IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[sentoffagain2]

      Toulouse have beaten Wakefield once this season.If they beat them away and then again in the play offs 3 out of 3  Wakefield will still be elevated to SL because of the IMG scoring system.I don't know about the rest of you but i think that would be crazy.

[Rioman]

45 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

      Toulouse have beaten Wakefield once this season.If they beat them away and then again in the play offs 3 out of 3  Wakefield will still be elevated to SL because of the IMG scoring system.I don't know about the rest of you but i think that would be crazy.

Already played at Wakefield . Wakefield won 28-12.      Currently one game apiece.

[sentoffagain2]

18 minutes ago, Rioman said:

Already played at Wakefield . Wakefield won 28-12.      Currently one game apiece.

     Missed that i don't keep a check on Wakefields results so even if Toulouse beat Wakefield in the play offs it weakens my argument.Thank you for pointing out my mistake.

[stookie]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

just like my club Wakefield

You jumping ship Harry?

[Harry Stottle]

11 minutes ago, stookie said:

You jumping ship Harry?

Nothing like highlighting selective text to create a whole new meaning Stookie

[binosh]

I wonder if The RFL and SL have ever considered just biting the bullet at all and pitching to Sky that for a measly (in comparison to football) extra 5 million per season we could have a 14 team SL, all televised with home and away games rather than loop Fixtures whilst having London, Toulouse and AN other team all in the top flight?

 

[oiseau]

1 hour ago, binosh said:

I wonder if The RFL and SL have ever considered just biting the bullet at all and pitching to Sky that for a measly (in comparison to football) extra 5 million per season we could have a 14 team SL, all televised with home and away games rather than loop Fixtures whilst having London, Toulouse and AN other team all in the top flight?

 

That’s far too sensible !

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, binosh said:

I wonder if The RFL and SL have ever considered just biting the bullet at all and pitching to Sky that for a measly (in comparison to football) extra 5 million per season we could have a 14 team SL, all televised with home and away games rather than loop Fixtures whilst having London, Toulouse and AN other team all in the top flight?

 

Why is that attractive to Sky? 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Dave T said:

Why is that attractive to Sky? 

Was just going to say, why would they buy that?

Sky want certain teams and certain games at certain points on TV, that's why two thirds of our games are going on Sky Sports +. The rest is nice but not necessary to them, it just supports what they want.

[Agbrigg]

1 hour ago, binosh said:

I wonder if The RFL and SL have ever considered just biting the bullet at all and pitching to Sky that for a measly (in comparison to football) extra 5 million per season we could have a 14 team SL, all televised with home and away games rather than loop Fixtures whilst having London, Toulouse and AN other team all in the top flight?

 

Or looking at it another way. All these IMG  point criteria are areas that purport to make clubs far more healthy financially. So if that is the case then surely they could manage quite easily with a bit less Sky funding and expand the SL in a way that you suggest. 

However if clubs embrace the IMG guidelines and reach the A status but yet still can't  afford to lower Central funding to establish a 14 team league. I would suggest IMG is worthless exercise  because as it achieves nothing. 

[ATLANTISMAN]

13 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:

Or looking at it another way. All these IMG  point criteria are areas that purport to make clubs far more healthy financially. So if that is the case then surely they could manage quite easily with a bit less Sky funding and expand the SL in a way that you suggest. 

However if clubs embrace the IMG guidelines and reach the A status but yet still can't  afford to lower Central funding to establish a 14 team league. I would suggest IMG is worthless exercise  because as it achieves nothing. 

5 SL clubs will not receive IMG points for LED unless they completely  upgrade buy or replace existing systems and that includes St Helens.

Cost around 400 K + for a new system.

Cas also don't have one at all and Wakey will need to buy one.

[fighting irish]

33 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

5 SL clubs will not receive IMG points for LED unless they completely  upgrade buy or replace existing systems and that includes St Helens.

Cost around 400 K + for a new system.

Cas also don't have one at all and Wakey will need to buy one.

LED?

 

[Roughyed Rats]

46 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

5 SL clubs will not receive IMG points for LED unless they completely  upgrade buy or replace existing systems and that includes St Helens.

Cost around 400 K + for a new system.

Cas also don't have one at all and Wakey will need to buy one.

Just hire one in for match days like Bradford are doing. Nothing in the IMG criteria that says it has to be a permanent fixture or be owned

Edited August 6 by Roughyed Rats

[ATLANTISMAN]

44 minutes ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Just hire one in for match days like Bradford are doing. Nothing in the IMG criteria that says it has to be a permanent fixture or be owned

200m is 20K per match 

[phiggins]

1 hour ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

5 SL clubs will not receive IMG points for LED unless they completely  upgrade buy or replace existing systems and that includes St Helens.

Cost around 400 K + for a new system.

Cas also don't have one at all and Wakey will need to buy one.

And who are the others?

[Archie Gordon]

1 hour ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

5 SL clubs will not receive IMG points for LED unless they completely  upgrade buy or replace existing systems and that includes St Helens.

...

The IMG gradings currently ensure that Saints don't need to bother.

[Dave T]

 

1 hour ago, fighting irish said:

LED?

 

 

1 hour ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Just hire one in for match days like Bradford are doing. Nothing in the IMG criteria that says it has to be a permanent fixture or be owned

LED advertising boards is what's being referred to here, along the three camera-facing sides. 

Looks like the clubs in SL who currently miss out on the 0.125pts are Salford, Wire, Cas, Hull KR and Saints. 

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Just hire one in for match days like Bradford are doing. Nothing in the IMG criteria that says it has to be a permanent fixture or be owned

Why is that an issue? 

[Roughyed Rats]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

Why is that an issue? 

It’s not an issue, it’s a solution.

[gingerjon]

33 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

The IMG gradings currently ensure that Saints don't need to bother.

It should be in the minimum standards and then everyone would have to.

[phiggins]

9 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It should be in the minimum standards and then everyone would have to.

You could create minimum standards for all the pillars bar performance and reduce that to a one year assessment.

I do agree with your point though. If IMG think LED screens are needed, then enforce them

[Gav Wilson]

1 hour ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Just hire one in for match days like Bradford are doing. Nothing in the IMG criteria that says it has to be a permanent fixture or be owned

It made me smile a few weeks ago when I went to Odsal to watch the Knights. The big screen they've hired on the back of that transit van that sits at the top of the hill was showing a feed from a police drone display, and when the actual game was on they turned it off.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, phiggins said:

You could create minimum standards for all the pillars bar performance and reduce that to a one year assessment.

I do agree with your point though. If IMG think LED screens are needed, then enforce them

Minimum standards are down to the RFL.

It's another example of their cowardice.

[dboy]

1 hour ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Just hire one in for match days like Bradford are doing. Nothing in the IMG criteria that says it has to be a permanent fixture or be owned

The hired in ones do not meet the spec.

I also understand that the considerable detail that clubs receive DOES make it clear they are to be permanent fixtures.

Interestingly, I'm told that Wakey's is actually too small and is about to be replaced.

[Roughyed Rats]

4 minutes ago, dboy said:

The hired in ones do not meet the spec.

I also understand that the considerable detail that clubs receive DOES make it clear they are to be permanent fixtures.

Interestingly, I'm told that Wakey's is actually too small and is about to be replaced.

Incorrect. The clubs receive what’s already in the public domain. Nothing more than that. Bradford put out a post on social media stating they would be increasing their IMG score as a result of using the ‘van screen’.