Potential ban on artificial pitches in the Premiership - No to just 12 clubs voting

[itzdrk]

Don't really see the advantage to our game of not having these pitches.  

It would be better if there was some sort of 'pitch maintenance' framework that covered grass, hybrid and artificial surfaces that all the clubs had to follow e.g. no slopes, adequate drainage, artificial surfaces replaced before expiry etc etc

[itzdrk]

9 minutes ago, Alert Mongoose said:

At no point in this crusade have you considered the implications for worms and other similar creatures.  Good points and bad points should be covered.

Kilmarnock are getting a grass pitch in. 

[San Starko Rover]

1 hour ago, 101 said:

That's the problem though, many artificial pitches are down far far too long.

Queen of the south and Falkirk both had pitches down beyond their expected life span, well beyond in Queens case. Would imagine Raiths would be replaced this close season or next?

I think teams drag the arse out of it and that's the problem, also what do folk do with their old pitches would be good if they were donated to local uses that could use them but I suspect they end up in landfill.

Got no problem with plastic pitches as long as they’re the required standard although a good grass pitch will always beat a good artificial surface.   I’ve actually been pretty impressed with ours as I was sceptical at first but I agree with your point about replacing them. For SPFL football there should be a lifespan of (X) number of years and then it MUST be replaced. 

[Paisley Ton]

Think it will be OF pushing this. 

While these pitches offer additional use and community use they do effect how the game is played. 

So OF wish to remove any perceived advantage to others. Just like Hearts reducing OF away supporters numbers.

Not sure if their training pitches are grass and artificial.

As for recycling, Ralston golf club got the old St Mirren training surface and has used for walkways.

[stevoraith]

The football argument is one thing and it’s been covered plenty. 
 

What worries me if Raith were to be made to revert to grass, far more than losing any perceived sporting advantage or improved call-off rate, is the loss of the community use facility. 
 

The pitch is in use every night of the week. There are literally hundreds of local youngsters playing with the Raith crest on their strips on the same pitch as their heroes. 
Of course the community teams would still exist but how well would they do if they had to find alternative locations elsewhere in the town or even outside? 
And the crucial point for me- the Raith community foundation teams then become just another team for kids to play with. They’re not playing for THE Raith Rovers, and the connection that could bind them to the club as supporters for the rest of their lives is gone. 

The old firm don’t get that type of connection or sense of community so they won’t give a shit. 
A vote on whether we should get the Old Firm to f**k would be more worthwhile I think. 

Edited March 18 by stevoraith

[Finlay21]

1 minute ago, stevoraith said:

A vote on whether we should get the Old Firm to f**k would be more worthwhile I think. 

[Passionate]

The great debate. Grass or plastic,   we live in a constantly moving world with hi tech being the norm throughout every part of society,  but we are still happy to pay (overpay let's be honest) to watch Football on a 'grass pitch' with 40% grass on it the majority of the season, the rest hard caked mud...   Or you can play on the latest gauge of an artificial surface, the same surface players mostly train on during the week,   

 

But I am not a member of the elite SPL where not for the first time Dundee have been the victim of an 'act of god' and has to cancel a televised game due to an unplayable surface. Dundee eh must have it's own micro climate,    haud on,  there is another pitch 100m away at Tannadice that's like a bowling green, (well it was 2 weeks ago) with a team in a lower league who even if they win their league will not even earn a fifth of the prize money Dundee will earn finishing 6 or 7th in the good old SPL..

We can moan about the 400k Doncaster earns etc, there are clubs throughout the pyramid who are putting our top clubs to shame with the state of their grass pitches,

With the generous prize money (compared to the rest of the leagues) surely the league can insist that if they want a no plastic rule in the SPL , then every club must have an amount of money put aside every season for pitch upkeep, relaid start of season or through the season as required,  Aesthetics.are important in football, better players might want to come, better TV deals could be sought,   have we really tried anything different apart from moan about everything,  the good old days of Scottish Football weren't that great if you remember....

Back to the main point if you want Grass make sure it's on the pitch, or it not really a grass pitch...

 

OR. 

 

As a lot of fans think when Livi and their 'dreaded pitch' go,  and Dundee United and their very decent facilities come up,  the drawbridge will get pulled up , with a 2 fingered salute to the rest of Scottish Football......

[SandyCromarty]

I've brought up the problem with plastic pitches a few times over the last few years after reading a couple of articles against them by the environmental brigade. There is a campaign against them due to the plastic composition with the main argument being that plastic from the pitches is getting into the drainage systems.

But what next? A ban on plastic formed seating?

[HIT THE CHANNEL]

@stevoraith and @grumswall fully agree on the damage to the community. That’s my main concern. Do email the club to get this point across and try and get some momentum for a fair vote

[vikingTON]

3 minutes ago, HIT THE CHANNEL said:

@stevoraith and @grumswall fully agree on the damage to the community. That’s my main concern. Do email the club to get this point across and try and get some momentum for a fair vote

Ah yes, it's merely the community impact and poor wee scheme weans that are the subject of your concern. As opposed to Raith's 'speculate to accumulate' 'business model' going up in flames. 

No other 4G pitch facility exists in Fife that could possibly take up the slack. 

[Sergeant Wilson]

Community involvement = charging people to use it. 

If football clubs could find a way to exclude the community, they would.

[stevoraith]

40 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said:

I've brought up the problem with plastic pitches a few times over the last few years after reading a couple of articles against them by the environmental brigade. There is a campaign against them due to the plastic composition with the main argument being that plastic from the pitches is getting into the drainage systems.

But what next? A ban on plastic formed seating?

This argument is complete tosh in the context of banning them from the Premiership. 
There are a maximum of 12 pitches which could be artificial in the top league. 
There are probably more than that in every decently sized town in Scotland. 

For schools, community use and training facilities they are chosen because they are consistent, easier and cheaper to maintain, can withstand heavy usage and can be used in more inclement weather without damage. 

It’s not like these venues chose them because they want to have the same surface as the big clubs so banning them in the top flight will have negligible environmental benefit. 
 

There may be an environmental argument for the banning of artificial surfaces completely but that is a very different argument to this one. 

[A Diamond For Me]

We have had a couple of games off with a frozen pitch over the years, but if it's getting so cold that a plastic pitch can't be used then neither could a grass one.  Some days are just unplayable, but you clearly lose far fewer games to the weather with an articfial pitch than you do with grass.

Edited March 19 by A Diamond For Me
Typo

[stevoraith]

33 minutes ago, virginton said:

Ah yes, it's merely the community impact and poor wee scheme weans that are the subject of your concern. As opposed to Raith's 'speculate to accumulate' 'business model' going up in flames. 

No other 4G pitch facility exists in Fife that could possibly take up the slack. 

In Fife? Yes of course there are other facilities. 
But not enough in Kirkcaldy and as I said in my previous post, playing at Starks Park gives the ‘scheme weans’ and the rich bairns, and the ladies teams and the old duffers that play walking football a connection to the club that wouldn’t be there if we moved all of them back to the Michael Woods centre in Glenrothes where most of it happened before we installed the artificial surface. 
It’s about building a sense of connection that makes folk want to be a Raith fan (whether that’s buying shirts or coming to games) for decades to come. 
 

17 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

Community involvement = charging people to use it. 

If football clubs could find a way to exclude the community, they would.

Charging people to use the facility (as well as saving costs for renting external training facilities) is of course an important part of the whole thing. 
 

There’s no denying it is part of the business model for the club- it would be churlish to claim otherwise. 
The community connection aspect however is not simply a gimmick- you might be right that most clubs don’t give a shit about the community but that is genuinely not the case with Raith. For years the previous owner made it clear that he cares more about using Raith to benefit the community than be successful on the pitch- the new owners seem to be making community involvement mutually beneficial and if other clubs can’t see that then more fool them. 
 

The only way clubs our size can hope to make ends meet is by maximising the usage of the stadium and if you don’t have (e.g.) a graveyard next door so you can host funeral teas five days a week then using your facilities for community use every day is probably the best option. 
 

But of course if you are the old firm (or your stadium is as much of a shit-hole as cappielow) then you don’t understand that logic. 

[Scary Bear]

10 hours ago, stevoraith said:

The football argument is one thing and it’s been covered plenty. 
 

What worries me if Raith were to be made to revert to grass, far more than losing any perceived sporting advantage or improved call-off rate, is the loss of the community use facility. 
 

The pitch is in use every night of the week. There are literally hundreds of local youngsters playing with the Raith crest on their strips on the same pitch as their heroes. 
Of course the community teams would still exist but how well would they do if they had to find alternative locations elsewhere in the town or even outside? 
And the crucial point for me- the Raith community foundation teams then become just another team for kids to play with. They’re not playing for THE Raith Rovers, and the connection that could bind them to the club as supporters for the rest of their lives is gone. 

The old firm don’t get that type of connection or sense of community so they won’t give a shit. 
A vote on whether we should get the Old Firm to f**k would be more worthwhile I think. 

I agree with all of your post, but just on the alternative locations thing, Rovers community clubs also play on artificial pitches at Windmill and Balwearie. 

I was not in favour of changing our grass pitch at Starks to an artificial pitch but it’s been a huge success. Going back to grass would be a retrograde step. Given the Winter weather in Scotland, artificial pitches are a bonus, as shown by how many clubs now have artificial pitches.

[Scary Bear]

1 hour ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

Community involvement = charging people to use it. 

If football clubs could find a way to exclude the community, they would.

All the kids football clubs in Fife charge the people to have their kids playing football. I’m assuming adult teams are the same.

With regards to football clubs wanting to exclude the community, in Rovers case, I’m not sure that’s true anymore. Our crowds are up and a lot of that additional crowd are kids who plays for the various Rovers community clubs and their families.

[Mike the Magyar]

11 hours ago, scottsdad said:

Ban grass pitches. They scream snobbishness.

Mind you, not difficult to feel inferior if you live in Falkirk

[HIT THE CHANNEL]

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Ah yes, it's merely the community impact and poor wee scheme weans that are the subject of your concern. As opposed to Raith's 'speculate to accumulate' 'business model' going up in flames. 

No other 4G pitch facility exists in Fife that could possibly take up the slack. 

Fair enough. And of course any organisation (including charities) have to grow and be financially successful to be able to then do good work. So yes, of course there is a business element to it. But as mentioned above by @stevoraith there is a real drive to make the club a force for good in a town that needs all the help it can get.

And no other pitch could do the good work the same. No pitch outside the stadium could so easily connect parents/guardians bringing kids to play to the other events that happen in the club off the pitch (mens and women's fitness and mental health clubs, charity drives etc.). And no other pitch can create positive emotional connections to the football club the same way for kids off all backgrounds - connections that are genuinely needed in the country more than ever.

All that may not be important to you or others, but its important to me. 

 

More than that though I am surprised that fans of most clubs (including you and your own) are not worried about the principle of premiership only voting. If it happens with this it can happen with other criteria (from open terraces [as opposed to 'safe standing seats'], to any other arbitrary criteria that is aimed at TV fans and self preservation - how big a press box you have, how high is your gantry etc. etc.).

 

 

[Sergeant Wilson]

1 hour ago, stevoraith said:

In Fife? Yes of course there are other facilities. 
But not enough in Kirkcaldy and as I said in my previous post, playing at Starks Park gives the ‘scheme weans’ and the rich bairns, and the ladies teams and the old duffers that play walking football a connection to the club that wouldn’t be there if we moved all of them back to the Michael Woods centre in Glenrothes where most of it happened before we installed the artificial surface. 
It’s about building a sense of connection that makes folk want to be a Raith fan (whether that’s buying shirts or coming to games) for decades to come. 
 

Charging people to use the facility (as well as saving costs for renting external training facilities) is of course an important part of the whole thing. 
 

There’s no denying it is part of the business model for the club- it would be churlish to claim otherwise. 
The community connection aspect however is not simply a gimmick- you might be right that most clubs don’t give a shit about the community but that is genuinely not the case with Raith. For years the previous owner made it clear that he cares more about using Raith to benefit the community than be successful on the pitch- the new owners seem to be making community involvement mutually beneficial and if other clubs can’t see that then more fool them. 
 

The only way clubs our size can hope to make ends meet is by maximising the usage of the stadium and if you don’t have (e.g.) a graveyard next door so you can host funeral teas five days a week then using your facilities for community use every day is probably the best option. 
 

But of course if you are the old firm (or your stadium is as much of a shit-hole as cappielow) then you don’t understand that logic. 

 

49 minutes ago, Scary Bear said:

All the kids football clubs in Fife charge the people to have their kids playing football. I’m assuming adult teams are the same.

With regards to football clubs wanting to exclude the community, in Rovers case, I’m not sure that’s true anymore. Our crowds are up and a lot of that additional crowd are kids who plays for the various Rovers community clubs and their families.

I take a more cynical view than you both. All decisions made by clubs are either directly of indirectly to increase revenue.

Directly, they buy replica shirts to sell for a profit.

Indirectly, they invite the local schools in free hoping the kids bring paying adults, or come back as paying customers themselves. This ends as soon as a negative, or even passive result is indicated on the balance sheet.

Pitch hire, saves outlay for affiliate clubs and reduces the need for the parent club to subsidise. Non-affiliate clubs or customers pay the going rate.

[WattersIsGod]

Grass pitches don't have to be in terrible condition for half the season. we've proved that even with 2 teams playing on it, a grass pitch can be well maintained. we've had the odd issue with frozen pitch due to a patch that doesn't get sunlight.  i'm sure that could be resolved with a bit of effort. from what i've seen, we have the best grass pitch in the bottom two leagues. 

interesting comments about the community use. i have fond memories of playing on the astroturf at Annfield many moons ago. i played both hockey and football on it (it was far better as a hockey pitch). i did love playing on the same surface that i went to watch my team on a Saturday. given how bad it was for football, i probably enjoyed a lot more than the players on a Saturday. 

still got a couple of nice scars on my knees to remind me about it. 

the artificial pitches these days bear no resemblance to that one thankfully. they've come a long way in the last 30 years.