I quite like the small screen for ref like football.

Does the proposed new deal suggest that the "reimagining of RL" has come up with the same result as we had, before their imagination "ran wild".
Basically no change, other than giving more for less (more games, less revenue). This is just depressing,

It becomes increasingly clear that clubs need to look after themselves and rely less and less on broadcasting revenues.

Looking highly likely this could happen to us as early as next season. If we drop down to the championship ,TV income will not be really matter we'll have to survive on Championship payments.

Seems like SL clubs can’t make up their minds e.leeds-live.co.uk/_act/link.php ... d=13256186

Seems like SL clubs can’t make up their minds e.leeds-live.co.uk/_act/link.php ... d=13256186

Quote ="Dunkirk Spirit"Seems like SL clubs can’t make up their minds e.leeds-live.co.uk/_act/link.php ... d=13256186'" A 14-team league and Magic weekend gives us 27 fixtures and no loop fixtures. Suits both sides. Not the talent depth for 14 teams, but if the game is to be spread, the talent pool might increase. Change the overseas quota. There will be very capable understudies in the NRL. Jake Arthurs will never shake any trees, but he'd be a very capable player over here. Morgan Harper at Manly will be on squad-filler money, and doesn't always start, but he'd be a first choice star in the Super League. And the list goes on. Watching talent inspires people. Watching dross doesn't.

Quote ="Dunkirk Spirit"Seems like SL clubs can’t make up their minds e.leeds-live.co.uk/_act/link.php ... d=13256186'" A 14-team league and Magic weekend gives us 27 fixtures and no loop fixtures. Suits both sides. Not the talent depth for 14 teams, but if the game is to be spread, the talent pool might increase. Change the overseas quota. There will be very capable understudies in the NRL. Jake Arthurs will never shake any trees, but he'd be a very capable player over here. Morgan Harper at Manly will be on squad-filler money, and doesn't always start, but he'd be a first choice star in the Super League. And the list goes on. Watching talent inspires people. Watching dross doesn't.

Can you tell our coaches that, we play Dross, Not going to Salford nothing to get inspired by

Whilst 14 teams would be ideal it's a non-starter. There is no way the clubs are going to split a lessening pot an extra two ways, plus most of the understudies in the NRL wouldn't qualify for work visas anymore so the player pool would be streched way too thin.

So another £10 for our league and all the fun and games that getting a stable feed brings? Not for me. Paying for Sky is about all I can manage, hopefully C4 get more games, it just comes across as a much more pleasurable way to spend 2 hours than listening to Brian Carney. Woeful.

So maybe they have to play some young British talent? Perish the thought.

Sky seem likely to get the bulk of the games and Channel 4 is free so, it's only if you want to push the boat out for a Trinity game and this wont be an issue if we drop into the Championship.

The most frustrating issue here is that SL is giving up more of its "product" for a diminishing return.

Or have they learned from the football and NRL model. If you give people access to all of it, they will follow it and take an interest and it grows the popularity. If you provide a limited selection, out of which only half might be decent games, does that generate interest?

The main worry is crowd attendances. Saturation coverage hasn't affected NRL audiences, but games in half-empty stadiums never look good. But how many casual fans are there, in reality? There are the hardcore who go regardless. Then, there are the people who take an interest but can't go to every game, for a variety of reasons.

But if saturation coverages attracts extra interest, that might attract more people who fancy popping along.

Sometimes, to get interest, you've got to remind people you exist.

The preliminary grades were due to be released to clubs this week, however,
From MG Twitter
I’m hearing there has been a slight delay and the long awaited revealing of the IMG indicative grading table will now take place next week.

I guess IMG and the RFL, have a bit of last minute manipulation due to last Sunday match in France. I wish I could have seen the statement before they decided to change it.

Doesn’t look good or professional at all.

Surely all scores are done but for a couple of small adjustments to the GF winners points for finishing.

London getting promoted has just changed the landscape. I would bet good money on them being protected from relegation now making it harder for us to get back up unless they move to 14 teams, which a lack of money from the TV deal may prevent.

Maybe i'm being cynical but this is what IMG said themselves back in December...

[urlhttps://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/dec/15/london-img-transform-rugby-league[/url

After supporting Trinity for over 65 years am absolutely exhausted and dissilusioned by the status quo.Would really like to see the likes of ourselves, Halifax, Fev, Swinton , Oldham, etc , etc , break free and form a viable competition. I know it's ' pie in the sky' ,but feel Rugby League ha lost its identity and ' raison d'etre'.

And how would you finance that league?

How is it financed at the moment? The club's don't appear to benefit from Sky deals

Oh yes I see what you mean.
I still don't see the point of breaking away.

I’ve often thought myself that there are many ‘lower’ clubs with big potential.
I’ve advocated before for SL 1 and SL 2, to bring to life such clubs as Widnes, Halifax, Featherstone, and now us!
Problem is finance. My idea wouldn’t work because clubs like Saints, Wigan and Leeds wouldn’t allow finance for it. They want the Money for themselves.
A breakaway league of the said championship clubs would get my vote all day long to get away from a one sided (putting it very politely) set up we have now BUT much more money would be needed than the championship clubs generate now! The league would have to be full time to attract the players of the right quality, otherwise all the best players would stay in SL.
As said, if it could be done it would get my backing all day long.

It's never looked good or professional to me. The criteria is so vague and without clarity that it can be interpreted in many ways. I think that's the reason ,so it can easily be manipulated and definitions can be stretched to make it achieve the outcome you desire.

I have always thought it's good to improve the game in many ways off the field, but this IMG process looks nothing more than a sham to give more control and power to a few. I think we know who they are.

I don't agree at all. It's very specific.
There is nothing vague on there as far as I can see.
Each section has targets to achieve.

Ok then seeing as you know ,can you help me with this.
LED boards, how many do you need, a couple, a dozen, or more ? plus how big do they need to be and where do they need placing.

Seems very specific to me:

4. LEDS – 0.125
An additional bonus score of 0.125 is awarded if a club has LED advertising boards
across a minimum of the TV arc (three sides with a content management system):
• 100m length (save for where main dug outs are opposite the TV cameras).
• Full length behind goals.
• 900mm high.

Sorry my fault I wasn’t very clear. I meant that it’s not professional to push back or delay announcements on something as big as img scores. While there won’t be and tinkering with the actual benchmark it will just raise questions and apprehension.

The actual criteria if it’s clearly defined then I don’t have issue with. So long as it’s not tweaked anywhere or anytime other than officially agreed by all clubs and governance involved.

Regards these LED boards. Do we have these?