Artificial pitch vote

[Scooby_Doo]

5 hours ago, Jacky1990 said:

If we want all good grass pitches season long, we need to move to a summer league.

Very good point. Most grass pitches in the top flight go very brown once the clocks change, and stay that way until they change back again.

[PSJ.84]

11 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

The Champions League Final has been held on plastic, and the World Cup Final will in 2 years.

I’m on your side but I can’t help being pedantic

If you’re meaning the 2008 Champions League Final then they replaced the plastic for a grass pitch temporarily. 

Edited March 10 by PSJ.84

[Spring Onion]

17 minutes ago, PSJ.84 said:

I’m on your side but I can’t help being pedantic

If you’re meaning the 2008 Champions League Final then they replaced the plastic for a grass pith temporarily. 

And the WC in 2 years will be on a natural grass pitch. No part of what he said was true. 

[Ric]

Yes we should "ban" artificial pitches, because a properly maintained grass pitch is always superior to a fake one.

That said, artificial pitches have their uses, especially further down the leagues where money is extremely tight and forking out (ha, pun!) cash for a grass pitch when you'll not have the money to maintain it seems daft. On the flip side, a bad grass pitch can be much worse than a good artificial one. Artificial surfaces are much better then previously. I remember despising Hamilton's plastic pitch because the ball movement was very clearly different.

So, top division, no plastic, lower leagues can have them.

Here is the rub for those who feel I am being harsh on plastic surface clubs, I suggest that the SPFL funds the pitch cost of converting a plastic pitch to grass for any club wishing to compete in the premiership. In my mind a good quality grass pitch enhances our game, so spending money on such things should be considered an acceptable cost.

[PSJ.84]

10 minutes ago, Ric said:

Here is the rub for those who feel I am being harsh on plastic surface clubs, I suggest that the SPFL funds the pitch cost of converting a plastic pitch to grass for any club wishing to compete in the premiership. In my mind a good quality grass pitch enhances our game, so spending money on such things should be considered an acceptable cost.

Where’s the money coming from though?

[Ric]

Just now, PSJ.84 said:

Where’s the money coming from though?

Do you mean that literally, because it's in the section you quoted, or is that in the figurative sense?

Figuratively it's a question you could ask for every single thing in football. Referees? Where is the money coming from to pay them? Floodlights so players can see? Where is the money coming from to pay for them? etc...

 

It would be a considerable financial burden for a small club to come up and be forced to spend money on a grass pitch because the league rules state you need one. Yet, if we also accept that a well maintained grass pitch is the best option to play football on then the league should help that club out.

I think we would all prefer to see money being put into clubs, it's just that the pervasive late stage capitalist model we see ourselves forced to endure doesn't allow investment without financial return. Me? I'm happy arguing that RoI is not tangible and that it is an existential issue rather than a financial one.

 

 

 

 

[Sortmeout]

9 hours ago, welldaft said:

Kilmarnock fan says so. I mean pmsl. 

Your pitch is an embarrassment. Face facts.

How did your cup tie go today

 

When did Motherwell last win a trophy? Were you even alive? 
 

 

[NFL12]

10 hours ago, welldaft said:

Kilmarnock fan says so. I mean pmsl. 

Your pitch is an embarrassment. Face facts.

How did your cup tie go today

 

The state of this. And for just a plastic argument. Must have skinned his knee on one.

[itzdrk]

Welldaft seems like a well rounded individual.  

[GNU_Linux]

Love footy
love grass
ate plastic

Simple as

[welldaft]

31 minutes ago, itzdrk said:

Welldaft seems like a well rounded individual.  

I am. Everyone in the care home says so.

I start drinking malt whisky on a Saturday night around 9pm. So there comes a point I just take the piss. And the funniest part is how many (Killie) fans fall for it. Normally I aim my malt infused posts at St Mirren fans. 

And to the guy asking I was at the 1991 Cup final. Only game I missed was the Morton replay. 

Enjoy your Euro trips Killie fans. I have been on many. Always a laugh regardless the results. 

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

15 hours ago, Scooby_Doo said:

See by no-one, do you mean everyone?

Here are Kilmarnock's league placings since installing the 'magic' carpet in 2014:

14/15 10th
15/16 11th
16/17 8th
17/18 5th
18/19 3rd
19/20 8th
20/21 11th (Relegated via the play off)
21/22 1st Championship
22/23 10th

Admittedly, in the seasons we finished 5th and 3rd we did have the massively unfair advantage of having a fucking great manager. If you take those outliers out, it has been of no advantage at all.

I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with the point you are arguing against, but I don’t think the above is the best evidence to prove your point. Surely better evidence would be to compare your home form to your away form during those same seasons.

Seems to me that this argument is more about the quality of artificial pitches rather than whether they should be allowed or not. If a plastic pitch is genuinely good quality that doesn’t prevent good football being played, then I have no issue with it just because it’s plastic. However, that cannot be said about either Killie or Livi’s pitches which are both terrible. The way the ball moves on them makes it almost impossible for players whose game is about running with the ball and teams often have to just resort to a long ball game. 

[2426255]

7 minutes ago, GNU_Linux said:

footy

[chris1883]

13 hours ago, welldaft said:

17 hours ago, velo army said:

 

The arguments against are based on professional players and Managers

It's not though. I would say that the arguments against come more from the boardroom. of clubs with grass pitches. What players and managers complain about is bad plastic pitches. I wouldn't go as far as saying that the pitch at Stark's has received praise this season as such, but it hasn't received complaints. Tony Watt even seemed happy with the surface following the 1:1 draw earlier this season because of the weather.

People seem to not realise that synthetic pitches need to pass an inspection every season, whereas grass pitches don't. It's almost like saying "If you install a synthetic pitch, it needs to pass UEFA quality standards... because the SFL has standards. If you install grass - do what you want because a tattie field in a rain storm in Peterhead is superior to FIFA approved 3G". It's just madness.

If the SPL does go down the route of banning all synthetic surfaces, they need to implement standards for grass pitches including inspections.

[LIVIFOREVER]

On 09/03/2024 at 09:13, tree house tam said:

Why should Scottish football pay for all and sundry to have artificial pitches? Clubs should find their level and if they can't afford them tough, along will come another club to fill the gap.

Only they keep changing the goal posts to keep clubs down. If they could get away with it they'd make the top flight exclusive to clubs with over 5 thousand fans only.

[Kyle Reese]

I am still for getting rid of them. I think an elite level league should have certain things that are not compromised on. Full participation in a reserve league. A youth system. Grass pitches. Undersoil hearing and good drainage. Grass pitch. If that impacts the amount to be spent on first team players then so be it. I do not really get how some clubs can argue that their artificial surface is good for youth development and argue against a bigger league and reserve league, when both of those latter things would improve youth development.

 

 

Edited March 10 by Kyle Reese

[RandomGuy.]

13 minutes ago, Kyle Reese said:

I am still for getting rid of them. I think an elite level league should have certain things that are not compromised on. Grass pitches.

Just pure grass pitches?

[Kyle Reese]

Just now, RandomGuy. said:

Just pure grass pitches?

Enhancements like hybrid fibres that protect them from cutting up is fine too, obviously. Cheeky wee scamp.

[chris1883]

9 minutes ago, Kyle Reese said:

I do not really get how some clubs can argue that their artificial surface is good for youth development

It is simply because they use their pitch and stadium facilities for their academy, reserves, community engagement etc. If they needed to build and run somewhere near by - that would be prohibitively expensive and would likely result in engagement and development being cut.

Scotland is a small country. The money in our game is ridiculously small (most clubs requiring handouts to just do the basics). I believe if you list the priorities of our game in order, the requirement of a grass pitch would not be at the top. I would put the First Team, The Academy, Facilities, Community involvement, the woman's game all above the requirement to have a grass pitch over a good 3G pitch.

I return to a point I have made many times - we aren't even stating the grass pitch needs to be of a standard. A club could rip up a UEFA approved multi-million pound 3G surface to replace it with turf bought from B&Q with poor drainage and will cut-up. This fascination with grass surfaces needs to be put into context... an average grass pitch is generally worse to play on than a good synthetic surface. Why are so many intent with implimenting a rule to mandate a grass pitch which will likely be worse than what it replaces?

[NFL12]

11 hours ago, itzdrk said:

Welldaft seems like a well rounded individual.  

You mean fat?