0Neils40yarder Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 6 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: It led, and still does, to clubs losing a fortune maintaining stadiums multiple sizes too big for them. But Motherwell are alright, so it's nobody else issue I guess. Being in the top flight and having the massive prize money every year has really skewed your perception of Scottish football IMO. One relegation, and the ~£2m+ shortfall that comes with it, would probably be good for your mindset. Whatever the loss would be upon relegation, Motherwell would need to cut their cloth accordingly...that's business. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post McGuigan1978 Posted June 1 Popular Post Share Posted June 1 People celebrating clubs having to rip up surfaces that are good to play football on, and hugely beneficial to the local community is quite the look. 20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 19 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said: Whatever the loss would be upon relegation, Motherwell would need to cut their cloth accordingly...that's business. Which is why, when clubs were forced to maintain 10k+ stadiums they couldn't fill, many turned to the less expensive artificial pitches that also brought income in during the week. But that's no longer an option, so endless loss making and cost cutting on the playing side, while those in the top flight with the £1m+ income advantage over you continue gaining ground and widening the gap. It's literally just the 10k rule all over again, an attempt to close the shop without officially making it so, and those in the top flight are just too content with their own situation to even care what it'll do to the game at all levels. Kids who would spend Wednesday night playing on the park at their local stadium now spending it doing something else, somewhere else. Great stuff. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pizzo Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 The rugby park lights are on every night during the winter months with kids/women's games. To the point we're currently installing a full new floodlight system to save on energy prices. We're fortunate to have an owner who's willing to invest but that won't last forever. The ground is starting to show it's age and the steelwork looks like it's gonna need some pretty serious maintenance soon. I'd imagine all the 90s stands are similar as most were built on the cheap. Could be an interesting next decade as far as facilities go for the whole of Scottish football. Still, so long as Brendan gets his dirty knees fantasy fulfilled every week we'll all be fine. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 1 minute ago, Pizzo said: The rugby park lights are on every night during the winter months with kids/women's games. To the point we're currently installing a full new floodlight system to save on energy prices. We're fortunate to have an owner who's willing to invest but that won't last forever. The ground is starting to show it's age and the steelwork looks like it's gonna need some pretty serious maintenance soon. I'd imagine all the 90s stands are similar as most were built on the cheap. Could be an interesting next decade as far as facilities go for the whole of Scottish football. Still, so long as Brendan gets his dirty knees fantasy fulfilled every week we'll all be fine. McDiarmid is the same. Becoming neglected and old now. Who knew that forcing clubs to spend all their money building stadiums they couldn't afford to maintain, or build, would be causing issues years later? Maybe everyone should have just given up on thinking about playing in the top flight and just let the big kids play amongst themselves instead though. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eez-eh Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said: You're getting £1m more in prize money every season than these clubs, and that's ignoring the higher attendances too. I seem to remember this exact point being dismissed by fans of shite Prem teams a week ago when the huge gap often seen in the play-offs was being discussed. Funny how folk just pick and choose their arguments depending on their agenda. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 1 minute ago, eez-eh said: I seem to remember this exact point being dismissed by fans of shite Prem teams a week ago when the huge gap often seen in the play-offs was being discussed. Funny how folk just pick and choose their arguments depending on their agenda. Only if you ignore the actual points I've made in both, sure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Diamond For Me Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 56 minutes ago, 0Neils40yarder said: Premier league...top division...premiership...same difference. While the 10k seats rule was abysmal in terms of reality (as in the amount of clubs who actually needed that amount of seats), it was required to an extent to force clubs who would happily give fitba players money whilst ignoring the utterly disgraceful facilities that were falling in and around their ears. Yes motherwells hybrid pitch is magnificent...thanks very much It's not the same, because the SPL was an independent organisation. Those clubs broke away from the SFL and set up their own league with their own rules. It was self-serving greed from top to bottom, but at root it was an independent league which could decide who they wanted as members. The SPFL is one organisation, and it is utterly rancid that one subset of that organisation can unilaterally make decisions about membership criteria that impact on other members of the same organisation without there being any consultation or vote. Also, the 10,000 seater rule was not about improving crumbling facilities. That may have been a by-product of it, but if "disgraceful facilities" were the problem, those could be solved by more rigorous safety certificiation without the totally arbitrary and financially ruinous rule about needing 10,000 seats. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 (edited) Still haven't actually heard why folk don't like artificial pitches other than the usual stupid clichés (and lies) about the ball bouncing differently or running differently, or the even bigger cliché and lie about never seeing a good game on one. I've seen plenty of shite games on artificial pitches. I've seen far more shite ones on grass. Are we to ban grass because it makes games shite? I saw a game at East End this season where the ball almost stuck in the pitch due to a problem area. Clearly the ball bounced differently and ran differently. Should all grass pitches therefore be banned? Edited June 1 by DA Baracus 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 (edited) 13 hours ago, 0Neils40yarder said: Because they have spent their money on shite fitba players instead. You have the memory of a chicken. Motherwell made boom and bust fashionable in the John Boyle years. They also took bad pitches to new heights. All it needs is your grounded to be hit by a bus and you'll be playing on the Somme again inside a year. Edited June 1 by Sergeant Wilson 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jute Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 13 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Still haven't actually heard why folk don't like artificial pitches other than the usual stupid clichés (and lies) about the ball bouncing differently or running differently, or the even bigger cliché and lie about never seeing a good game on one. I've seen plenty of shite games on artificial pitches. I've seen far more shite ones on grass. Are we to ban grass because it makes games shite? I saw a game at East End this season where the ball almost stuck in the pitch due to a problem area. Clearly the ball bounced differently and ran differently. Should all grass pitches therefore be banned? To counter that I have seen one good argument for them staying other than it saves money. No of the major manufacturers claim they are as good grass they all talk about use and cost reduction. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 9 minutes ago, Jute said: To counter that I have seen one good argument for them staying other than it saves money. No of the major manufacturers claim they are as good grass they all talk about use and cost reduction. Have you read this thread? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranaldo Bairn Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 3 minutes ago, DA Baracus said: Have you read this thread? It's unbelievable! Good to see lots of folk weighing in on this matter now, but a bit earlier might have been more useful. Can't be helped now. As you said, we're still waiting for any rationale for this madness. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby_Doo Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 12 hours ago, olliethedug said: The pitch at Rugby Park was poor for years before it changed to artificial. The Moffat Stand blocks most of the sun in the winter months. So the grass doesn’t grow. Ah, good old Gus Hollas. Learned horticulture from the janitor on Chewin' The Fat. I think Motherwell also benefitted from his expertise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0Neils40yarder Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 22 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said: Motherwell made boom and busy fashionable in the John Boyle years. They also took bad pitches to new heights. Can't disagree with either of they points...not sure what they have to do with the here and now though 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Kinnear Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 (edited) 50 minutes ago, Pizzo said: The rugby park lights are on every night during the winter months with kids/women's games. To the point we're currently installing a full new floodlight system to save on energy prices. We're fortunate to have an owner who's willing to invest but that won't last forever. The ground is starting to show it's age and the steelwork looks like it's gonna need some pretty serious maintenance soon. I'd imagine all the 90s stands are similar as most were built on the cheap. Could be an interesting next decade as far as facilities go for the whole of Scottish football. Still, so long as Brendan gets his dirty knees fantasy fulfilled every week we'll all be fine. We are the same through the winter, mental health groups, men’s health teams, Falkirk foundation, woman’s team, youth football etc etc all use our pitch through the winter. Switch to grass and that’s gone. Where do these teams get a facility with floodlights to use during the winter months. We also have East Stirling, Denny Warriors using our pitch. They will be made homeless. Edited June 1 by Harry Kinnear 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 Just now, 0Neils40yarder said: Can't disagree with either of they points...not sure what they have to do with the here and now though The point is, shit happens, you (any club) is only a change of circumstances from being in the shite. In Motherwell's case a change of groundsman, a bad winter, a no fault issue with the turf etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby_Doo Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 50 minutes ago, A Diamond For Me said: It's not the same, because the SPL was an independent organisation. Those clubs broke away from the SFL and set up their own league with their own rules. It was self-serving greed from top to bottom, but at root it was an independent league which could decide who they wanted as members. The SPFL is one organisation, and it is utterly rancid that one subset of that organisation can unilaterally make decisions about membership criteria that impact on other members of the same organisation without there being any consultation or vote. Also, the 10,000 seater rule was not about improving crumbling facilities. That may have been a by-product of it, but if "disgraceful facilities" were the problem, those could be solved by more rigorous safety certificiation without the totally arbitrary and financially ruinous rule about needing 10,000 seats. The SPFL only came into existence because Rangers needed to be allowed into it. The only shock is that they haven't gone back to a breakaway twelve again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranaldo Bairn Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 1 minute ago, Scooby_Doo said: The SPFL only came into existence because Rangers needed to be allowed into it. The only shock is that they haven't gone back to a breakaway twelve again. That's probably not far away if the smaller clubs keep on telling them to ram their accursed B Teams. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C4mmy31 Posted June 1 Share Posted June 1 58 minutes ago, Pizzo said: The rugby park lights are on every night during the winter months with kids/women's games. To the point we're currently installing a full new floodlight system to save on energy prices. We're fortunate to have an owner who's willing to invest but that won't last forever. The ground is starting to show it's age and the steelwork looks like it's gonna need some pretty serious maintenance soon. I'd imagine all the 90s stands are similar as most were built on the cheap. Could be an interesting next decade as far as facilities go for the whole of Scottish football. Still, so long as Brendan gets his dirty knees fantasy fulfilled every week we'll all be fine. Barr Construction & Murray International Metals, we really should have known better !! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.