Maybe its because we are a current SL club, that all the other ones would say that - Wakey being petty....
However, having listened to what the guys at Keighley have said and their explanation, I do think IMG have moved to goalposts somewhat.
I also envisage that we may not be the only SL club voting against it.

From what I have read the I M G proposals will ensure the usual few stay at the top.

I can’t blame them for not voting for the proposals if they don’t feel they have the full details needed to make a decision.

If it were me I’d want to see the full proposal with detail. You wouldn’t sign something before seeing it in its entirety would you? Same concept.

Also, I think the sport needs more of a marketing revolution but imho that should come from the governing body first then filter down. Or payments made towards the central figure who markets the league/sport and its clubs.

It will certainly make the strong clubs stronger on all fronts playing and finances that’s for sure.

If there’s one thing that should be brought in it’s a good sun of money for the championship winner. Something substantial to strive for to allow clubs winning to improve their facilities/playing roster.

I think if we had managed to stay up this season we could have hoped to retain a place. However when we drop down i really dont see a future beyond life in the championship for some time. Pity we didnt manage to get a competitive team as the amount it would have cost will look like peanuts to the amount of funding we will lose once relegated.

Irrelevent what we do as it will highly likely pass anyway and once we have voted against it i've no doubt we'll be seen as the pariahs and have a black mark against our name moving forward. That said we couldn't have picked a worse time to have finally completely tanked on the field as the scoring system will probably mean relegation this year will see us away from the top flight for a good while.

Absolutely bang on and it does look like some of their proposals are "liquid".
The issue that irks most here is that IMG, to justify their "wedge" will have to make changes to the clubs in the top flight as, leaving the same 12 clubs in SL would be a bit pointless.
We then come down to the mechanism used to engineer the change and let's face it, this isn't difficult.
So, who are they wanting to bring into SL and what happens to the clubs that are ejected and to the clubs lower down the league pyramid.
Is there ANY mention of funding, for anyone ?

IMG aren't changing the teams. They are simply setting the criteria.
If let's say Featherstone tick more boxes than us, why shouldn't they get in?
It's up to us to get to that level.....which we are trying to do.

I understand the "idea", they like to use the phrase "re-imagining RL".
Sorry PT but, it's a smoke screen.
Nobody is going to come in and have a "consultation for 2 years and not make some changes.
Having said that, if one club ticks more boxes in a newly defined range of criteria, why the hell are they more deserving, than any other club, of a spot in the top flight.
The sensible way, would be to have some minimum standards and then decide how things go on the field of play, if not, then, what is the point.
Once we go down the box ticking route, pro RL is no longer a sport.

And we will keep coming back to changes in the criteria, either now or in the future and these preferences can be "bought".
A few words in the right ears and suddenly there could be a change, it's fundamentally wrong.

Which other world sports follow this model ?

If Featherstone tick more boxes than we do and get a SL place it rather begs the question of what IMG are actually trying to achieve. As far as IMG are concerned, of the 3 Wakefield clubs it’s probably a toss up between ourselves and Cas - it’s definitely not Featherstone Rovers. Which is why, in my opinion, any system that doesn’t reward lower league teams with promotion is deeply flawed.

If the game needs to grow where are all these players coming from, when there is no reward for player development. Bet Salford are well pleased.

We might be in a different place now not part funding a Academy.

Indeed

Although we look like getting relegated this season (understatement), it's better to be relegated than never to have the (realistic) chance of promotion.
The one thing for sure is that any new "model" will not want Trinity, Cas and Fev in the top flight.
Its much more likely that at some point they will want only one and maybe none of us in there, almost regardless of how well any of us have performed on the pitch.
It's strange that not too many years ago, the structure was changed to allow for promotion and relegation, based on on field performance and now, it looks like, what happens on the filed of play is no longer important and it's all about the number of plastic seats, albeit, that it's wrapped up to sound like something more grand.

This is one of the irony's of the new thing.
The players will still come from the heartlands and down under.

The money spent on the academy per year can fund a broadie croft and tim lafai, of course salford leigh york etc are laughing but rugby league wont be laughing in 10 to 15 years time when there wont be enough good players around cos clubs wont keep doing it,if they do they wont pay the lads(somthing that goes on now at some clubs)so lads has they are will walk away from the game

JM explained that at present, the IMG criteria works on your immediate area. So Wakefield get the Wakefield area, Cas get the area to the Cas boundary and Fev get theirs.
Whether it stays like that remains to be seen, but we are in the best group of the 3. Other criteria obviously goes for and against.

In terms of players....that is why expansionist want a club outside the area, so the young players come from, say, Leicester or Newcastle.

It all seems so OTT to me, what in all this criteria is actually about reimagining the game. With a few exceptions there is nothing really new or inspirational to move the game itself forward.

It's just a mechanism for who can come to the party.

Right load of Bo-----ks.