2026 Championship Discussion

[jason taylor]

Like quality of the grounds and pitch sizes, yes?

As you’d know by now, stadium is one of the five categories (Fandom (5 points), On field performance (5 points), Finance (4.5 points) Stadium (3 points), Community (2.5 points)

Bradford made large increases in their finance rating (increased by 1.5 points to 4.2), Stadium (still only 1.8/3 but an increase of 1.1), a minor increase in performance of .3, a minor decrease of .3 in Fandom (still a strong 3.9/5) with Community static at a high 2.25.

So you might ask how they got the stadium rating they did due to the well recognised poor state of Odsal - it comes down to the stadium rating not being exclusively dictated by the quality of the pitch itself, but a broader range of criteria.

“Stadium [3pts]: Quality of facility and capacity of stadium (1.5pts), owning the stadium (0.25pts), match-day experience (LED advertising boards 0.125pts, big screen 0.125pts), utilisation (1pt)”

So if we look the above criteria, we can see where they pick up stadium points.
- their ownership of Odsal (which yes, Nigel Wood was involved in) gives them an automatic 0.25 points.
- They put up a big screen this year - so that’s an automatic 0.125 points. I have no clue regarding LED Advertising boards, but I think it’s safe to say they have those as well given the minimal effort to put those up when you own the stadium (so another 0.125 points)

So that’s already .5 points out of 3 gain through relatively low effort that is not available to other teams due to them not owning their stadium.

- By all reports the biggest gain they made in the stadium criteria was utilisation. I think it’s been said that they did a Clive Palmer and reduced the active capacity of the stadium to on paper fully utilise it? So again, a step they were able to pull off because of their stadium ownership.
- I believe live streaming their own games also counts towards stadium utilisation points.
- they improved the “quality of facilities” by installing a new and enlarged gantry, so that’s extra points there as well.

So ultimately, I attribute Bradford’s rapid increase up the IMG ratings down to three factors:

1) They have clearly turned things around financially and are running a relative (as far as professional rugby league clubs in the UK go) sustainable operation. They’re in a much better state financially than they have been in a very long time and seemingly are being run competently.

2) Bradford’s ownership over Odsal has allowed them to target IMG rating increases in a strategic way. This is a strategy that isn’t available to clubs that don’t own their stadium.

3) That they have established strong scores in Fandom and Community, which provided a strong base to build on in terms of further improving their score.

So yes - Nigel Wood’s role in the stadium saga and Bradford’s regaining of ownership played an important role. But outside of that, I don’t see a grand conspiracy of him doctoring their results, which is what a lot of the online social media conspiracies are inferring.

 

[Perth Red]

Like quality of the grounds and pitch sizes, yes?

They take into quality of the ground from a number of perspectives. #1 being revenue generation and media quality. Aesthetics are subjective and therefore not included.

unfortunately stock cars has a long lease for odsal so unless bulls are willing to buy it out looks like they’re stuck with pitch confines.

 

[RL The greatest game]

As you’d know by now, stadium is one of the five categories (Fandom (5 points), On field performance (5 points), Finance (4.5 points) Stadium (3 points), Community (2.5 points)

Bradford made large increases in their finance rating (increased by 1.5 points to 4.2), Stadium (still only 1.8/3 but an increase of 1.1), a minor increase in performance of .3, a minor decrease of .3 in Fandom (still a strong 3.9/5) with Community static at a high 2.25.

So you might ask how they got the stadium rating they did due to the well recognised poor state of Odsal - it comes down to the stadium rating not being exclusively dictated by the quality of the pitch itself, but a broader range of criteria.

“Stadium [3pts]: Quality of facility and capacity of stadium (1.5pts), owning the stadium (0.25pts), match-day experience (LED advertising boards 0.125pts, big screen 0.125pts), utilisation (1pt)”

So if we look the above criteria, we can see where they pick up stadium points.
- their ownership of Odsal (which yes, Nigel Wood was involved in) gives them an automatic 0.25 points.
- They put up a big screen this year - so that’s an automatic 0.125 points. I have no clue regarding LED Advertising boards, but I think it’s safe to say they have those as well given the minimal effort to put those up when you own the stadium (so another 0.125 points)

So that’s already .5 points out of 3 gain through relatively low effort that is not available to other teams due to them not owning their stadium.

- By all reports the biggest gain they made in the stadium criteria was utilisation. I think it’s been said that they did a Clive Palmer and reduced the active capacity of the stadium to on paper fully utilise it? So again, a step they were able to pull off because of their stadium ownership.
- I believe live streaming their own games also counts towards stadium utilisation points.
- they improved the “quality of facilities” by installing a new and enlarged gantry, so that’s extra points there as well.

So ultimately, I attribute Bradford’s rapid increase up the IMG ratings down to three factors:

1) They have clearly turned things around financially and are running a relative (as far as professional rugby league clubs in the UK go) sustainable operation. They’re in a much better state financially than they have been in a very long time and seemingly are being run competently.

2) Bradford’s ownership over Odsal has allowed them to target IMG rating increases in a strategic way. This is a strategy that isn’t available to clubs that don’t own their stadium.

3) That they have established strong scores in Fandom and Community, which provided a strong base to build on in terms of further improving their score.

So yes - Nigel Wood’s role in the stadium saga and Bradford’s regaining of ownership played an important role. But outside of that, I don’t see a grand conspiracy of him doctoring their results, which is what a lot of the online social media conspiracies are inferring.

Friends in the UK tell me there is a huge mistrust of Wood and his agenda, and apart from Bradford Bulls fans he is despised by fans of other clubs, and it's not helped by giving the interim CEO job at the RFL to one his mates who hasn't been a CEO of any company for 20 years

 

[jason taylor]

Friends in the UK tell me there is a huge mistrust of Wood and his agenda, and apart from Bradford Bulls fans he is despised by fans of other clubs, and it's not helped by giving the interim CEO job at the RFL to one his mates who hasn't been a CEO of any company for 20 years

Which I’m not contesting - I’m just dispelling the myth that he manufactured the return of Bradford to Super League through subverting the IMG ratings.

Bradford leveraged their strengths to maximise their score using the framework that is in place. The reason other teams haven’t done the same is a combination of being in a worse financial position and not owning their stadium.

 

[RL The greatest game]

Which I’m not contesting - I’m just dispelling the myth that he manufactured the return of Bradford to Super League through subverting the IMG ratings.

Bradford leveraged their strengths to maximise their score using the framework that is in place. The reason other teams haven’t done the same is a combination of being in a worse financial position and not owning their stadium.

So you don't find anything suspicious about their gradings go up to 10th and being able to get full TV funding?

 

[jason taylor]

So you don't find anything suspicious about their gradings go up to 10th and being able to get full TV funding?

No I don’t - read my post again. I have laid it all out for you. It all makes sense given how the IMG rating system works. Bradford were well positioned this year, given their improved financial situation, their resumption of ownership of Odsal, and their 9th place finish in 2022 dropping off to rapidly increase their score.

You can criticise the IMG system and what it takes into account, but Bradford’s score makes sense within the framework given the advantages they have over the teams they leapfrogged in terms of fandom, their community and their improved financial situation in recent years.

 

[RL The greatest game]

No I don’t - read my post again. I have laid it all out for you. It all makes sense given how the IMG rating system works. Bradford were well positioned this year, given their improved financial situation, their resumption of ownership of Odsal, and their 9th place finish in 2022 dropping off to rapidly increase their score.

You can criticise the IMG system and what it takes into account, but Bradford’s score makes sense within the framework given the advantages they have over the teams they leapfrogged in terms of fandom, their community and their improved financial situation in recent years.

Community that's an interesting one. Bradford has had a large Asian community for many years, so how many development officers do the Bulls have working in the Asian community, and working in schools where they are more than 50% Asian or kids of Asian descent?

 

[jason taylor]

Community that's an interesting one. Bradford has had a large Asian community for many years, so how many development officers do the Bulls have working in the Asian community, and working in schools where they are more than 50% Asian or kids of Asian descent?

Unfortunately that’s not what the ‘Community’ rating takes into account. It’s the weird catchment area/charitable arm metric (which has been criticised since the ratings were first announced two years ago).

Its a well known limitation of the IMG system (by fans anyway) that it doesn’t take into account academies/grassroots development.

 

[Perth Red]

Community that's an interesting one. Bradford has had a large Asian community for many years, so how many development officers do the Bulls have working in the Asian community, and working in schools where they are more than 50% Asian or kids of Asian descent?

Bradford have one of the best community foundations and jnr pathway success in England.

 

[RL The greatest game]

Unfortunately that’s not what the ‘Community’ rating takes into account. It’s the weird catchment area/charitable arm metric (which has been criticised since the ratings were first announced two years ago).

Its a well known limitation of the IMG system (by fans anyway) that it doesn’t take into account academies/grassroots development.

So it's flawed concept then

 

[jason taylor]

So it's flawed concept then

It’s not perfect no. But the majority of clubs signed up the IMG process and endorsed the criteria. So you can’t argue it’s a Nigel Wood/Bradford conspiracy.

It’s a more objective process than what proceeded it and the facts are in the results - clubs have improved off the field since IMG was adopted three years ago.

 

[Perth Red]

So it's flawed concept then

No its a very good process. Its year 3 of a 12 year plan. Its making clubs get their sht together at long last. Long may it continue!

 

[League Unlimited News]

 

[League Unlimited News]

How every RFL Championship team's fixture list will look in 2026

The RFL will launch a newly-merged 21-team Championship in 2026. Here is how every clubs' fixture list is going to look as it stands.

www.loverugbyleague.com

The schedule for the newly-merged 2026 Championship is getting close to publication – and recent comments from some club executives in recent days have offered a clear hint as to the format.

High-profile individuals from Whitehaven and Barrow have revealed in separate interviews on social media that, as reported by Love Rugby League last month, the bulk of the 21-team league’s structure will not be on geography, but will instead be on league positions in the previous season.

Here is an explanation of how it will all work – so far.

The first 20 games​

Every club will be given a seeding based on where they finished the previous year. So as it stands – though we’ll clarify that later – Salford are ranked 1 as they had the highest finish in the pyramid in 2025. Halifax are next, as they progressed the furthest in the play-offs of the remaining teams, Oldham 3 and so on: all the way down to Newcastle, who finished bottom of League 1.

Each team plays 10 other teams at home and away based on the seedings, which makes for 20 games. At this stage, we’d urge you to watch Barrow chairman Steve Neale’s excellent explanation of how the ‘pendulum system’ will work. In short, you’ll play the 10 teams that are closest to you in the seedings.

For example, Salford are going to play the 10 teams left from the Championship. Newcastle would play the 10 above them. If you’re in the middle, you play those who were directly above you and those directly below you.

What about the extra four games?​

Four more games are then added based on local rivalries – but here’s the catch, you can’t play a team you’ve already been drawn against in the seedings system. So for example, Workington and Whitehaven are scheduled to already be playing each other – so an extra local derby wouldn’t be added.

Batley and Dewsbury, however, are not drawn against one another in the pendulum system, so that will almost certainly be an extra fixture home and away for both.

Some games that look certain to be added based on the fact they’re not already seeded against each other (both home and away) include Doncaster v Sheffield, Barrow v Whitehaven, Halifax v Dewsbury, Salford v Swinton and, as mentioned the Heavy Woollen Derby of Batley v Dewsbury.

But at this stage, it’s impossible to know what all those loop games will be – though we can lock in 20 of the 24 games every team will play.

The Salford conundrum​

As revealed by Love Rugby League last month, and confirmed by Neale himself in his Facebook video, the delay behind publishing this system surrounds Salford.

It remains unclear whether they’ll survive the off-season and if they were to go bust and re-form, there is a debate about whether they should enter as the 1st ranked team, or the last ranked team.

 

[Listenup94]

As you’d know by now, stadium is one of the five categories (Fandom (5 points), On field performance (5 points), Finance (4.5 points) Stadium (3 points), Community (2.5 points)

Bradford made large increases in their finance rating (increased by 1.5 points to 4.2), Stadium (still only 1.8/3 but an increase of 1.1), a minor increase in performance of .3, a minor decrease of .3 in Fandom (still a strong 3.9/5) with Community static at a high 2.25.

So you might ask how they got the stadium rating they did due to the well recognised poor state of Odsal - it comes down to the stadium rating not being exclusively dictated by the quality of the pitch itself, but a broader range of criteria.

“Stadium [3pts]: Quality of facility and capacity of stadium (1.5pts), owning the stadium (0.25pts), match-day experience (LED advertising boards 0.125pts, big screen 0.125pts), utilisation (1pt)”

So if we look the above criteria, we can see where they pick up stadium points.
- their ownership of Odsal (which yes, Nigel Wood was involved in) gives them an automatic 0.25 points.
- They put up a big screen this year - so that’s an automatic 0.125 points. I have no clue regarding LED Advertising boards, but I think it’s safe to say they have those as well given the minimal effort to put those up when you own the stadium (so another 0.125 points)

So that’s already .5 points out of 3 gain through relatively low effort that is not available to other teams due to them not owning their stadium.

- By all reports the biggest gain they made in the stadium criteria was utilisation. I think it’s been said that they did a Clive Palmer and reduced the active capacity of the stadium to on paper fully utilise it? So again, a step they were able to pull off because of their stadium ownership.
- I believe live streaming their own games also counts towards stadium utilisation points.
- they improved the “quality of facilities” by installing a new and enlarged gantry, so that’s extra points there as well.

So ultimately, I attribute Bradford’s rapid increase up the IMG ratings down to three factors:

1) They have clearly turned things around financially and are running a relative (as far as professional rugby league clubs in the UK go) sustainable operation. They’re in a much better state financially than they have been in a very long time and seemingly are being run competently.

2) Bradford’s ownership over Odsal has allowed them to target IMG rating increases in a strategic way. This is a strategy that isn’t available to clubs that don’t own their stadium.

3) That they have established strong scores in Fandom and Community, which provided a strong base to build on in terms of further improving their score.

So yes - Nigel Wood’s role in the stadium saga and Bradford’s regaining of ownership played an important role. But outside of that, I don’t see a grand conspiracy of him doctoring their results, which is what a lot of the online social media conspiracies are inferring.

Bradford bulls put up led boards for one game , an img loophole , the rest of the time they've been undergoing 'maintenance apparently '.

 

[Taking The Two]

https://x.com/londonbroncosrl/status/1993582998051237915?s=46

A Broncos exclusive at 3.30pm today.

 

[Taking The Two]

The exclusive was the signing of Jeremiah Simbiken for London.

It seems that Jason Demetriou has done a podcast with Sky, too.

 

[Perth Red]

Good interview with the coach:

 

[Taking The Two]

https://www.alloutrugbyleague.co.uk/news/championship-fixture-date-new-look-1527847

Tuesday for the fixtures.

 

[Taking The Two]

https://www.londonbroncosrl.com/product/2026-london-broncos-mens-home-jersey

https://www.londonbroncosrl.com/product/2026-london-broncos-mens-away-jersey


London jerseys for the year.