Re: IMG Proposals : Fri Apr 21, 2023 1:49 pm  

Phantom - your first link (BBC) is from 2015 and the second one (SkySports) is from 2021.

Re: IMG Proposals : Fri Apr 21, 2023 2:08 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Why? I fail to see how encouraging clubs to develop and improve on and off the field can be considered a bad thing? If Keighley want to be in Super League, invest in the club and develop the stadium and the fan base and win the Championship. Or don't, they'd be able to get up even without winning it if they improve as a club. The likes of Cas, Wakefield, Featherstone aren't going to bother, so plenty of opportunity for clubs like York, Keighley and Toulouse to replace them. We're likely never going to get to 12 category A sides, so the sporting integrity element Keighley are crying about so much will still be there. No category A side is going to finish bottom, so them being protected is irrelevant and there will never be 12 A sides. If there are then it'll prove IMGs proposals have been an incredible success. There aren't any more than a handful of A class sides currently.

This is nothing more than what was decided years ago , no new ideas , no investment , no plans for investment .
Where are future players going to come from as there will be no lower leagues and the amateur game is already dying on its feet .

Re: IMG Proposals : Fri Apr 21, 2023 2:25 pm  

I thought the main purpose for bringing IMG in was to market the product - not just rehash the franchise system.

Re: IMG Proposals : Fri Apr 21, 2023 3:28 pm  

Tigerade wrote:

Phantom - your first link (BBC) is from 2015 and the second one (SkySports) is from 2021.

Not sure what your point is, but the 2015 link is about the addition of the two stands which by common consent made the ground superior to those of its two nearest SL rivals (though Wakefield have finally addressed the issue).

Re: IMG Proposals : Fri Apr 21, 2023 4:26 pm  

Fair does Phantom.Your ground might be superior as you say but it holds little weight in the big scheme of things (IMG). Facilities is only one small factor. Attendances and league position will let you down. A chairman who is critical of the grading system won’t help you either.

Re: IMG Proposals : Fri Apr 21, 2023 6:53 pm  

Tigerade wrote:

Fair does Phantom.Your ground might be superior as you say but it holds little weight in the big scheme of things (IMG). Facilities is only one small factor. Attendances and league position will let you down. A chairman who is critical of the grading system won’t help you either.

If the protocols are followed the same as before then no one will bother

Re: IMG Proposals : Sat Apr 22, 2023 10:47 am  

Bulls Boy 2011 wrote:

I’m intrigued by this as well. If they go down this season there’s no guarantee they will finish top of the Champ in 2024 as it is very competitive. So as for performance they may not rank well.

I’m more surprised at the likes of Oldham, Rochdale, Swinton etc voting for the changes. As neither of these have any real scope for growth like York, Newcastle, Bradford etc have. I genuinely thought they may have voted against the proposals.

Thing is, these kinds of teams never really had much hope of getting into Super League anyway so in terms of that, there isn't a whole lot of change. In fact, realistically it would give them a better chance of doing it one day, and by doing so would force them to invest their money into improving their club itself, rather than the playing squad which would likely be some kind of short term fix/hope and would make them healthier overall.

I can see why teams like Featherstone would vote against as they've invested heavily into their playing squad to try and get them promoted on the field. For teams that have never really been anywhere near getting there on the field, then these proposals would actually be better for their sustainability

Re: IMG Proposals : Sat Apr 22, 2023 10:46 pm  

ploinerrhino wrote:

This is nothing more than what was decided years ago , no new ideas , no investment , no plans for investment .
Where are future players going to come from as there will be no lower leagues and the amateur game is already dying on its feet .

Investment? Look at the money Coleman, Moran and Leneghan have put in? The Yorkshire based clubs are the ones holding rugby league back. Awful stadiums that are an embarrassment and penny pinchers.

#yorkshireispropertight

Re: IMG Proposals : Sun Apr 23, 2023 11:00 pm  

Tigerade wrote:

.........I was also surprised that there wasn't a part of the formula that mentioned stadium ownership.

There was. See "Primacy of Tenure."

Strangely though (as pointed out by Bongser passim), when a couple of their "Jewels in the Crown" went bust, the RFU decided to include Primacy of Tenure as one criterion in their hastily assembled, revised licensing. Said criterion was dropped as it was found to be against UK Competition Law.

IMG only allocated 0.25 points out of 20 (1.25%) to this.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey?