Good spot DS...wonder how many they will get ??

Has anybody seen any detail of how a club’s catchment area is going to be calculated?
Is our catchment area (along with Cas and Rovers) the Wakefield Met area and will that be compared with London’s and Skolar’s London and the South East? Will Leeds and Hunslet have the same score? It seems likely to be fraught with difficulty and inconsistency to me.

For the 1895? 0.1 points

IMG have been given the job of revamping Super League. Anyone given that job would say they need to two things:
1. Ensure the continuation of big, successful clubs and those who provide a good matchday experience
2. Spread the game

The criteria should do that. Let's be honest, our concerns are only about us, but any objective view of us would say that we bring nothing to the party and never have. Leigh are already adding more to the Super League than us. I get the criteria.

If I were to be given a choice of a successful and vibrant sport of rugby league but Wakefield in the Championship, or a declining Super League that included Wakefield, I'd pick the former. I love rugby league. Wakefield is my team because it's where I'm from and it's the team I've attended for over fifty years, but it's the love of rugby league that underpins everything. The game has got to thrive, or else what's the point?

Quote ="Slugger McBatt"IMG have been given the job of revamping Super League. Anyone given that job would say they need to two things: 1. Ensure the continuation of big, successful clubs and those who provide a good matchday experience 2. Spread the game The criteria should do that. Let's be honest, our concerns are only about us, but any objective view of us would say that we bring nothing to the party and never have. Leigh are already adding more to the Super League than us. I get the criteria. If I were to be given a choice of a successful and vibrant sport of rugby league but Wakefield in the Championship, or a declining Super League that included Wakefield, I'd pick the former. I love rugby league. Wakefield is my team because it's where I'm from and it's the team I've attended for over fifty years, but it's the love of rugby league that underpins everything. The game has got to thrive, or else what's the point?'" That's all well and good but where do think the game will actually thrive? London? Been there York or Newcastle? Would they have a good enough team or just end up with players from the relegated clubs? Bradford? Not financially secure... Cumbria? A team would be good from there, I'll grant you that, but is that feasible? The talk about location areas is a clear indication that they want to remove teams within that certain area, like us, cas and fev. But no mention of the closeness - albeit different cities of Leeds & Bradford. And what about Hull? I would like to see teams [ipenalised[/i points for sharing football grounds in the criteria... I mean we could play at Barnsley FC, which would make us a better proposition. Speaking of Hull I see that we have a new RFL Chief Exec..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/64962394 He worked for Hull FC for 13 years and "assisted" IMG in the plans for moving forward.... Hmmm...

Quote ="Slugger McBatt"IMG have been given the job of revamping Super League. Anyone given that job would say they need to two things: 1. Ensure the continuation of big, successful clubs and those who provide a good matchday experience 2. Spread the game The criteria should do that. Let's be honest, our concerns are only about us, but any objective view of us would say that we bring nothing to the party and never have. Leigh are already adding more to the Super League than us. I get the criteria. If I were to be given a choice of a successful and vibrant sport of rugby league but Wakefield in the Championship, or a declining Super League that included Wakefield, I'd pick the former. I love rugby league. Wakefield is my team because it's where I'm from and it's the team I've attended for over fifty years, but it's the love of rugby league that underpins everything. The game has got to thrive, or else what's the point?'" That's all well and good but where do think the game will actually thrive? London? Been there York or Newcastle? Would they have a good enough team or just end up with players from the relegated clubs? Bradford? Not financially secure... Cumbria? A team would be good from there, I'll grant you that, but is that feasible? The talk about location areas is a clear indication that they want to remove teams within that certain area, like us, cas and fev. But no mention of the closeness - albeit different cities of Leeds & Bradford. And what about Hull? I would like to see teams [ipenalised[/i points for sharing football grounds in the criteria... I mean we could play at Barnsley FC, which would make us a better proposition. Speaking of Hull I see that we have a new RFL Chief Exec..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/64962394 He worked for Hull FC for 13 years and "assisted" IMG in the plans for moving forward.... Hmmm...

League placing according to yorkshire Live.
Thoughts?

IMG's criteria reveal has provided fresh insight into the grading process, with on-field performance still a major part of the equation. Five key criteria will determine the scores of all 36 clubs, with results on the pitch counting for 25 per cent of a club's overall score.

The criteria has confirmed clubs will be ranked 1-36 based on their performances over a three-season period. The score will be determined via league positions and trophy wins from the most recent season.

Taking that theory into account, we decided to crunch the numbers and figure out how the league table will look based on the current three seasons. That did provide some challenges given the curtailed 2020 season for Championship and League 1, meaning 2019 results were instead taken into account for this sample. Of course, the results from that season will be irrelevant when the real grading system comes into play.
The other uncertainty comes around the play-offs and whether a club's performance in them determines their 'league position' or where they finished in the regular season. As an example, Leeds finished fifth last year but made the Grand Final, which would align with finishing second. For this sample, it has been based on league position only.

Unsurprisingly, St Helens come out on top having won three Grand Finals, a Challenge Cup and two League Leaders' Shields in that time. Closely behind are the three other clubs to win trophies in the past three seasons, Wigan Warriors, Catalans Dragons and Leeds Rhinos. Despite their shocking 2022 campaign, Warrington are fifth. At the other end of Super League, Wakefield are eleventh and Leigh thirteenth, though their score is hampered by the fact they finished fourth in the Championship in 2019. Toulouse are in between them.

Championship outfit Keighley, who have been the largest dissenting voice to the grading system, are in 32nd place, punished largely for finishing next to bottom of League 1 in 2019.

A full 36-team league table based on IMG's on-field grading criteria

1 St Helens
2 Wigan Warriors
3 Catalans Dragons
4 Leeds Rhinos
5 Warrington Wolves
6 Huddersfield Giants
7 Castleford Tigers
8 Hull FC
9 Hull KR
10 Salford Red Devils
11 Wakefield Trinity
12 Toulouse Olympique
13 Leigh Leopards
14 Featherstone Rovers
15 Halifax Panthers
16 London Broncos
17 York Knights
18 Batley Bulldogs
19 Bradford Bulls
20 Sheffield Eagles
21 Widnes Vikings
22 Whitehaven
23 Barrow Raiders
24 Dewsbury Rams
25 Newcastle Thunder
26 Swinton Lions
27 Workington Town
28 Oldham
29 Rochdale Hornets
30 North Wales Crusaders
31 Doncaster
32 Keighley Cougars
33 Hunslet
34 Midlands Hurricanes
35 London Skolars
36 Cornwall

Quote ="BarnsleyGull"That's all well and good but where do think the game will actually thrive? London? Been there York or Newcastle? Would they have a good enough team or just end up with players from the relegated clubs? Bradford? Not financially secure... Cumbria? A team would be good from there, I'll grant you that, but is that feasible? The talk about location areas is a clear indication that they want to remove teams within that certain area, like us, cas and fev. But no mention of the closeness - albeit different cities of Leeds & Bradford. And what about Hull? I would like to see teams [ipenalised[/i points for sharing football grounds in the criteria... I mean we could play at Barnsley FC, which would make us a better proposition. Speaking of Hull I see that we have a new RFL Chief Exec..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/64962394 He worked for Hull FC for 13 years and "assisted" IMG in the plans for moving forward.... Hmmm...'" I also understand IMG are helping us find a new Chief Executive

Quote ="BarnsleyGull"That's all well and good but where do think the game will actually thrive? London? Been there York or Newcastle? Would they have a good enough team or just end up with players from the relegated clubs? Bradford? Not financially secure... Cumbria? A team would be good from there, I'll grant you that, but is that feasible? The talk about location areas is a clear indication that they want to remove teams within that certain area, like us, cas and fev. But no mention of the closeness - albeit different cities of Leeds & Bradford. And what about Hull? I would like to see teams [ipenalised[/i points for sharing football grounds in the criteria... I mean we could play at Barnsley FC, which would make us a better proposition. Speaking of Hull I see that we have a new RFL Chief Exec..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/64962394 He worked for Hull FC for 13 years and "assisted" IMG in the plans for moving forward.... Hmmm...'" I also understand IMG are helping us find a new Chief Executive

Quote ="BarnsleyGull"That's all well and good but where do think the game will actually thrive? London? Been there York or Newcastle? Would they have a good enough team or just end up with players from the relegated clubs? Bradford? Not financially secure... Cumbria? A team would be good from there, I'll grant you that, but is that feasible? The talk about location areas is a clear indication that they want to remove teams within that certain area, like us, cas and fev. But no mention of the closeness - albeit different cities of Leeds & Bradford. And what about Hull? I would like to see teams [ipenalised[/i points for sharing football grounds in the criteria... I mean we could play at Barnsley FC, which would make us a better proposition. Speaking of Hull I see that we have a new RFL Chief Exec..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/64962394 He worked for Hull FC for 13 years and "assisted" IMG in the plans for moving forward.... Hmmm...'" I agree, in part, but I suppose it depends on your perspective. London, for example, didn't fill the terraces or travel well, but they did well in developing the game in the south and were competitive occasionally. My own view is that there is nothing wrong with strong heartland teams. For example, I follow baseball and support the Red Sox, and have even travelled to see them now and again. Would I go watch the Wakefield Red Sox? No. I enjoy the matches in the elite competition. On that analogy, I suspect the southern supporters have their favourite northern team. I was walking to the Saints game a few years ago (I think it was the first year in their new stadium, when we beat them), and I was chatting to a Londoner who had travelled up because he's a Saints fan. The press will always ignore us, because we are not rugby union, but it shouldn't be measured by column inches. Yes, expansion should always be an aim, but it would be great to see the Grand Final full every year, and Wembley even. I'd be happy with full northern grounds every week and plenty of grassroots involvement, with enough money to retain stars and maybe even attract a few more Aussie big names.

Quote ="BarnsleyGull"That's all well and good but where do think the game will actually thrive? London? Been there York or Newcastle? Would they have a good enough team or just end up with players from the relegated clubs? Bradford? Not financially secure... Cumbria? A team would be good from there, I'll grant you that, but is that feasible? The talk about location areas is a clear indication that they want to remove teams within that certain area, like us, cas and fev. But no mention of the closeness - albeit different cities of Leeds & Bradford. And what about Hull? I would like to see teams [ipenalised[/i points for sharing football grounds in the criteria... I mean we could play at Barnsley FC, which would make us a better proposition. Speaking of Hull I see that we have a new RFL Chief Exec..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/64962394 He worked for Hull FC for 13 years and "assisted" IMG in the plans for moving forward.... Hmmm...'" I agree, in part, but I suppose it depends on your perspective. London, for example, didn't fill the terraces or travel well, but they did well in developing the game in the south and were competitive occasionally. My own view is that there is nothing wrong with strong heartland teams. For example, I follow baseball and support the Red Sox, and have even travelled to see them now and again. Would I go watch the Wakefield Red Sox? No. I enjoy the matches in the elite competition. On that analogy, I suspect the southern supporters have their favourite northern team. I was walking to the Saints game a few years ago (I think it was the first year in their new stadium, when we beat them), and I was chatting to a Londoner who had travelled up because he's a Saints fan. The press will always ignore us, because we are not rugby union, but it shouldn't be measured by column inches. Yes, expansion should always be an aim, but it would be great to see the Grand Final full every year, and Wembley even. I'd be happy with full northern grounds every week and plenty of grassroots involvement, with enough money to retain stars and maybe even attract a few more Aussie big names.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlEPGiC4CNE Interesting conversation here with the Keighley owners and I've got to say I largely agree with them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlEPGiC4CNE Interesting conversation here with the Keighley owners and I've got to say I largely agree with them.

Excellent video, I’m even more convinced now more than previously that IMG are manipulating the system to suit a certain agenda. The 2 Keighley owners have given us an insight and a reason to why the game will eventually die if these proposals are passed.
I hope all the fans watch this video, I think most will agree with the comments given.

Yes watched it myself, I have never heard of these two guys but they seemed two genuine blokes trying their best for their club. They do make some very valid points and I tend to agree with them mostly.
I think this IMG plan will all be long forgotten in 5 or 6 years and someone will be thinking of further new ways to reinvent the Rugby League wheel.

Not watched the video yet, but said from the outset that they can set the criteria to suit who they want inSL.

Well I couldn’t have put it any better myself. Have been saying this myself. Why is it that rugby league has an inbuilt self destruct set as default mode. Right back to the BARLA fiasco when people who promoted and run the amateur level for no more than the game itself were pushed out as it wasn’t in keeping anymore.
Through to the new super league and the the new style of your face has to fit!!!
Every club owner should listen to this and take a deep long look at their souls and decide is this what they want their legacy to the game to be???
I wish these two could be running the RFL, they seem to stand for everything that I personally believe and seem to have a really good grasp of what the sport is and where it should go.
Well done for speaking up against the tide.

I'm convinced it is a fait accompli and at best only one of us, Cas & Fev will make the cut if any of us do at all. I have no doubt they will target expansion sides in some kind of far-fetched claim of world domination which will fill the spots of many of the traditional teams and on the back of that will spell the death knell of many of those clubs. I have no confidence that the scores won't be fudged to suit and the top league will become a closed shop soon enough with those inside at that time creaming all the funds and leaving the rest to rot. They probably would quite like some of the current clubs to merge to be honest.....

Honestly, I don't get the chip on the shoulder.
Criteria is the same for everyone. We need to work hard to get it.

Is the full criteria published… I would love to see the way in which criteria and criterion are articulated, and weighted … for example Leeds and Hunslet … Leeds are based in Headingley… Hunslet in South Leeds… Wigan and Leigh… do/can St Helens claim Liverpool as catchment? How does the boundary of the community foundation we (trinity) have, relate to the catchment area area of the club?

Further with regard to playing results… if the assessment is of the club … how much store is place on the cumulative results of all the teams representing the club rather than just the male first grade??

So many questions

It is all purposely vague so they can get the teams in that they want and get rid of the teams that they don't. IMG are in this to make money, they don't care about Rugby League as a sport or its heritage, to them it is a money making exercise.

I just don't see how we fit into their plans, if you take any sort of Rose Tinted Glasses off then under the criteria Cas are ahead of us and have almost twice the crowds that we do. I would bet that even teams like Bradford and potentially York as well as London would be favored over us and again you may not agree but with the vagueness of the criteria it is very easy to justify.

You also need to remember that if Toulouse are in any sort of reasonable financial state that they will be a shoe in for it as well.

Our only chance of surviving the cull is being successful on the field this season and next but it is clear that our board have no means or willingness to try and make this happen.

Isn't every single person involved in Super League earning money for what they do? It's hardly a shock IMG are getting paid.
And I can't really see why anything but a successful league will be good for them.
It's up to us to be part of it.

Well your one that they’ve won over with their talk a lot and say very little sales pitch.
Glover will be doing the next meeting at cedar court for them.
Have to say I read a lot of what you say on here pop tart and find your posts on the most very much a positive and well balanced view. However on this I don’t understand where you want us to be in this new system and don’t get how people don’t see this as anything but a bad idea for RL.
Just because we are badly run doesn’t mean that anything else has to be better.
Well that’s what I think anyway and like is said I wish the keighly guys actually ran the RL. I believe they would do a far better job.

It's a good video Adam, and yes I'm in agreement too.

I don't know if any on here have experienced the Cougars on a match day, I have on a couple of occasions, as my nephew is part of the media team, and have to say it is second to none, and hoping they go well

I think my point is about Rugby league rather than Wakefield.
The thing for me that holds rugby league back is that sub standard clubs moan there isn't enough money but then try and block things that would move everything along but leave them behind if they don't keep up with the progress.

I don't know IMG will be better, but it is potentially better and no one else has proposed anything else, apart from staying right where we are.

Wakefield is a city with a population fit for a big city club. But we aren't one.
Would we be upgrading the stadium if we didn't have to?
A lot of teams need to be dragged into the 21st century and we should try and be part of that.

Of course Leeds and Sts are going to be fine, but only because they've done the work already.
We are very unlikely to get an A based on the criteria, but we should plan to be the best B with a road map to A.

And if we do progress we can leave the likes of Cas or Salford behind. If we don't we deserve to be in the championship with a team from York or Gloucester taking our place.

I’m glad RFL and IMG have been made to respond to the concerns.

RFL Reach Out to Keighley Cougars regarding
IMG Proposals Following the latest IMG "Reimaging Rugby League" meeting in Huddersfield, the RFL have reached out to Ryan and Kaue to listen and understand the very well publicised concerns

regarding the IMG proposals. Chair of the RFL, Simon Johnson met with Ryan and Kaue in central London on Tuesday spending 4
hours in discussions.
Ryan said "The meeting was largely positive. Simon listened to our scepticism and wants to reach a unified position where all clubs can agree
to a restructure" On behalf of the RFL, Simon Johnson agreed to feedback to IMG the concerns and proposals of
the Keighley Cougars. Ryan said "Our key points are that promotion and relegation should be on a 2 up, 2 down model. We tentatively agree that only category A and category B clubs should be in Super League, but that there
should not be sub-grading within the A and B categories. We will continue to express our stance on the situation and of course update our fans in
due course".

I completely get what you’re saying PT. Unfortunately as this is the only option on the table as of now, I know we as a club have to do whatever we can to be there or their abouts.
My concern is fundamentally what you said. Small minded club/owners(and we have been guilty of this too like it or not) looking after number one.
But I personally really do feel this is the system that at the start will look and feel good but then once it’s a closed shop that is when RL will then die as a sport. Because what’s the point if you can’t advance and once the lower leagues go then who’s going to feed the big clubs as grass roots will die too I’d think.
We all want rugby league to be here for longer than us and I do believe the fans have the good of the sport at our hearts but I’m not sure clubs look any further than their own books.
When this starts to happen, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s another new RFL mark 2 breakaway. We have form for this don’t we? and then we weaken again because of people in glass houses just like Union was all those years ago.
Maybe lol but it could…

I don't see the lower leagues declining because of lack of promotion. It was only ever available to 2 maybe 3 at the most.
Having stability gives teams a much stronger base to build on.
I would vote for money being diverted to support that division too. It shouldn't just be about Super League.

But as always, it doesn't matter how good the idea is, it's the execution that counts.

As much as I disagree with your views on it PT. One thing I completely agree on is that it’s all about execution or lack of.