Artificial pitch vote

[bob_mcshug]

That paper barely has anything in it (less than 10 pages) and presents a statistical formula to simulate outcomes and doesn't account for all the other variables mentioned above. 

It also only studied one league over 3 seasons so no reference to other leagues that use pitches or other divisions. It's not the smoking gun you think it is...

[scottsdad]

2 hours ago, btb said:

Familiarity.

Artificial Pitches and Unfair Home Advantage in Professional Football by Jan van Ours :: SSRN

 

OK...however that one study (based on 3 seasons of the Dutch league) is actually rebutted by other, bigger studies that are published in more reputable journals. 

For example:

The effect on home advantage when a team changes from grass to artificial turf – a worldwide study in professional football

from the International Journal on Performance Analysis in Sport states 

Quote

No significant difference in HA was found between the four seasons (p = .85). This result, together with studies showing no injury, physical or performance difference between AT and NT, gives further validation to FIFA in its current promotion of AT.

(HA = home advantage, AT = artificial turf, NT = natural turf)

and:

Does accounting for an artificial turf advantage in Dutch football increase predictive accuracy of probabilistic models?

states in a clear rebuttal to the paper you cited that

Quote

We find that including the artificial turf home advantage as additional predictor does not improve the accuracy of the forecasts. We conclude that the evidence for a large artificial turf advantage in the Eredivisie is not strong. 
 

 

There is a whole body of evidence showing no difference. There are a few papers showing there is. It's like finding the odd paper arguing that climate change doesn't exists amongst the others that state it does. 

[btb]

2 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

OK...however that one study (based on 3 seasons of the Dutch league) is actually rebutted by other, bigger studies that are published in more reputable journals. 

For example:

The effect on home advantage when a team changes from grass to artificial turf – a worldwide study in professional football

from the International Journal on Performance Analysis in Sport states 

and:

Does accounting for an artificial turf advantage in Dutch football increase predictive accuracy of probabilistic models?

states in a clear rebuttal to the paper you cited that

 

There is a whole body of evidence showing no difference. There are a few papers showing there is. It's like finding the odd paper arguing that climate change doesn't exists amongst the others that state it does. 

And the EFL not allowing artificial pitches?

My main argument however has always been the hypocrisy of Falkirk and Falkirk fans re the accusations of self-interest.  

[scottsdad]

4 minutes ago, btb said:

And the EFL not allowing artificial pitches?

My main argument however has always been the hypocrisy of Falkirk and Falkirk fans re the accusations of self-interest.  

All I am asking for are proper reasons for banning them, other than "I don't like them". 

The "advantage" they give doesn't exist. They don't cause more injuries. I'm just asking why people are taking against them. 

[btb]

1 minute ago, scottsdad said:

All I am asking for are proper reasons for banning them, other than "I don't like them". 

The "advantage" they give doesn't exist. They don't cause more injuries. I'm just asking why people are taking against them. 

Fair enough you've found a paper with a different opinion to mine but that's not outright proof that the "advantage" doesn't exist as I say just a different opinion but I see again you've ignored my EPL point - there's a clear and obvious reason for this. As I've said if the vote goes to allow plastic pitches I hope we install one as my main gripe is the hypocrisy of Falkirk and their fanbase,

Is there a "Days Lost" prize cos I'm sure I'll be winning it today. 

[scottsdad]

1 minute ago, btb said:

Fair enough you've found a paper with a different opinion to mine but that's not outright proof that the "advantage" doesn't exist as I say just a different opinion but I see again you've ignored my EPL point - there's a clear and obvious reason for this. As I've said if the vote goes to allow plastic pitches I hope we install one as my main gripe is the hypocrisy of Falkirk and their fanbase,

Is there a "Days Lost" prize cos I'm sure I'll be winning it today. 

I wasn't sure what the EPL point is, i'm not overly fussed with why other associations ban them. I just want to understand why fans at other clubs are so against them. 

To be truthful, if there was a genuine, measurable advantage to having an artificial pitch and it was well known about, the premiership clubs wouldn't be voting to ban them; they'd be installing them. 

[Rugster]

5 minutes ago, btb said:

 I see again you've ignored my EPL point - there's a clear and obvious reason for this.

There's also a clear and obvious reason UEFA allow them.

[Empty It]

With all this home advantage with an artificial pitch I'm suprised that Livi haven't won the league yet. 

[Billy Jean King]

16 minutes ago, Rugster said:

There's also a clear and obvious reason UEFA allow them.

UEFA the last bastion of fairness

 

I'm really not grasping this notion that fans of clubs with plastic pitches genuinely didn't think there was such a groundswell of disdain towards them from fans of clubs who play on grass. The only visible evidence will be via the fans owned clubs member votes but they will not be an outlier (why would they be). What did you honestly expect  ?

[Groundhopping Adventures]

A lot in here parroting what the Daily Record or S*n tell them about artificial pitches. 

[strichener]

4 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

The fact you’re disagreeing with me just confirms my position.

Please show your workings.  Your stance against UEFA is rather Brexity.  Oh wait..

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

45 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

 

To be truthful, if there was a genuine, measurable advantage to having an artificial pitch and it was well known about, the premiership clubs wouldn't be voting to ban them; they'd be installing them. 

The advantage isn’t that you play better football on them. The advantage is that you better understand how the surface behaves.

So why would that be a reason for everyone to install them? If that happened, all you’d have is a situation where there was no advantage to anyone and we’d all be playing on shite plastic pitches. 

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water. 

[Bairnardo]

8 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

The advantage isn’t that you play better football on them. The advantage is that you better understand how the surface behaves.

So why would that be a reason for everyone to install them? If that happened, all you’d have is a situation where there was no advantage to anyone and we’d all be playing on shite plastic pitches. 

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water. 

So have we stats on what this advantage actually adds up to? Because as others have already pointed out, iv seen Falkirk be both utterly rancid, and absolutely sublime on our surface. 

[Bairnardo]

39 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

UEFA the last bastion of fairness

 

I'm really not grasping this notion that fans of clubs with plastic pitches genuinely didn't think there was such a groundswell of disdain towards them from fans of clubs who play on grass. The only visible evidence will be via the fans owned clubs member votes but they will not be an outlier (why would they be). What did you honestly expect  ?

Again.... Disdain is absolutely fine. You can absolutely hate them if you want..... 

Issuing a ban on something that has been absolutely allowed and acceptable up until now, and has seen considerable investment from a number of clubs on that basis, because you don't like it, is not fine. 

It has about the same level of integrity as shrieking for a ban on putting ten men behind ball cos it annoys you when a Diddy team snatches a draw against you. 

[Ranaldo Bairn]

19 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

The advantage isn’t that you play better football on them. The advantage is that you better understand how the surface behaves.

So why would that be a reason for everyone to install them? If that happened, all you’d have is a situation where there was no advantage to anyone and we’d all be playing on shite plastic pitches. 

Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water. 

Ironically, exactly what looks like happening here.

[Ranaldo Bairn]

49 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

UEFA the last bastion of fairness

 

I'm really not grasping this notion that fans of clubs with plastic pitches genuinely didn't think there was such a groundswell of disdain towards them from fans of clubs who play on grass. The only visible evidence will be via the fans owned clubs member votes but they will not be an outlier (why would they be). What did you honestly expect  ?

We probably expected a fair da quotient, but the sheer paucity of arguments for getting rid of them is frankly getting embarrassing now.

There are no financial, entertainment or injury-related reasons to do so. Any on-field advantage is minimal at best, and more likely non-existent.

So come on then, apart from "Ah just dinny like them", tell us why they all need ripped up?

[Scooby_Doo]

3 hours ago, btb said:

......and there were no other factors involved in these relegations, are we meant to assume these were  the only teams relegated during this period - strawman argument.

You mean 'other factors' that might contribute to a perceived advantage?

You also have to wonder about the motive behind a study talking about the supposed 'unfair' advantage of artificial surfaces. How can it be unfair if they are permitted in the league rules?

[2426255]

10 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

I'm saying everyone should be playing on one surface not that grass pitches are all the same. Dens was a disgrace, no excuse for that, simply bad pitch management. 

 

Worse than that. Dundee FC were skimping on the pitch to allow funds to be redirected to other areas that enabled them to achieve their league objectives and beyond. That's so poor and they were caught with their pants down when it rained.

I think if teams are forced to have grass pitches it's inevitable we will see other teams take similar gambles trying to push the limits and make our game look amateur.  

Edited May 29 by 2426255

[Newbornbairn]

This is all because Brendan Rodgers says he doesn't like artificial turf. Also the St Mirren manager "hates them with a passion" but doesn't explain why. 

[Ranaldo Bairn]

Catastrophic display on this matter from the Paisley Luddites.

Come on lads, speak up, why must they go? Was it because Uncle Brendan told you they had to?