IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[JohnM]

2 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:

Well if you cant be bothered to look for it yourself, why should I

It's up to you to make your case. You made the claim, now you substantiate it. 

[Agbrigg]

1 minute ago, JohnM said:

It's up to you to make your case. You made the claim, now you substantiate it. 

£7.8 million

[Agbrigg]

Just now, Agbrigg said:

 

 

Edited September 9 by Agbrigg

[PREPOSTEROUS]

6 minutes ago, JohnM said:

It's evidence and proof that counts. 

So , can anyone  tell us how much has been paid by the RFL or anyone else, and for what deliverables?

I don't think there will be much hard evidence, more reports from the press.

https://www.totalrl.com/talking-rugby-league-rfls-surprise-bill-from-img-raises-questions/

As Sadler writes, the RFL will not disclose commercially sensitive information so that's as much as we plebs will ever know.

 

[Hopie]

3 hours ago, Damien said:

Just joking mate, of course I presumed you were in the posh seats with your prawn crackers.

It was prawn sandwiches at Old Trafford, glad we haven't got that posh!

5 hours ago, Dave T said:

It's just really dumb analysis and makes RL people look like a bunch of neanderthals unable to actually understand the complexities of sport and how a team can have a poor season for a huge number of reasons.

 

I don't think Hull being ###### this year is because of IMG, but there is a case to be made that a lack of relegation can harm teams, like it did when Huddersfield regularly finished bottom, and were much better off going down to come back up. 
Wakefield will have found benefits from their time in the Championship this year, as Cas did, as Leigh did etc etc. That is one of the many reasons I find this very high bar for promotion (which I believe will effectively become a closed door) and relegation to be unfair and unjustified, and not the change we need to see in the way the game is structured. 

[JohnM]

8 hours ago, PREPOSTEROUS said:

I don't think there will be much hard evidence, more reports from the press.

https://www.totalrl.com/talking-rugby-league-rfls-surprise-bill-from-img-raises-questions/

As Sadler writes, the RFL will not disclose commercially sensitive information so that's as much as we plebs will ever know.

 

Thanks for that.  Given that's about the most solid evidence presented so far, it's a long stretch to reach the claims made by some posters.

However, that's their version of the truth and they are not going to be swayed by the facts ( or absence of facts).  From the article, the  words in bold are not going to please those  critics. 

"To be fair to IMG, most clubs have told me that IMG’s advice has enabled them to significantly improve their digital operations and it may be that the payment is fully justified, both by the outcome of that work and its inclusion in the IMG contract with the RFL."

Edited September 9 by JohnM

[Roughyed Rats]

6 hours ago, JohnM said:

Thanks for that.  Given that's about the most solid evidence presented so far, it's a long stretch to reach the claims made by some posters.

However, that's their version of the truth and they are not going to be swayed by the facts ( or absence of facts).  From the article, the  words in bold are not going to please those  critics. 

"To be fair to IMG, most clubs have told me that IMG’s advice has enabled them to significantly improve their digital operations and it may be that the payment is fully justified, both by the outcome of that work and its inclusion in the IMG contract with the RFL."

If that paid for advice has only been provided to SL clubs, and it’s enabled them to significantly improve their digital operations. How’s that level playing field for the digital engagement IMG scoring looking?

Edited September 10 by Roughyed Rats

[gingerjon]

10 minutes ago, Roughyed Rats said:

If that paid for advice has only been provided to SL clubs, and it’s enabled them to significantly improve their digital operations. How’s that level playing field for the digital engagement IMG scoring looking?

Why would it only have been provided to SL clubs when all clubs are graded?

[Roughyed Rats]

9 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Why would it only have been provided to SL clubs when all clubs are graded?

Exactly my point. 

Edited September 10 by Roughyed Rats

[gingerjon]

24 minutes ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Exactly my point. 

Your point is that it will very obviously have been provided to all clubs?

Good to know.

[Roughyed Rats]

19 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Your point is that it will very obviously have been provided to all clubs?

Good to know.

Nope. I suggest you contact the RFL and ask.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Roughyed Rats said:

Nope. I suggest you contact the RFL and ask.

I'll just work on the assumption that a partnership between IMG, the RFL and RFL Commercial is available to all members of the RFL, given that they are all involved with it, until I see literally anything to suggest otherwise.

[Harry Stottle]

19 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

1. Agree, you can’t really judge Hulls season based on a different system,

2. If relegation was in play they may have made some different decisions which might have ‘saved’ them from the drop.

 

1. Yes you can.

2. There you go, you have just answered No 1.

Hull would have strived to make sure in regular P&R they would have avoided the drop, the 'system' took away the jeopardy, they have played the system no matter how anyone wants to dress it up.

[ATLANTISMAN]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

1. Yes you can.

2. There you go, you have just answered No 1.

Hull would have strived to make sure in regular P&R they would have avoided the drop, the 'system' took away the jeopardy, they have played the system no matter how anyone wants to dress it up.

With the signings that they have made for next season i can see the Championship on the horizon  

[RP London]

1 hour ago, Roughyed Rats said:

If that paid for advice has only been provided to SL clubs, and it’s enabled them to significantly improve their digital operations. How’s that level playing field for the digital engagement IMG scoring looking?

The word "if" at the beginning of that post is doing an awful lot of heavy lifting.

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

14 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

1. Yes you can.

2. There you go, you have just answered No 1.

Hull would have strived to make sure in regular P&R they would have avoided the drop, the 'system' took away the jeopardy, they have played the system no matter how anyone wants to dress it up.

Disagree Harry, we can only assume what Hull would have done under P&R.  However we know exactly what Hull have done under IMG and however much the IMG fans on here try to convince themselves, it don't look good.

[Harry Stottle]

7 hours ago, JohnM said:

Thanks for that.  Given that's about the most solid evidence presented so far, it's a long stretch to reach the claims made by some posters.

However, that's their version of the truth and they are not going to be swayed by the facts ( or absence of facts).  From the article, the  words in bold are not going to please those  critics. 

"To be fair to IMG, most clubs have told me that IMG’s advice has enabled them to significantly improve their digital operations and it may be that the payment is fully justified, both by the outcome of that work and its inclusion in the IMG contract with the RFL."

Why miss out theses words John:-

"Obviously that raises the question of who, exactly, has seen and read through the contract with IMG.

I’m quite sure that the clubs haven’t and I wonder whether the non-executive directors of both the RFL and RL Commercial have done so.

If so, I wonder whether any of them raised any objection to this deal when it was presented to them."

Obviously those words do not suit your narrative, so those words are not going to please the supporters of this contract.

 

[RP London]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Why miss out theses words John:-

"Obviously that raises the question of who, exactly, has seen and read through the contract with IMG.

I’m quite sure that the clubs haven’t and I wonder whether the non-executive directors of both the RFL and RL Commercial have done so.

If so, I wonder whether any of them raised any objection to this deal when it was presented to them."

Obviously those words do not suit your narrative, so those words are not going to please the supporters of this contract.

 

"I'm quite sure" and "I wonder whether" do not mean that they have any evidence for it and its just pure speculation on the authors part.. 

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, RP London said:

"I'm quite sure" and "I wonder whether" do not mean that they have any evidence for it and its just pure speculation on the authors part.. 

Listen to the TRL podcast with Mr Beaumont, it is discussed on there that the contract was not disclosed to the clubs.

Edited September 10 by Harry Stottle

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Listen to the TRL podcast with Mr Beaumont, it is discussed on there that the contract was not disclosed to the clubs.

I've listened to it and quite honestly I question a lot of what comes out of his mouth, including an awful lot on the podcase. Any and all of it I would want corroborated by other owners. Now you may say that is becuase of a narrative I have but I have always been very open with the fact that I have my doubts on IMG but I am willing to give them a go. I just also believe, from experience of listening to him before, that Beaumont will say whatever he needs to to prove a point he is trying to make and its not always accurate and he doesn't speak for everyone (ie he may have chosen to ignore it etc). I have a lot of time for what he has done at leigh but I wouldn't trust him based on historical inacuracies in his past social media outbursts and his general treatment of people and players in the past. 

[JohnM]

Beaumont used to be a double -glazing salesman. Just sayin'.

[gingerjon]

35 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

we know exactly what Hull have done under IMG

Sack the coach, change the team around?

[Harry Stottle]

16 minutes ago, RP London said:

I've listened to it and quite honestly I question a lot of what comes out of his mouth, including an awful lot on the podcase. Any and all of it I would want corroborated by other owners. Now you may say that is becuase of a narrative I have but I have always been very open with the fact that I have my doubts on IMG but I am willing to give them a go. I just also believe, from experience of listening to him before, that Beaumont will say whatever he needs to to prove a point he is trying to make and its not always accurate and he doesn't speak for everyone (ie he may have chosen to ignore it etc). I have a lot of time for what he has done at leigh but I wouldn't trust him based on historical inacuracies in his past social media outbursts and his general treatment of people and players in the past. 

Is that a round about way of saying 'Liar' ?

[bobbruce]

7 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Beaumont used to be a double -glazing salesman. Just sayin'.

 

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Sack the coach, change the team around?

Sell the club (or at least get new investment) put a new ceo in place. 

Edited September 10 by bobbruce

[gingerjon]

And St Helens show exactly why IMG - or, if not IMG, then an IMG-esque replacement - is needed. When your top clubs are losing this much year on year ...

https://www.saintsrlfc.com/2024/09/10/st-helens-announce-increased-losses-for-2023/?swcfpc=1