Ultimately, in RL 2024, you finished in 13th place and your performance rating for 2024 should be reflected accordingly. Also, how can you receive points for winning a trophy (1895 Cup) that twelve clubs weren't eligible to compete in. Although I did enjoy watching you make more noise at Wembley than the Wigan and Wire fans! (I stayed back to watch your rather one-sided stroll to victory).

Anyway, welcome back after your little sojourn away for twelve months, I suspect we will be locking horns in 2025, anxiously watching each others results!

That's just ridiculous!! I didn't realise that.

I've no axe to grind against Wakey as they are getting things right both on and off the pitch and will be as asset to SL but an A grade? no chance.

Does it really matter? If the club think we bring in more revenue on weekends I don’t think an extra 0.1 of a point will change anything. Also, the bigger the crowds the more points we get for stadium utilisation, so you could chase the TV viewing figure points on by picking the best kick off viewing spot but end up losing more points then you’ve gained if the crowds drop because that kick off time might not be convient for match going fans.

I keep banging on about it but looking on the performance points breakdowns, if you take away the performance points Wigan only score the same as Wakefield for all the off field stuff, I doubt they’re losing sleep about it. Look after the performance stuff first and everything else will look after itself. We really don’t need to over think it.

I don’t think any of us would argue that we aren’t deserving of a B grade due to our appalling on field performances. However the whole grading idea and method for me is completely flawed and not worth the paper it’s written on.
It’s great to see Wakey back in SL but the fact they have gained performance points in a league lower and a competition SL clubs weren’t eligible for just doesn’t sit right. Again the loss of points due to not being able to include the suburbs/surrounding area for both ourselves and KR and two clubs in the same city despite both achieving very good attendances. Thats before we get on to the screen issue and viewing figures etc, all of which point to me that the IMG grading is pointless and a worthless expensive exercise.

Hopefully having being downgraded to B will have an impact on us in terms of refocusing and getting the mindset reset and flushing out the general malaise within the club.

All in all as much as the likes of Cas have made some changes to their ground the Jungle still is light years away from the modern stadia requirements set out years ago and they haven’t performed much better than ourselves either yet are grade A due to the skewed logic in the grading.

For all Bonaire gets ridiculed for negativity but on the subject of IMG and their input into turning the sport around I think he’s been pretty much spot on in his view.

The game can ill afford to lose money but at £450K per year over 10 years to IMG the sport is literally haemorrhaging cash that it will simply not get back. I’m do believe in the old adage you have to speculate to accumulate but there’s not a cat in hells chance this IMG will offer anything remotely like value for money and it’s simply another in the long list of white elephants and hair brained schemes by clueless RFL and SL chairmen.

In relation to the 1895 Cup only 4 clubs out of SL could qualify for the Challenge Cup so in essence over 20 clubs are excluded from playing a SL side is that right?

Yes we took a lot to Wembley it reflects how far we have come since relegation. The owner has put in 2 to 3 million (his words) on and off the pitch so we are looking pretty good going forwards

Although I don't think it is central to IMG's remit to incentivise investment in player pathways, it is still included as a minimum requirement. Based on the proposed standards from March, Clubs that don't have an RFL-approved Talent and Performance Pathway lose 0.25 in the first year that is the case, 0.5 in the second and a whole grade (e.g. A to B) in the third and thereafter.

Onfield performance would have been better based on games won, rather than finishing places, imo. Maybe a Championship win being worth 0.4 of a SL win or something like that.

Edit: Is there any evidence that the £500k paid for IMG services is an annual, ongoing commitment?