Plastic Pitches Dilemma

[DreamOakTree1]

6 hours ago, Harry Kinnear said:

The thing is it’s artificial surfaces now, what’s the next obstacle they will find to prevent other clubs joining the party. It could be things like all spectators have to be under cover, certain criteria for TV/media gantries like they do in the English Prem, sauce for pies have to be supplied by a certain company, they could come up with anything. It may not mean changes  at  your individual club now but who knows what they will come up with next.

The one thing that’s guaranteed is that it will be something that the dirty dozen have and the potential challengers that threaten their entitled status don’t have. Hence the haves and the have-nots.

[Disco Duck]

1 minute ago, Mediocre Pundit said:

Being more serious, I expect most people prefer a good grass surface to plastic, but also prefer plastic to a bad grass surface. So for the best football the authorities should demand clubs maintain a good grass surface. If that means some clubs need to have a slightly smaller playing budget then that’s fine. 

“Prefer”, ie it’s a matter of opinion.  The football authorities shouldn’t demand anything unless it’s detrimental to player safety (it’s demonstrable that it’s not and if it were it should be banned for training, youth teams, women’s teams…).

We’re in a country where the weather is wet and unpredictable.  Games get cancelled on grass, rarely on artificial.  It saves clubs money as they can rent it out, train on it, etc.  But people seem to think it’s a good thing for clubs to waste money?

”But it looks crap oan ma telly” is about the most convincing argument I’ve seen so far.

[Disco Duck]

5 minutes ago, Chicken Soup said:

Agree on the problem of poor quality grass, but disagree on the solution. You view artificial as a superior alternative, I see it as a cheaper and inferior option, compared with proper investment in, and maintenance of the grass. Let’s see if anything happens following the rule change.

Once again, opinion.  What makes it inferior?  And why is that enough to mandate change?

[Mediocre Pundit]

44 minutes ago, Disco Duck said:

“Prefer”, ie it’s a matter of opinion.  The football authorities shouldn’t demand anything unless it’s detrimental to player safety

44 minutes ago, Disco Duck said:

”But it looks crap oan ma telly” is about the most convincing argument I’ve seen so far.

The football authorities are responsible for collectively selling our game to broadcasters, sponsors etc. It’s perfectly acceptable for them to want to have a minimum standard for pitches, as with any other element of fan experience that flows through into broadcast experience. 
 

Good grass pitches make for a better spectacle. 
 

I’d also go further on broadcasting bit - clubs should be forced to fill the bits of the stadium that tv cameras face first. We often have games with decent crowds but stadium looks empty on TV. Again, stuff that can make the game a more attractive proposition. Point is, I’m not just against plastic pitches per se - it’s more about what our game should be / how we should market it. 
 

ETA: and for the exact reason we should bin VAR - not just because it’s shit, but because we could differentiate our game as “traditional” football. 

Edited June 2 by Mediocre Pundit

[Bairn in Exile]

5 minutes ago, Mediocre Pundit said:

 

I’d also go further on broadcasting bit - clubs should be forced to fill the bits of the stadium that tv cameras face first. We often have games with decent crowds but stadium looks empty on TV. Again, stuff that can make the game a more attractive proposition. Point is, I’m not just against plastic pitches per se - it’s more about what our game should be / how we should market it. 
 

 

Because Firhill is missing an end and not a side? So doesn't apply to PT?

[Mediocre Pundit]

It’s a continued riddy - and we should do something to make it tidier and eventually develop that end. But we actually do a decent job of ensuring as much as possible of a broadcast is shot from that end and up towards the developed side of the stadium. 

[Disco Duck]

17 minutes ago, Mediocre Pundit said:

The football authorities are responsible for collectively selling our game to broadcasters, sponsors etc. It’s perfectly acceptable for them to want to have a minimum standard for pitches, as with any other element of fan experience that flows through into broadcast experience. 
 

Good grass pitches make for a better spectacle. 
 

I’d also go further on broadcasting bit - clubs should be forced to fill the bits of the stadium that tv cameras face first. We often have games with decent crowds but stadium looks empty on TV. Again, stuff that can make the game a more attractive proposition. Point is, I’m not just against plastic pitches per se - it’s more about what our game should be / how we should market it. 
 

ETA: and for the exact reason we should bin VAR - not just because it’s shit, but because we could differentiate our game as “traditional” football. 

And they should be mandated to have adequate match day facilities and a high level of safety, so the main stand at Firhill should be levelled.

[stevoraith]

6 minutes ago, Mediocre Pundit said:

Good grass pitches make for a better spectacle. 
 

Here's the problem though, the ban doesn't mandate 'good grass pitches' it simply bans artificial ones.

So you can't have your very good to play on, almost immune from the weather pitch which you can train on and rent out to the community, because Billy from Glenrothes thinks it looks too shiny when he's watching the Ranjurs on the telly in the pub, but bash on and have a tattie field and 4 weather-related call-offs a season, that's fine.

[Disco Duck]

9 minutes ago, stevoraith said:

Here's the problem though, the ban doesn't mandate 'good grass pitches' it simply bans artificial ones.

So you can't have your very good to play on, almost immune from the weather pitch which you can train on and rent out to the community, because Billy from Glenrothes thinks it looks too shiny when he's watching the Ranjurs on the telly in the pub, but bash on and have a tattie field and 4 weather-related call-offs a season, that's fine.

I’ve come to the conclusion that the Daily Rangers readers have gone native.

[Ranaldo Bairn]

3 hours ago, Chicken Soup said:

The same attractive football would be a better spectacle if played on a quality grass pitch though, you are able to demand both.
 

It’s a shame fans of these clubs would rather protect their own current setup than push for a higher quality product for themselves, and by extension, everyone. 

One of the hottest takes yet. Wow!

[Youngmcnaughtleigh]

7 hours ago, Harry Kinnear said:

The thing is it’s artificial surfaces now, what’s the next obstacle they will find to prevent other clubs joining the party. It could be things like all spectators have to be under cover, certain criteria for TV/media gantries like they do in the English Prem, sauce for pies have to be supplied by a certain company, they could come up with anything. It may not mean changes  at  your individual club now but who knows what they will come up with next.

Certainly not ground sound system  anyway. Ross County a throw back to pre 60s 

Even old school 50/50 number board carried round the ground

[Youngmcnaughtleigh]

27 minutes ago, Disco Duck said:

I’ve come to the conclusion that the Daily Rangers readers have gone native.

That's if the game hasn't been cancelled 3 times for flooding 

[DiegoDiego]

2 hours ago, Chicken Soup said:

Agree on the problem of poor quality grass, but disagree on the solution. You view artificial as a superior alternative, I see it as a cheaper and inferior option, compared with proper investment in, and maintenance of the grass. Let’s see if anything happens following the rule change.

Surely a cheaper alternative is better? That's what every business is looking for.

1 hour ago, Disco Duck said:

And they should be mandated to have adequate match day facilities and a high level of safety, so the main stand at Firhill should be levelled.

They may have been a bit of work done since the previous decade when your mob were last in town.

[Ranaldo Bairn]

5 hours ago, DiegoDiego said:

Surely a cheaper alternative is better? That's what every business is looking for.

They may have been a bit of work done since the previous decade when your mob were last in town.

We were in town last July big chap.

 

Edit: and I just remembered you were down in the same lowly league as us as recently as 3 years ago 

Edited June 2 by Ranaldo Bairn

[baba douche]

1 hour ago, Disco Duck said:

And they should be mandated to have adequate match day facilities and a high level of safety, so the main stand at Firhill should be levelled.

Yes, it should be.

If possible, we probably would have jn the past.

Unfortunately, it's a listed building, so we can't. Better to simply put some plebs in it if and when necessary.

[DiegoDiego]

53 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

We were in town last July big chap.

Contrary to popular rumour, I'm actually not that big.

[DreamOakTree1]

The more I think about this situation, the more I wonder if the Premiership clubs are guilty of flaunting the rules of UEFA regarding AstroTurf surfaces.
I’m pretty sure there is a directive on the minimum standard of surface required, but not on preventing that standard to be deployed in the country’s top division. 

If this is the case then the vote should have been taken on whether to allow clubs with the top standard of astroturf surfaces to take part in the top division.

I also believe the vote should have democratically involved every club in the SPFL system. This would have ensured that all aspects of types of surfaces used would be debated fairly with all sides of the argument included. 
This just seems unjust, undemocratic and morally wrong.

[Cptn Hooch]

5 minutes ago, DreamOakTree1 said:

 

If this is the case then the vote should have been taken on whether to allow clubs with the top standard of astroturf surfaces to take part in the top division.

 

I don't think that would have mattered. Livi's pitch seems to be picked out as worse than other artificial pitches, yet meets the highest FIFA quality criteria. 

[TxRover]

If there was any serious concern for having a quality grass surface, surely changing (perhaps shortening?), the playing season and reducing the pointless cups would have been on the top of the list. However, these would also reduce income producing games…so it’s amusing to see the spectacle of the Premiership blatting on about quality playing surfaces when fiascos like that at Dundee last season occur.

If they were truly serious about it being a player welfare and game quality issue, there’s more than enough money currently being shared around the top level that could be divided among the lower 30 teams to support them having grass pitches. But, like the vote on grass surfaces, it’s all about keeping the rich rich and the riff raff out of the club.

[TxRover]

Meanwhile, a question. The SPFL Criteria for Membership for season 2026/2027 will obviously demand a grass pitch for Premiership sides. Now, the Criteria for Membership letter is sent about in 31 October for the following season, and specifies compliance or a waiver request by 31 March of the next year. So that means the grass pitch must be in place, or the team must have all the details ironed out and contracted to get a grass pitch down, before the end of the season where they might be promoted. And even then, a waiver is NOT assured, only possible.

This could result in perhaps two, three or more teams needing to contract to replace their playing surface in the hopes they either win the league or win promotion via the playoffs. If they fail, would they then possibly try to cancel the contracts? Also, let’s say Team A jumps first, then Team B, can Team C find a company to contract with…just how many companies are active in Scotland that can do such a job? It seems a very unstable way to go about this. Also, there is the time required to remove the plastic/underlayment, relay a natural base/grass, and bed in the surface. With the various preseason stuff probably having to be hosted elsewhere, it’s likely any team will be away from their home pitch for a two to almost four month stretch in an attempt to get the best possible chance for the new surface to succeed.

In a way, it’s blackmail by the Premiership, almost requiring teams who feel they have a chance for promotion to replace their plastic the year before to avoid the waiver issue and in order to get the “new” surface established (as much as you can over a Scottish winter).