IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[JohnM]

Going right back to first principles, looking at the various presentations and non-RL journalistic pieces, the only P&R mention is that it will no longer be automatic. The joint RFL/IMG presentation gradings timeline mentions the possibility of 14 SL teams of grade A in 202?.

Two questions:

1. Under what circumstances can an existing grade A SL team drop down to the Championship?

2. Under what circumstances an existing Grade A Championship side move up to SuperLeague?

 

[dboy]

36 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Going right back to first principles, looking at the various presentations and non-RL journalistic pieces, the only P&R mention is that it will no longer be automatic. The joint RFL/IMG presentation gradings timeline mentions the possibility of 14 SL teams of grade A in 202?.

Two questions:

1. Under what circumstances can an existing grade A SL team drop down to the Championship?

2. Under what circumstances an existing Grade A Championship side move up to SuperLeague?

 

1. There are 12 Grade A clubs with higher scores.

2. Their score is in the top 12 scores.

Under point 1 in your scenario we have to assume SL have decided not to expand beyond the top 12. Of course, they did say Grade A = SL, but when will we actually see 12+ Grade A clubs??

I'm not completely sure of the scenario you are suggsting in point 2.

[JM2010]

12 minutes ago, dboy said:

1. There are 12 Grade A clubs with higher scores.

2. Their score is in the top 12 scores.

Under point 1 in your scenario we have to assume SL have decided not to expand beyond the top 12. Of course, they did say Grade A = SL, but when will we actually see 12+ Grade A clubs??

I'm not completely sure of the scenario you are suggsting in point 2.

I think if we get to more than 12 Grade As then it might be time to expand SL

[Agbrigg]

1 minute ago, JM2010 said:

I think if we get to more than 12 Grade As then it might be time to expand SL

IMG have tinkered with things already and as time goes by there will be many more problems that crop up that were not thought through properly. So you ask a good question and the answer could be to expand. Then again they may decide to create and A plus or AA standard to keep the numbers the same or even reduce them. My guess is that it wont matter that much, they'll be gone in a couple of years.

[Hopie]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

Going right back to first principles, looking at the various presentations and non-RL journalistic pieces, the only P&R mention is that it will no longer be automatic. The joint RFL/IMG presentation gradings timeline mentions the possibility of 14 SL teams of grade A in 202?.

Two questions:

1. Under what circumstances can an existing grade A SL team drop down to the Championship?

2. Under what circumstances an existing Grade A Championship side move up to SuperLeague?

 

The first scenario won't happen this year, the second seems very unlikely, and I don't think your questions are entirely answerable, because there is some contradictory information out there.

1. It is stated that if a Super League club is grade A it remains in Super League, but there are various ways a club can lose that grade in the documentation, even if their grading points don't change.    

2. If there are more A grade clubs than spots in Super League things will be "looked at", however the criteria will make it increasingly difficult for a non-super league club to be graded A over the next 3 seasons. If there aren't more, then that is when promotion occurs. 

[dboy]

20 minutes ago, JM2010 said:

I think if we get to more than 12 Grade As then it might be time to expand SL

I agree, but that wasn't the premise of the question posed.

I think the game should be making a 14 team SL work regardless.

It's not impossible.

[JohnM]

What happens if an SL club loses it's Grade A status?

What happens if an SL club fails or goes out of business? 

"IMG have tinkered with things already and as time goes by there will be many more problems that crop up that were not thought through properly"

The RFL would be rightly criticised if they stuck rigidly to the day one detail. It seems to me entirely proper to fine-tune any system as it develops and as information/consequences not immediately available at the outset becomes known.

Of course, the confirmed critics (however small in number) of the RFL's project are not going to sit by quietly and watch it succeed. Unlike the neutrals, the floaters and those who are genuinely concerned about certain aspects of the RFL project, there are some whose ritual and overwhelming condemnation of the project has resulted in their credibility being shot. 

Edited September 16 by JohnM

[Adelaide Tiger]

15 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

How did you make your millions Lee, just asking.

And how much have you given to charities and other needy causes?

Harry, no need to be so condescending.  I look at the issue of individuals giving to charity from a different perspective.

I think more of a person earning for example £400 a week and giving say £10 a week to charities of their choice than of someone who has a net worth of £30m - as an article states that this is Beaumont’s net worth - and may gives £1m a year to charities.

It is a far bigger commitment to give to charity when you are on a low wage than knowing that you still having millions in the bank.

[gingerjon]

16 hours ago, bobbruce said:

Is there a sport in the UK where the governing body pick the TV games and not the broadcaster. 

Even soccer gets dictated to by the broadcasters. The only concession being that most times - not all - there is at least a minimum of a few weeks notice.

[RP London]

12 hours ago, JM2010 said:

I think if we get to more than 12 Grade As then it might be time to expand SL

IF we get 12 Grade As then the clubs will be in a really good financial position that a 14 team super league will not be such a big problem as it is now in terms of having to split central funding 14 ways instead of 12 etc. The wise money as well would be on the fact that if we had more than 12 clubs at that level the general product would be worth more in terms of media and advertising etc.. so it should pay for itself. 

Now that is conjecture admittedly but its easily modelled out and to an extent thats all you can go on because, frankly, 1. when have we had 12 -14 clubs with that sort of turnover, quality stadiums etc and 2. it would be expected to be a few years down the track at which point IMG will have their own confidence in their ability to actually do what they have said they will with these improved clubs. 

Yes you have to trust IMG on this but if you have a strategy document you have to put your trust in someone to execute said strategy, the document isnt doing it for itself, so even if it was the RFL or, indeed, the company you work for the growth predictions and plans are always based on trusting that you have the right people employed to do the job you are planning for. You only ever know that when the execution phases starts (and IMHO we're still at the foundations stage where nothing of any substance can really be done until the first grading is complete and the emphasis and time can come away from that activity).

[RP London]

11 hours ago, dboy said:

I agree, but that wasn't the premise of the question posed.

I think the game should be making a 14 team SL work regardless.

It's not impossible.

At the moment it would arguably be difficult to make that work in terms of clubs losing share of funding (which has already gone down), the only way to make a "14 team SL work regardless" is if more money came into the game to fund the other 2 teams without taking away from the 12. However, it should 100% be the aim.

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, RP London said:

At the moment it would arguably be difficult to make that work in terms of clubs losing share of funding (which has already gone down), the only way to make a "14 team SL work regardless" is if more money came into the game to fund the other 2 teams without taking away from the 12. However, it should 100% be the aim.

Yes the funding share has gone down a tad for the 12 SL clubs, by a mere £800,000 in a few short years, it was in the region of 2.1M now 1.3ish.

So two extra teams should effectively have extra sponsers away from the present League Funding? Would that be up to RL Commercial/IMG/RFL to source for these extra teams?

And on another aspect do you not consider that having two extra teams would somewhat dilute the quality of the competition with the players of the required quality available, or would we have to increase the numbers of allowed 'non fed' trained players per club from the present 7 per team to maintain the standard? that would to me create further problems in that should the Salary Cap be raised to accomdate more overseas players if so then the richer clubs benefit most and *the gap widens and it would mean less opportunities for homegrown talent barring injuries and suspensions for I shouldn't imagine clubs would be bringing in overseas players to sit in the stands.

* I expect that this IMG system will effectively be a closed shop before it officially becomes one and if it is increased from 12 to 14 teams and the richer clubs go further away than the rest in terms of on-field quality, then come the mid point of the season there will nothing for a lot of clubs to play for and there will be more matches that are meaningless in terms of results, and we know what happens then as one if our present 'A' grade clubs have shown this season.

I think there is a lot more to consider than just the funding aspect when we talk about increasing the League from the present 12 to 14 teams, I agree it would be much better even if it only got rid of the stupid loopy fixtures but I cant see it happening any time soon - if ever, and I hope not without bringing jeopardy back into the equation.

[RP London]

8 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes the funding share has gone down a tad for the 12 SL clubs, by a mere £800,000 in a few short years, it was in the region of 2.1M now 1.3ish.

So two extra teams should effectively have extra sponsers away from the present League Funding? Would that be up to RL Commercial/IMG/RFL to source for these extra teams?

And on another aspect do you not consider that having two extra teams would somewhat dilute the quality of the competition with the players of the required quality available, or would we have to increase the numbers of allowed 'non fed' trained players per club from the present 7 per team to maintain the standard? that would to me create further problems in that should the Salary Cap be raised to accomdate more overseas players if so then the richer clubs benefit most and *the gap widens and it would mean less opportunities for homegrown talent barring injuries and suspensions for I shouldn't imagine clubs would be bringing in overseas players to sit in the stands.

* I expect that this IMG system will effectively be a closed shop before it officially becomes one and if it is increased from 12 to 14 teams and the richer clubs go further away than the rest in terms of on-field quality, then come the mid point of the season there will nothing for a lot of clubs to play for and there will be more matches that are meaningless in terms of results, and we know what happens then as one if our present 'A' grade clubs have shown this season.

I think there is a lot more to consider than just the funding aspect when we talk about increasing the League from the present 12 to 14 teams, I agree it would be much better even if it only got rid of the stupid loopy fixtures but I cant see it happening any time soon - if ever, and I hope not without bringing jeopardy back into the equation.

yes, but you can stop thinking of all the other problems when the big one stops you before you need to get there.. otherwise you waste time and effort thinking about things that are utterly irrelevant until the first bit is fixed which may also, by accident or design fix some of the others anyway, and time may do. 

Equally I am not sure why you expect someone who has a job away from Rugby League can/should be able to answer the problems of the entire sport in one post.. 

However, to cover some of them I direct you to the post I made before I made the post you quoted, just in case you missed it rather than ignoring it to post lots of difficult/impossible/long to answer questions that will then be picked apart using more conjecture because it will be conjecture that answers them in the first place in due to lack of information/time to really go into it.. (it pretty much answers the questions you pose except when you pose and answer your own one about fed trained/salary cap players which is definitely something that you would consider closer to the time as so much can change between now and then with academy qualities, employment law etc etc so to try and work that one out now seems silly IMHO)

59 minutes ago, RP London said:

IF we get 12 Grade As then the clubs will be in a really good financial position that a 14 team super league will not be such a big problem as it is now in terms of having to split central funding 14 ways instead of 12 etc. The wise money as well would be on the fact that if we had more than 12 clubs at that level the general product would be worth more in terms of media and advertising etc.. so it should pay for itself. 

Now that is conjecture admittedly but its easily modelled out and to an extent thats all you can go on because, frankly, 1. when have we had 12 -14 clubs with that sort of turnover, quality stadiums etc and 2. it would be expected to be a few years down the track at which point IMG will have their own confidence in their ability to actually do what they have said they will with these improved clubs. 

Yes you have to trust IMG on this but if you have a strategy document you have to put your trust in someone to execute said strategy, the document isnt doing it for itself, so even if it was the RFL or, indeed, the company you work for the growth predictions and plans are always based on trusting that you have the right people employed to do the job you are planning for. You only ever know that when the execution phases starts (and IMHO we're still at the foundations stage where nothing of any substance can really be done until the first grading is complete and the emphasis and time can come away from that activity).

 

Edited September 16 by RP London

[JM2010]

20 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes the funding share has gone down a tad for the 12 SL clubs, by a mere £800,000 in a few short years, it was in the region of 2.1M now 1.3ish.

So two extra teams should effectively have extra sponsers away from the present League Funding? Would that be up to RL Commercial/IMG/RFL to source for these extra teams?

And on another aspect do you not consider that having two extra teams would somewhat dilute the quality of the competition with the players of the required quality available, or would we have to increase the numbers of allowed 'non fed' trained players per club from the present 7 per team to maintain the standard? that would to me create further problems in that should the Salary Cap be raised to accomdate more overseas players if so then the richer clubs benefit most and *the gap widens and it would mean less opportunities for homegrown talent barring injuries and suspensions for I shouldn't imagine clubs would be bringing in overseas players to sit in the stands.

* I expect that this IMG system will effectively be a closed shop before it officially becomes one and if it is increased from 12 to 14 teams and the richer clubs go further away than the rest in terms of on-field quality, then come the mid point of the season there will nothing for a lot of clubs to play for and there will be more matches that are meaningless in terms of results, and we know what happens then as one if our present 'A' grade clubs have shown this season.

I think there is a lot more to consider than just the funding aspect when we talk about increasing the League from the present 12 to 14 teams, I agree it would be much better even if it only got rid of the stupid loopy fixtures but I cant see it happening any time soon - if ever, and I hope not without bringing jeopardy back into the equation.

Hopefully if we end up with 14 grade A clubs then that might result in more clubs bringing players through the academies and more juniors playing the game in general which might help with having enough players to accommodate 2 extra clubs. 

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

yes, but you can stop thinking of all the other problems when the big one stops you before you need to get there.. otherwise you waste time and effort thinking about things that are utterly irrelevant until the first bit is fixed which may also, by accident or design fix some of the others anyway, and time may do. 

Equally I am not sure why you expect someone who has a job away from Rugby League can/should be able to answer the problems of the entire sport in one post.. 

However, to cover some of them I direct you to the post I made before I made the post you quoted, just in case you missed it rather than ignoring it to post lots of difficult/impossible/long to answer questions that will then be picked apart using more conjecture because it will be conjecture that answers them in the first place in due to lack of information/time to really go into it.. (it pretty much answers the questions you pose except when you pose and answer your own one about fed trained/salary cap players which is definitely something that you would consider closer to the time as so much can change between now and then with academy qualities, employment law etc etc so to try and work that one out now seems silly IMHO)

 

Yes there are lots of different scenarios to consider moving to 14 teams, but you seem to just be saying let's do it and take it from there.

[RP London]

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes there are lots of different scenarios to consider moving to 14 teams, but you seem to just be saying let's do it and take it from there.

Harry I think you are responding to the wrong person on this... I specifically said (and you have quoted one of the posts I put it in) that we should not be doing that becuase we absolutely cannot afford to do it.. however, it should be an aim to be getting the game to the point where that is possible.. 

I mean I know you dont agree with me on IMG but just making things up is a real new low for you.. 

[The Blues Ox]

SL is never expanding and I am not sure where these other 2 Grade A teams will come from to make it 14. There is no Championship team that can realisticaly get to 15 points.

[Taffy Tiger]

4 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes the funding share has gone down a tad for the 12 SL clubs, by a mere £800,000 in a few short years, it was in the region of 2.1M now 1.3ish.

So two extra teams should effectively have extra sponsers away from the present League Funding? Would that be up to RL Commercial/IMG/RFL to source for these extra teams?

And on another aspect do you not consider that having two extra teams would somewhat dilute the quality of the competition with the players of the required quality available, or would we have to increase the numbers of allowed 'non fed' trained players per club from the present 7 per team to maintain the standard? that would to me create further problems in that should the Salary Cap be raised to accomdate more overseas players if so then the richer clubs benefit most and *the gap widens and it would mean less opportunities for homegrown talent barring injuries and suspensions for I shouldn't imagine clubs would be bringing in overseas players to sit in the stands.

* I expect that this IMG system will effectively be a closed shop before it officially becomes one and if it is increased from 12 to 14 teams and the richer clubs go further away than the rest in terms of on-field quality, then come the mid point of the season there will nothing for a lot of clubs to play for and there will be more matches that are meaningless in terms of results, and we know what happens then as one if our present 'A' grade clubs have shown this season.

I think there is a lot more to consider than just the funding aspect when we talk about increasing the League from the present 12 to 14 teams, I agree it would be much better even if it only got rid of the stupid loopy fixtures but I cant see it happening any time soon - if ever, and I hope not without bringing jeopardy back into the equation.

Hi Harry , have to disagree with you on the following

 

 I expect that this IMG system will effectively be a closed shop before it officially becomes one and if it is increased from 12 to 14 teams and the richer clubs go further away than the rest in terms of on-field quality, then come the mid point of the season there will nothing for a lot of clubs to play for and there will be more matches that are meaningless in terms of results, and we know what happens then as one if our present 'A' grade clubs have shown this season.

 

In response to your above quote , and only my opinion of course , but I think there will be far fewer meaningless games under the IMG system . In any season previous to this with P&R , Cas's season would have finished with around 8 or 9 games still to play , as it became clear that Hull or London would be fighting it out for who finished bottom , and with Cas too far away from realistically finishing in the top 6 , we would have had nothing to play for . This season , and under the IMG system we have been trying for 9th , even though this wouldn't have got us any extra performance points this year , because we know that , when taken as a  3 year average , it could make a difference to our scores in the future .

Last season was even worse for dead-rubbers as it became clear at the half way stage , with Wakey 0-14 and Cas 3-11 that it could only be one of us that would be relegated , and once teams in 7-10 couldn't reach the play-offs , their season was effectively over .

Under this IMG system you have something to play for until the team below you can't catch you , and you can't catch the team above you . 

 

 

 

Edited September 16 by Taffy Tiger

[Harry Stottle]

24 minutes ago, Taffy Tiger said:

Hi Harry , have to disagree with you on the following

 

 I expect that this IMG system will effectively be a closed shop before it officially becomes one and if it is increased from 12 to 14 teams and the richer clubs go further away than the rest in terms of on-field quality, then come the mid point of the season there will nothing for a lot of clubs to play for and there will be more matches that are meaningless in terms of results, and we know what happens then as one if our present 'A' grade clubs have shown this season.

 

In response to your above quote , and only my opinion of course , but I think there will be far fewer meaningless games under the IMG system . In any season previous to this with P&R , Cas's season would have finished with around 8 or 9 games still to play , as it became clear that Hull or London would be fighting it out for who finished bottom , and with Cas too far away from realistically finishing in the top 6 , we would have had nothing to play for . This season , and under the IMG system we have been trying for 9th , even though this wouldn't have got us any extra performance points this year , because we know that , when taken as a  3 year average , it could make a difference to our scores in the future .

Last season was even worse for dead-rubbers as it became clear at the half way stage , with Wakey 0-14 and Cas 3-11 that it could only be one of us that would be relegated , and once teams in 7-10 couldn't reach the play-offs , their season was effectively over .

Under this IMG system you have something to play for until the team below you can't catch you , and you can't catch the team above you . 

 

 

 

Hi Taffy, not disagreeing with you on that explanation but you give last year as an example, not to long ago we had 4 teams who could possibly have been relegated going into the last game of the season it was as intriguing as it was exiting seeing it unfold on the field of play, but realistically I am suggesting what will happen in a closed shop situation, which I believe if not officially announced it will effectively be such in a couple of seasons in IMG's format, like @The Blues Ox I can't see any championship club breaking into the top 12 such is the advantage/weighting SL clubs have in the scoring criteria. At that time I do believe we will have meaningless fixtures.

Edited September 16 by Harry Stottle

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

SL is never expanding and I am not sure where these other 2 Grade A teams will come from to make it 14. There is no Championship team that can realisticaly get to 15 points.

Expansion to 14 SL clubs is clearly set out as a possibility -not a probability - in the project on slide 9

Slide 10 states THE SECOND & THIRD TIER ARE IMPERATIVE FOR THE GROWTH  OF THE GAME
+ Significant role in driving growth through participation, fan engagement and player development.
+ Objective is to develop highly competitive leagues and subsequently increase exposure (broadcast, digital and OTT).
+ Season peaks to include 1895 Cup Final and Grand Final Days for second and third tier.
+ Proportion of central funds remains constant – as game grows,  so does the distribution.
+ 14 teams in second tier in 2024, number of teams in third tier to remain flexible.
+ Promotion and relegation between second and third tier based on performance

IIt should be remembered that it's a twelve year project. Who is to say that there won't be current ambitious and capable  Championship clubs working towards a stronger Championship competition and EVENTUAL Grade A and admission to SL. Doesn't havetobe today, not tomorrow, not even in 5 years time. 

 

[Taffy Tiger]

21 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hi Taffy, not disagreeing with you on that explanation but you give last year as an example, not to long ago we had 4 teams who could possibly have been relegated going into the last game of the season it was as intriguing as it was exiting seeing it unfold on the field of play, but realistically I am suggesting what will happen in a closed shop situation, which I believe if not officially announced it will effectively be such in a couple of seasons in IMG's format, like @The Blues Ox I can't see any championship club breaking into the top 12 such is the advantage/weighting SL clubs have in the scoring criteria. At that time I do believe we will have meaningless fixtures.

Hi Harry , yes I agree I am coming it at it form a cas point of view in the last 2 seasons,  and fully agree that if the RFL were to announce that we were to operate under a franchise system once 14 teams were in SL , then there would be more meaningless games . However , and under the current system , I do think that every game will matter until you can't catch the team above you and the team below you can't catch you . 

I don't think it will necessarily become a closed shop if we go to 14 teams under the current system either , as the '15th team' would have a similar chance to that of the '13th team' now , and if we look at Wakey this year they must have at least a small chance of a category A , but I do take on board that their chances of achieving a Category A grading are somewhat less than that of a current SL club at face value , however it's the 0.35 points extra that are up for grabs each season for the top Championship team that does level the playing field considerably , and although it would be a challenge , I can see no reason why the extra 0.35 points shouldn't elevate a top Championship team to Category A status in the future . At the end of the day , surely it has to be better to have only the strongest all round teams in the top tier .

[Archie Gordon]

10 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Expansion to 14 SL clubs is clearly set out as a possibility -not a probability - in the project on slide 9

Slide 10 states THE SECOND & THIRD TIER ARE IMPERATIVE FOR THE GROWTH  OF THE GAME
+ Significant role in driving growth through participation, fan engagement and player development.
+ Objective is to develop highly competitive leagues and subsequently increase exposure (broadcast, digital and OTT).
+ Season peaks to include 1895 Cup Final and Grand Final Days for second and third tier.
+ Proportion of central funds remains constant – as game grows,  so does the distribution.
+ 14 teams in second tier in 2024, number of teams in third tier to remain flexible.
+ Promotion and relegation between second and third tier based on performance

IIt should be remembered that it's a twelve year project. Who is to say that there won't be current ambitious and capable  Championship clubs working towards a stronger Championship competition and EVENTUAL Grade A and admission to SL. Doesn't havetobe today, not tomorrow, not even in 5 years time. 

 

Thanks for the reminder of this.

I think this looks like another 'lip service' slide - a bit like France, London and women being important. It is already out-of-date re the size of the Championship - but that is not the issue. The bigger problem is that the 2nd/3rd tier don't seem to be important at all.

Having been reminded of this slide, I do think that central funding shouldn't be so cliff edge. If you really wanted to encourage a club with potential in the 2nd/3rd tier, you would invest in them - a Champ club scoring 12.5 seems a much better investment to me than a SL club scoring 13.

[JohnM]

That's an issue in my view, though. Why does it look like a "lip service" issue? It's easy to say that this or that looks like a "lip service" slide, though clearly nowhere near as extreme as some who have dismissed the whole project out of hand. 

Objective three remains: Drive growth and maximise revenues from which the full Rugby League pyramid will benefit, including Championship, League 1, women’s, wheelchair and community game.

However, Not only are the resources available to do this on day one, it's something that will take time, seasons even, to gather momentum. 

 

[The Blues Ox]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

IIt should be remembered that it's a twelve year project. Who is to say that there won't be current ambitious and capable  Championship clubs working towards a stronger Championship competition and EVENTUAL Grade A and admission to SL. Doesn't havetobe today, not tomorrow, not even in 5 years time. 

 

I get what you are saying but nobody can convince me that a Championship club after next year can achieve 15 points because of how the system is stacked against them. 

[Dave T]

19 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

I get what you are saying but nobody can convince me that a Championship club after next year can achieve 15 points because of how the system is stacked against them. 

It is possible, but certainly more difficult. But it's likely that for the next few years at least they wouldn't necessarily need to make 15pts from the championship to make SL.