't grown and are run like £$"! just like LB is

You don't seem to want to reward failing clubs but the last system did exactly that when LB was promoted.

You miss the point, the only thing that does seperate some clubs is catchment areas hence why I think its a stupid metric to measure anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dboy

dboy

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Taffy Tiger said:

I guess we may never know , but I wouldn't have thought Cas would have said this if RFL had told them they didn't want it releasing . After all these are indicative scores and used as a dry run , so I wouldn't think there would be any legal issue here . RFL said clubs can release their own points score if they want to , but it's not obligatory . We were one of the few clubs to give our full breakdown of scores in each category . This is just an update on that in effect.

Cas haven't released their score - they have made an unsubstantiated claim that they have 12.91.

Why would the RFL re-assess Cas as 12.91, but then state they would not reconsider the score?

Cas have made an assumption, shared it unprofessionally, and compounded the fact that they screwed up their own application!

They have gained absolutely nothing and drawn attention to their own amateurish operation. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gates1

Gates1

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, dboy said:

Where does it state that the RFL agree the score would be 12.91?

It doesn't.

The rfl can't share it, because they would be contradicting there decision not to publish a regrade.

Why should Cas not?

How do you know the rfl didn't say we can't share it because we would be effectively regrading you publicly but you can?

Nothing like a bit of uninformed unnecessary outrage...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.