IMG require certain minimum facilities for the media . I don’t know but would this be in the East stand or staying above the portocabins. The former could be a problem because any tv coverage would look straight at the West Stand which is not a pleasing outlook.
The other problem we have no control over is that IMG are tasked with expanding the game away from the heartland.

It's only size of the area for cameras. The more detailed criteria is for press and media which is covered by East.

Picking up on Lampy's point about having 3 teams in Wakefield area, it definitely works against us. None of us will ever get full 1.5 score on that. We all have 0.5 because of the population divided by 3 being less than 130k.

It works in Featherstones favour as they would never draw from the wider Wakefield area as it does for a team like Hunslet. They effectively get 1.5 points because they can draw on half of Leeds.
Which is quite unrealistic.

Minards tried to argue the case but clearly lost.
I'd also say we should include the Barnsley areas to the south. Both Cas and Wakefield draw from this but it isn't counted because its outside our postcode despite there being no competition.

York would get a point as their population is over the second threshold of 130k

Leigh and Wigan would each get 1 point as they divide the Borough but are still just over 130k

I agree that they should include wider. I live in South Yorkshire but still travel in.

Long term, IF IMG are successful in expanding the game, this necessarily impacts on many existing clubs, especially clubs like ours.

I don't think they 'tasked' with expanding the game.
They are tasked with strengthening the game.
Some scores benefit a team outside the heartlands but IMG aren't going out to find those teams.

It certainly doesn't work in Featherstone's favour, Fev will get the minimum 0.5 points whereas the likes of Keighley, Bradford, Newcastle, London Broncos etc will get the full 1.5 points.

That whole section of the scoring system is a farce tbh, teams should be rewarded for extending their reach/attendances/sphere of influence by their own efforts, not for theoretical/"potential" progress. London Broncos have been around for nearly 50 years, and in their current guise for around 30 years, but are currently playing in front of around 400 fans, the "potential" there is imaginary.

The local catchment area grading is only for the tier 1 and 2 clubs, so if Hunslet stay in C1 they won't count towards the Leeds Rhinos score. I'm not sure what (if any) points Hunslet would then also get.

I also don't think it's fair to say that it works in Featherstones favouras they have the same restrictions as both us and Cas, and perhaps the reason they have less of a wider reach at present is because they are currently not a top tier club. That might change should they be promoted and gain a wider viewerahip

There's nothing in the handbook about only counting for tier 1 and 2. Hunslet will still need to complete an IMG submission.

Its just opinion. You may be right about Featherstone

From the IMG handbook:


CATCHMENT AREA THRESHOLDS
• Catchment Area is defined as the population of the Local
Authority District where the club’s stadium is located
divided by the total number of Tier 1 and Tier 2 clubs
in the same area.

Oh well if you are going to contradict me with actual facts there is no hope!

I even read that too. I need to work on that.

Good point. I'd not thought about how big Bradford is to be able to host two teams
And yes I said it the wrong way round. Wakefield are penalised rather than Fev benefit.

Your point about London shows the issue though. A new franchise will get location points but they won't get the grade A without the core criteria and will lose on attendance, fan base for digital and league performance