Interesting point on attendances, it will be "Real" numbers rather than season tickets plus walk in and away fans. Not to much as a blow for us are we would struggle to hit 7,500 but for Cas it's a blow as the match attendances are over 7.5k but real attendance will be under so they will only hit the score for over 3,500

The points for electronic ad boards is very small. So I guess clubs are wondering if it's worth it. Just checked it's 0.125

Yes it is but it’s not small if your 13th by 0.1 and it costs you amongst 1million in SL funding.

I think the boards are about the last think stadium improvement wise we can do and it’s not just an investment for 1 year but for many future years.

I wonder if the south boxes could have electronic LED’s going up the tiers. Would look very interesting.

The LED boards could add animations or other things when try’s and goals are scored. Could enhance the match day a fair bit.

I'm pretty sure they'll mostly know where they stand.
If you are 12th or 13th you'll know you are at risk.
Just the same as P&R

Only if Cas genuinely improve. They are at risk from Toulouse.

The point of electronic board is not to get points. That's just the criteria to show progress and improvement.

The reason IMG put them on the list is it is a potential major income source.
Static boards are sold for the season. There is a limit to what people will pay and you can only have a limited number per season.
LED allows you to sell space by the minute. If we are in SL and on Sky or BBC, the revenue from those boards could be massive if you market it right.

I guess the marketing team will know what income we can generate. I think Matt Ellis will have already looked at the pros and cons

That’s right and if your Leeds who are on tv 20 times a season even when having a poor year it’s not too shabby. Trinity who would get 4/5 not so much.

I always wondered why it wasn’t a level playing field and all teams in regular season don’t get an equal split. In a way it’s keeping the top at the top and making it harder for others to compete without the sky money, televised advertising and sponsorship boosts that comes with that.

Troj, the first part of your post falls down seeing as all games are now on Sky.....

Yes. As they are now all on Sky it doesn't matter, but to answer the question, it wasn't even because Sky weren't doing it to be fair. They were doing it to get most viewers so picked the best game.

You are not going to show Wakefield v Salford instead of Wigan v Srs or Leeds Bradford.

The best game? I find it hard to believe that's the criteria they have used over the years when you look at some of sky's selection. I think it's probably more to do with the fact that they have seen trends when the likes of Leeds etc are on, TV audiences are probably better but that's fair enough, it's all about viewing figures at the end of the day for them.

OP asking about date https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/ ... ge-4614697 Clubs October 22, announced next day

OP asking about date https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/ ... ge-4614697 Clubs October 22, announced next day

That does worry me though.
I heard it and cringed a bit.

He (or someone in his team) needs to be all over the IMG criteria. And his statement here implies he is not.

The one thing in our favour and alot will dissagree is that the rfl are not clean and although this is a img thing the rfl will be involved and they will like the fact mr ellis is spending the dough

It was only confirmed last week, perhaps it was changed till after the season following such feedback.

Nah. It's clear in the handbook.
But even so, simple logic says it can't be before the grand final.

I'm not having a go at him. But this is important.
We don't want to be in a situation like Cas where points aren't considered because you didn't understand the process.

I don't mind Ellis not knowing but if he doesn't, just like other things at the club, he needs to get someone in who does.

Seriously, how do you get that from one sentence in a radio interview? He quite obviously is all over the IMG stuff which is why he's meeting with IMG in the first place... And by the way go look on the website, they are posting articles on each of the IMG criteria, which I've only see us do (and cas very poorly). His comment made sense to me, if he met with IMG and they confirmed we would be replacing London next season regardless, it would make the playoffs pretty pointless, which is why he said it probably wouldn't be communicated to fans, I'm not sure I see the issue with what he's said.

Seriously........ what he said was incorrect by a long way. That's how I get it.
He is very much all over achieving the points, and is doing a great job of it.
But if he and his team don't know the rules he'll apply that effort in the wrong direction.

You don't have to defend him. I'm not having a go. But in this case he was wrong about something that is important. And he needs to be better.

Same as Sam Burgess. He made a mistake yesterday (or someone in his team did). In another game it could have cost them. It doesn't make him a bad coach, but he needs to be tighter on that bit in future.

I've just relistened to his interview from 4th March on BBC, go listen to that interview again rather than take a snippet from it and come back with the same comments. You can say he's wrong but the thing you are not getting on all of this is that you really only know what is put out in the public domain on the IMG stuff, if you think what you know and what the owner of RL clubs know is the same thing, then you are seriously deluded. If you think what you know and what Tony Sutton knows and was able to communicate with clubs last month is the same thing, again you are deluded. Final scorings for clubs are made post season yes, I'm not sure if that was ever in dispute to be honest? What was in dispute is if team A in the championship score higher than team B in the SL in those scorings, will they replace them for 2025, which is a question that was unanswered.

Happy to listen again. If you have it post the link.

But I'm not sure what you want me to say. Whether someone told him or not, based on the published rules it was incorrect.
No amount of 'if you think you know' will change that.

If we'd been working to those interpretations we'd have come unstuck at submission time.

But it's all done now. The info has been clarified and he (and you) should now know.

Doesn't stop me being concerned that he didn't know. I'm allowed to do that I think.

I did register to it.
He is clearly doing loads of things to improve the IMG score and I think he even lowballs the number we'll get to.
But he does get the date bit wrong.

And I didn't point it out. Luppy used it as a reason why I might be wrong when I said it will be after the grand final.

Can you point me to where the date is noted in the handbook please?

I can't see any reference to the announcement date and a firm date was only revealed in this last week.

It doesn't.
But it does say the grand final points are included in the final number. So the date couldn't have been before then.

So it's not even mentioned in the handbook - I knew I couldn't find it.

There can only be 2 teams in the GF - you therefore know a minimum and a maximum possible score, so a decision "could" have been announced before the GF.

It's far more logical just to wait for certainty though.

That was announced in the last few days, long after the Ellis interview.