Trojan Horse wrote:That 0.35 purely needs to be compensated for in 2025 finishing position. I believe if we finish 9th or above we will have similar to this years so should be grade A. If we fish bottom 2/3 though it may be a high B. You may lose some performance points but you can make them up in 2025.

If we perform as Ellis expects then A should be maintained. The plan is to be around the edge of playoffs next season and possibly get in it.

Also if we improve in other areas which it seems Ellis is pushing for then we could be higher.

The other side is that I can’t see Hudds/Salford/York/Toulouse/Bulls amassing enough points to force a high B just shy of 15 out.

Salford and Hudds scores will be quite stagnant I’d expect.

Not that we should or will rest on our laurels.

Best way to describe it is that a Grade A guarantees you the following year superleague rugby. As long as it is retained that is the case. If you’re not a grade A you must be in the top 12 to retain SL status following year as you say.

We just have to do the business on the field next season and try grow other parts of the business.

Most importantly as fans we need to buy season tickets and keep interacting social media. I went through the clubs Facebook page and Twitter recently and liked a few hundred posts from the past months…. Laborious yes but I feel like I did my part.

Another Cas Fan wrote:Hi TJ , First post on here but I come in peace .

First of all congratulations on reaching a Grade A , a fantastic turnaround for you in 2024.

Just wanted to reply regarding how performance score works . Finishing 9th won't improve your overall 12th (3 year average) position as it all works relative to other clubs .

Cas finished 11th and 10th in their last 2 seasons , so a total finishing position of 21 going into 2025

Wakey have finished 12th and 13th so a total finishing position of 25 with 2025 to add on


This means that Wakey would have to finish 4 places above Cas in 2025 (I think Hull are the same score as Cas as well) to tie in 3 year average finishing position . Finishing 5 places above Cas in 2025 will put you above us in the 3 year average .

Looking forward to seeing you next season in SL

dboy wrote:Finishing 4 places above Cas still puts Wakey ahead.

Yes, the average will be the same, but when averages are the same, the most recent year is used to determine placings.

Of course, we are going to win the CC as well, for some bonus points (fingers crossed!).

Another Cas Fan wrote:Hi TJ , First post on here but I come in peace .

First of all congratulations on reaching a Grade A , a fantastic turnaround for you in 2024.

Just wanted to reply regarding how performance score works . Finishing 9th won't improve your overall 12th (3 year average) position as it all works relative to other clubs .

Cas finished 11th and 10th in their last 2 seasons , so a total finishing position of 21 going into 2025

Wakey have finished 12th and 13th so a total finishing position of 25 with 2025 to add on


This means that Wakey would have to finish 4 places above Cas in 2025 (I think Hull are the same score as Cas as well) to tie in 3 year average finishing position . Finishing 5 places above Cas in 2025 will put you above us in the 3 year average .

Looking forward to seeing you next season in SL

PopTart wrote:You are right it is relative.
When we've been talking about it on here we have only talked about how to get the same score given we might not have the bonus scores.

We don't need to finish higher than Cas in performance to stay above Cas in the overall score......but I quite like the target of finishing 4 places higher than Cas too

PopTart wrote:Personally I think the IMG criteria is a good thing but it needs to be implemented pragmatically.

The teams like us and Cas along with London Toulouse and Bradford have/are making efforts to improve now, when they didn't bother before.

Belle Vue wrote:While I agree that clubs like ours , cas etc have made improvements. I’d like to see league 1 clubs given some slack regards doing assessments for IMG .. the cost is one thing they could do without.. surely better to give them a minimum requirement type criteria and if they win promotion then make them start ticking boxes for IMG

PopTart wrote:Personally I think the IMG criteria is a good thing but it needs to be implemented pragmatically.

The teams like us and Cas along with London Toulouse and Bradford have/are making efforts to improve now, when they didn't bother before.