IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[Wakefield Ram]

On 08/04/2024 at 09:22, DemonUK said:

I know this has probably done to death before on here, but the reality to me is horrifying for our sport.

1)  For approximately 96% of our clubs the 'On The Field Performance' contribution totals LESS than 20% of the total

2) I have noticed a number of clubs announce million pound investments at the beginning of this season (some would say not a bad thing, but is it just to sit on the books?)

3) I would suggest that at least 50% of available points can be 'manipulated', (see point 2 above as an example)

I could go on but I thnk i have put across my own thoughts on this subject.  The result of this is you find clubs virtually admitting they don't care how they do on the field as they think by  concentrating 100% on off field performance they are almost certain they will be guaranteed a SL place.  London on the other hand are not throwing good money after bad as they are virtually sure they won't be in SL in 2025.  Look at Bradford after the last few years of mid table championship performances they managed to be up in 14th or 15th position only a small fraction of a point below being given a SL place.

I did think that the Grading system would be tweaked a little but nothing has been said. 

Is this still sport?  I don't know.  What do I think will happen a week or two before the end of the 2024 season?  In a word 'carnage'.

 

In my working life, I have lost count of the number of times we have tried to grade products / software etc.. by coming up with a weighted matrix. Yes, it's all open to manipulation.

I fully get something concrete like saying your stadium must have xx capacity to be in SL. It needs to be big enough to allow fans to attend and for the club to be able to generate income to compete. Or your club must not have been in administration in last 3 years to show some financial stability. But they have to be yes/no criteria. 

Anything else is open to manipulation, pure and simple. The points awarded and the weighting is totally subjective. It's made up and any club who narrowly miss out on SL due to whether they have electronic advertising boards etc.. and not due to playing performance will be entitled to go down the legal route. 

That we've allowed a third party (IMG) with no long-term interest in RL other than making themselves money shows the weakness in the RFL/SL leadership. And before anyone mentions "12 year strategic partnership" the last "strategic partnership" I came across on a work environment ended in the client (think RFL) suing the "strategic partner" (think IMG, but it wasn't them) for a large amount of money long before the proposed end of the partnership. And it was settled out of court.

The club I support Dewsbury Rams will never be in SL unless some billionaire decides to put in millions, so I've no axe to bring in that sense. But other than something concrete yes/ no criteria like minimum stadium capacity, then it will cause more long-term damage to the game than any alleged extra income that IMG may or may not generate. And I would expect both sides have exit clauses in the contract, so it's only as long as either party want to be involved. 

[Harry Stottle]

35 minutes ago, Worzel said:

I don't watch sport for relegation battles. Neither does anyone in the NRL, and there seems to be plenty of sporting contest down there. 

Not really. Hull KR are a Grade A club, they got relegated less than 10 years ago. But the whole point is to work to a league full of Grade A clubs, who will all have security from relegation. This phase-in period is only that, a phase-in. 

Will IMG's methods increase the quality of what happens on the field of play?

If No, when we have 12 'A' grades and no threat of relegation what is going to entice the punters through the gates or to buy subscriptions, or will those punters just be happy to turn up irrespective if games are meaningless, keep rolling out the NRL it seems to be the stock answer to go to, we do things different up here.

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

1 hour ago, glossop saint said:

That won't happen due to the on field performance score. You are being completely disingenuous, as so many who argue against the IMG system are. And if it did then even more reason to have them in there as they would have overcome that performance disadvantage and shown themselves a top club. Note club not team.

Just to add there are also plenty who disagree with it and do put good, consistent points forward. They don't seem to be on this thread today.

Toulouse will score 1.5 points for population.  Castleford and Wakefield will score 0.5 points. 1 point equates to 9 places on the league ladder. Overcoming poor performance when you're being gifted ridiculous advantages like that probably says more about the scoring system than anything else.

[Worzel]

5 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Will IMG's methods increase the quality of what happens on the field of play?

If No, when we have 12 'A' grades and no threat of relegation what is going to entice the punters through the gates or to buy subscriptions, or will those punters just be happy to turn up irrespective if games are meaningless, keep rolling out the NRL it seems to be the stock answer to go to, we do things different up here.

Well we know that promotion & relegation don't seem to improve it. Team after team coming up, only to get battered each week having only been able to cobble together a rough hewn squad in the few weeks available to do so. Unless your owner has blown £1m in the Championship building the squad a year early. I mean, that sounds like a really fair, healthy way to decide which teams are in Super League eh? 

You can become an A-grade club by investing in other things, with a better long term impact than "one year's playing squad that we can't really afford". That sounds better to me than someone like David Hughes blowing over £25m on London Broncos over the years. only leaving him and us with a part-time squad getting battered every week in a rented stadium, no training infrastructure and negligible community or business/commercial engagement.  

Us "doing things differently up here" hasn't seemed to have worked so far. 

[Worzel]

4 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

Toulouse will score 1.5 points for population.  Castleford and Wakefield will score 0.5 points. 1 point equates to 9 places on the league ladder. Overcoming poor performance when you're being gifted ridiculous advantages like that probably says more about the scoring system than anything else.

It's not a ridiculous advantage, its a sensible way of suggesting which clubs have the greater potential for audience growth. 

[glossop saint]

5 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

Toulouse will score 1.5 points for population.  Castleford and Wakefield will score 0.5 points. 1 point equates to 9 places on the league ladder. Overcoming poor performance when you're being gifted ridiculous advantages like that probably says more about the scoring system than anything else.

So if Toulouse get relegated from Champ to League 1 then their population won't be enough for them to overcome the on pitch performance score therefore meaning it is incredibly unlikely to happen and that the poster saying that they might get relegated and still put in SL is talking nonsense. Thank you for the maths.

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

4 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

So if Toulouse get relegated from Champ to League 1 then their population won't be enough for them to overcome the on pitch performance score therefore meaning it is incredibly unlikely to happen and that the poster saying that they might get relegated and still put in SL is talking nonsense. Thank you for the maths.

In 2022 Toulouse finished 12th, in 2023 Toulouse finished 14th (2nd in championship), in 2024 its possible to get relegated from 12th but to be on the safe side lets say they finished 13th in the championship (25th overall) So 12+14+25=51. If we divide 51 by 3 we get 17 which would be there or thereabouts where Toulouse would finish on the performance ladder.  The population point would improve that position by 9 places on Wakefield and Castleford.  So, by my calculations it seems it would be possible for them to get relegated and still achieve SL. It would seem the original poster may be correct even though we both know Toulouse won't get relegated. Hope you enjoyed the maths.

[gittinsfan]

1 hour ago, Worzel said:

I don't watch sport for relegation battles. Neither does anyone in the NRL, and there seems to be plenty of sporting contest down there. 

Not really. Hull KR are a Grade A club, they got relegated less than 10 years ago. But the whole point is to work to a league full of Grade A clubs, who will all have security from relegation. This phase-in period is only that, a phase-in. 

So when you have 12 clubs who all have security from relegation,you have a closed shop.Where is the incentive for the majority of clubs iin RL to improve.Will IMG come up with something for them or will their job be done once they have sorted out the elite.

[Harry Stottle]

39 minutes ago, Worzel said:

It's not a ridiculous advantage, its a sensible way of suggesting which clubs have the greater potential for audience growth. 

That word - highlighted - has followed Toulouse around for a good few years now, yet we still have to see that potential realised.

[Hopie]

39 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Well we know that promotion & relegation don't seem to improve it. Team after team coming up, only to get battered each week having only been able to cobble together a rough hewn squad in the few weeks available to do so. Unless your owner has blown £1m in the Championship building the squad a year early. I mean, that sounds like a really fair, healthy way to decide which teams are in Super League eh? 

 

Promotion doesn't improve things so we should keep the teams we have next season forever? Even though most of those were teams promoted into the Super League?

If you prefer no relegation that is an opinion and you can't be wrong about an opinion, but at least pay attention to the facts of the situation. Promoted teams can stay up, and some teams have used relegation as a starting point for improvement.

[Wakefield Ram]

48 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Will IMG's methods increase the quality of what happens on the field of play?

If No, when we have 12 'A' grades and no threat of relegation what is going to entice the punters through the gates or to buy subscriptions, or will those punters just be happy to turn up irrespective if games are meaningless, keep rolling out the NRL it seems to be the stock answer to go to, we do things different up here.

One of the strengths of the NRL is that the top teams change. 

Before a ball is kicked in SL, we know Saints or Wigan will win the GF, London will be relegated. 

The NRL GF has had 13 different winners, SL has had 4 and Bradford unlikely ever to win it again. In the last 19 years it's 3 teams. The NRL have even allowed new teams to join expending the game whilst SL financially punish new clubs like Toronto and Catalans by forcing them to pay travel costs for the other clubs. 

The marquee player route is just a salary cap dodge to keep the top few clubs with more money ahead of the rest. Same clubs winning the same trophies. 

[Chrispmartha]

8 minutes ago, gittinsfan said:

So when you have 12 clubs who all have security from relegation,you have a closed shop.Where is the incentive for the majority of clubs iin RL to improve.Will IMG come up with something for them or will their job be done once they have sorted out the elite.

If there are 12 grade A clubs they have said the league should expand.

[Barley Mow]

7 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

If there are 12 grade A clubs they have said the league should expand.

Are you sure? I thought there had to be 13 Grade A's for it to expand.

[Ovenden Grunt]

2 hours ago, glossop saint said:

Yet more top quality balanced debate.

Thank you.  

[Chrispmartha]

14 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

Are you sure? I thought there had to be 13 Grade A's for it to expand.

Not as far as I'm aware, there’s even nothing stopping them expanding the league at any time if the clubs vote for it.

IMG doesn’t run the game they are consultants.

[Barley Mow]

Just now, Chrispmartha said:

Not as far as I'm aware, there’s even nothing stopping them expanding the league at any time if the clubs vote for it.

IMG doesn’t run the game they are consultants.

Yes, of course there's nothing to stop them expanding if that's what is voted for. I was referring to the situation that IMG/RFL had set out when introducing the new system:

I thought it was that SL has 12 clubs unless more than 12 attain Grade A status.

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

3 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

 

I thought it was that SL has 12 clubs unless more than 12 attain Grade A status.

That is my understanding.

[The Blues Ox]

2 hours ago, Worzel said:

That seems a proportionate, well considered, rational response to the situation. Thanks. Halifax haven't been able to get into Super League for over 20 years under the current model, so they're hardly creating a new barrier for you. 

Technically not true with some of the years we have been in this league there has been no promotion. Unfortunatley for us our purple patch came in the years when there was no promotion.

42 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

If there are 12 grade A clubs they have said the league should expand.

I think they said there was a possibility that it would expand rather than it certainly would. End of the day the SL clubs have the power and when we do have 12 clubs which will likely be in 2 or 3 years then unless the TV deal has gone up there is not a chance in hell that the SL clubs would vote to expand the league.

[LeeF]

4 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

Harry is correct in so far as he wouldn’t invest, that’s because he is totally opposed to IMG.

However the reality is that people have invested after IMG cane in, which kind of shoots massive holes in his argument.

Havent Oldham also had investment after IMG cane in?

And isn’t Degsy on record stating that he would up his investment on the back of IMG?

[gittinsfan]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

If there are 12 grade A clubs they have said the league should expand.

Once you have your 12 grade A clubs I very much doubt if a grade B club would qualify as A while being in the championship

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, gittinsfan said:

Once you have your 12 grade A clubs I very much doubt if a grade B club would qualify as A while being in the championship

Im not sure where it’s been stated that they would have to be grade A for the league to expand? As i say its ultimately down the what the clubs vote for

[gittinsfan]

10 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Im not sure where it’s been stated that they would have to be grade A for the league to expand? As i say its ultimately down the what the clubs vote for

What do you think the SL clubs will vote for? I'm sure the rest of the clubs won't have a say.As Worzel says,there will be 12 clubs with the security of no relegation.

[Chrispmartha]

7 minutes ago, gittinsfan said:

What do you think the SL clubs will vote for? I'm sure the rest of the clubs won't have a say.As Worzel says,there will be 12 clubs with the security of no relegation.

The rest of the clubs will have a vote just the same as they did for the IMG proposals.

I'm not saying the clubs will vote for 14 teams, and IMO part of the problem is the clubs having the say on it in the first place.

[Harry Stottle]

44 minutes ago, LeeF said:

And isn’t Degsy on record stating that he would up his investment on the back of IMG?

No he said he would leave his money in the club in such a way that it improves the financial scoring, isn't that something you said would not be possible to fudge the finances? Then if it wasn't you I apologise for inferring it was.

[gittinsfan]

11 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

The rest of the clubs will have a vote just the same as they did for the IMG proposals.

I'm not saying the clubs will vote for 14 teams, and IMO part of the problem is the clubs having the say on it in the first place.

Various posters on this forum sugges that only SL clubs have a say in expanding SL.I accept this may not be true.