|
|
Topic Originator: EastEndTales
Date: Thu 23 May 08:05
What a nonsense. Clubs try and increase revenue, cutting costs and they go and do this?
Scottish football constantly distracts itself with this psh, with VAR all the while for years ignoring the two main problems.
Uneven revenue distribution
And the standard of our game.
Until the first is dealt with, the second will never follow.
Ep.17 of East End Tales is out now with Andrius Skerla
https://www.buzzsprout.com/1972630/15082607
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Stanza
Date: Thu 23 May 09:37
There are some interesting figures in the paper the six dissenting clubs have submitted (link in the article), indicating the costs they would be incurring to change from plastic to grass (Ā£1.2m) and the annual costs (Ā£310k) of maintaining a grass pitch and hiring alternative venues for training, youth and women`s football. All this with no guarantee of promotion.
I believe Kilmarnock are the only Premiership club with plastic, and they are changing to grass soon. So the big clubs are likely to vote for it, and it will be one step nearer a closed shop - just expand the Premiership to include Partick Thistle and Dunfermline and that`s about it!
_________________
 Support Dunfermline Athletic Disabled Supporters` Club (DADSC) when you shop online with one of 8000 firms: https://www.easyfundraising.org.uk/causes/dadsc[
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: doctordandruff
Date: Thu 23 May 11:23
Should`ve been a 1 sentence statement. We don`t want to do it cause it gives us a big advantage and raises us loads of money. The end.
The rest is just garbage waffle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Kdy Par
Date: Thu 23 May 11:30
Quote:
doctordandruff, Thu 23 May 11:23
Should`ve been a 1 sentence statement. We don`t want to do it cause it gives us a big advantage and raises us loads of money. The end.
The rest is just garbage waffle.
Youāve hit the nail on the head. Itās all about clubs saving money and having an advantage. Really hope the vote goes through as plastic pitches shouldnāt be used in the topflight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: par-91
Date: Thu 23 May 11:44
The issue with the artificial pitches is that thereās no set standards these pitches have to meet, in order to be accepted for use in the professional game. Once theyāre put down, theyāre there. Clubs arenāt maintaining them properly or upgrading/replacing them regularly enough, to ensure theyāre of the best standard. If they are here to stay, there should be regulations in place, to ensure that they all use the latest technology and are maintained properly. Itās used as a cheap option and overuse/poor maintenance means that the surfaces become substandard very quickly and thereās nothing in place to prevent that from happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 23 May 12:16
TBH (and putting individual club motivations aside) Iāve never really enjoyed playing or watching matches on plastic and much prefer the hammer be played on grass
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Athletico
Date: Thu 23 May 12:26
Seen quite a few arguments against scrapping them, pointing to the state of grass pitches. Dundee being the most recent, and to be fair - ours wasn`t exactly brilliant towards the end of the season. But as Par-91 points out, there is no set standard for artificial, and clubs will only replace when the want to. Falkirks pitch last season was a joke, the bounce of the ball was hilarious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: LochgellyAlbert
Date: Thu 23 May 13:21
Saw Ian Murray being questioned about it the other night, surprisingly he was all for keeping it!š°š°š°
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: PARrot
Date: Thu 23 May 13:37
OK for training grounds but I haven`t seen a decent game played on one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: theparsman1885
Date: Thu 23 May 13:54
PARrot wrote:
> OK for training grounds but I haven`t seen a decent game played
> on one.
>
>
Ever? You sure about thatā¦?
The issue isnāt plastic or grass, itās quality of surface, regardless of type. Just as there are some shocking artificial surfaces out there (I personally think the Raith surface is bloody awful) there are some terrible grass ones.
If there are no or little guidelines, then clubs are currently able to lay down the worst of artificial surfaces with the black pellets to give ābounceā. It is extremely short sighted for a complete ban. Are they going to ban hybrid such as the surface at Celtic park which has an artificial compound? Didnāt think so.
What would be much more useful would be a properly consulted piece of work with standard setting on surfaces which would encourage better surfaces universally. It is highly likely that better artificial products will be in the market in the next 10 years that will supersede grass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Thu 23 May 15:06
I was a bit flippant in my OP because our local rivals were leading the protests, but it`s actually quite disgraceful tactics by the top flight clubs. They need 9 clubs to vote for the proposal and with Livi relegated and Killie about to rip their plastic up, they`ll have no bother getting that, even if the Rovers go up.
I agree with those above who say that synthetic pitches are not all the same.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parsfangaz
Date: Thu 23 May 15:11
Quote:
PARrot, Thu 23 May 13:37
OK for training grounds but I haven`t seen a decent game played on one.
Take it you were not at the Airdrie 3 - Pars 4 game, one of the best games ( if you are a pars fan ) i can remember in recent years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: theparsman1885
Date: Thu 23 May 15:26
Stenhousemuir 4-5 Dunfermline another that comes to mind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: PARrot
Date: Thu 23 May 15:51
Quote:
Parsfangaz, Thu 23 May 15:11
Quote:
PARrot, Thu 23 May 13:37
OK for training grounds but I haven`t seen a decent game played on one.
Take it you were not at the Airdrie 3 - Pars 4 game, one of the best games ( if you are a pars fan ) i can remember in recent years.
No, I wasn`t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: PARrot
Date: Thu 23 May 15:54
Quote:
theparsman1885, Thu 23 May 13:54
PARrot wrote:
> OK for training grounds but I haven`t seen a decent game played
> on one.
>
Ever? You sure about thatā¦?
The issue isnāt plastic or grass, itās quality of surface, regardless of type. Just as there are some shocking artificial surfaces out there (I personally think the Raith surface is bloody awful) there are some terrible grass ones.
If there are no or little guidelines, then clubs are currently able to lay down the worst of artificial surfaces with the black pellets to give ābounceā. It is extremely short sighted for a complete ban. Are they going to ban hybrid such as the surface at Celtic park which has an artificial compound? Didnāt think so.
What would be much more useful would be a properly consulted piece of work with standard setting on surfaces which would encourage better surfaces universally. It is highly likely that better artificial products will be in the market in the next 10 years that will supersede grass.
To be fair, I haven`t been to many matches with plastic pitches over the last few years. No doubt the have improved, but in games I have seen on tv I think players don`t seem to control their running, stopping in particular.
They seem much more cautious and even hesitant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: 1985Par
Date: Thu 23 May 15:56
No doubt a good grass pitch is miles better than any form of astro. The problem being, with scottish weather, there`s little chance of championship teams having the funds required to keep a lush surface throughout the season so if you want a pitch that you can actually pass on in March, astro is the only feasible option.
However teams in the top tier probably do have such funds and I`d cite Motherwell as a club whose pitch has improved massively. Teams coming up should receive some financial help to get a good grass pitch from some sort of premiership central fund as it`s in the best interest of all clubs that they have one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 23 May 19:02
I can see the advantages of plastic and why clubs would want to adopt them but they`re still crap IMO. I don`t play professionally but when watching games in person and on TV the game just doesn`t feel right. The way the ball bounces and travels isn`t right.
Obviously there`s a benefit in that the pitch should be pretty uniform and you don`t content with mudbaths like Dundee, but they`re just not for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parathletic
Date: Fri 24 May 15:59
I saw a report recently that it was 1.6 times more likely that you would pick up an ACL injury playing on astroturf versus grass.The study was done in American college football(soccer) and was carried out over 10 years.
I think there was been a lot of publicity over ACL injuries in the women`s game recently and I`ve said before it wouldnāt surprise me if it was correlated with the high proportion of games they seem to play on artificial surfaces.
I`ve played on a few of them and don`t think they have a place in the professional game but can understand the economic reasons at a lower level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: P
Date: Fri 24 May 19:46
Quote:
parathletic, Fri 24 May 15:59
lot of publicity over ACL injuries in the women`s game recently and I`ve said before it wouldnāt surprise me if it was correlated with the high proportion of games they seem to play on artificial surfaces..
Research says not pitches for female ACL;
āThere is no secret that men and women are built differently. The reasons for females being more at risk for ACL injury have been extensively studied. The increased risk for injury appears to be associated with many factors, including a narrower intercondylar femoral notch and smaller ACL, an increase in natural ligament laxity, slower reflex time, an imbalance secondary to greater quadriceps strength and hamstring weakness, fluctuation in estrogen levels, and the tendency for females to land flat-footed.
The research has shown that ACL injury rates are influenced by the differences in the biomechanics of men and women. Key differences include:
ā¢ Landing position: When landing from a jumping position, female athletes tend to land with the knee in extension, which transfers the force of impact to the knee joint. Men tend to absorb more of the energy of impact by landing with their knees in a flexed position.
ā¢ Valgus alignment: Women have an increased knee valgus, and this alignment leads to more stress to the knee ligaments with activities.
Seventy percent (70%) of ACL injuries in female soccer players are noncontact and primarily involve one of two mechanisms: running and cutting sharply with an erect posture or landing with the leg in extension on one leg. Both mechanisms result in significant forces on the ACL, leading to ACL tears.
Soccer ACL injuries usually occur when the knee is in a position of extension for both contact and noncontact injuries. Video analysis of ACL tears during soccer has revealed some interesting injury trends. For noncontact ACL tears, female soccer players are more likely to injure their nondominant leg while men tend to hurt their dominant leg. Video analysis demonstrated that 75% of all soccer ACL injuries occurred while defending. Defending requires more cutting and stepping in to reach for the ball. Defensive play also has more off-balance landing on one foot as a cause of ACL tears. This frequently occurs with landing after a head ball and regaining balance after kicking. Both situations place the knee at risk the critical extended valgus position.ā
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Parfect69
Date: Fri 24 May 22:02
They used to be the in thing so you could hire them out during the week, however the market was saturated with plastic pitches everywhere that it was no longer a viable option. Personally I dislike them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parathletic
Date: Fri 24 May 22:43
Quote:
P, Fri 24 May 19:46
Research says not pitches for female ACL;
āThere is no secret that men and women are built differently. The reasons for females being more at risk for ACL injury have been extensively studied. The increased risk for injury appears to be associated with many factors, including a narrower intercondylar femoral notch and smaller ACL, an increase in natural ligament laxity, slower reflex time, an imbalance secondary to greater quadriceps strength and hamstring weakness, fluctuation in estrogen levels, and the tendency for females to land flat-footed.
The research has shown that ACL injury rates are influenced by the differences in the biomechanics of men and women. Key differences include:
ā¢ Landing position: When landing from a jumping position, female athletes tend to land with the knee in extension, which transfers the force of impact to the knee joint. Men tend to absorb more of the energy of impact by landing with their knees in a flexed position.
ā¢ Valgus alignment: Women have an increased knee valgus, and this alignment leads to more stress to the knee ligaments with activities.
Seventy percent (70%) of ACL injuries in female soccer players are noncontact and primarily involve one of two mechanisms: running and cutting sharply with an erect posture or landing with the leg in extension on one leg. Both mechanisms result in significant forces on the ACL, leading to ACL tears.
Soccer ACL injuries usually occur when the knee is in a position of extension for both contact and noncontact injuries. Video analysis of ACL tears during soccer has revealed some interesting injury trends. For noncontact ACL tears, female soccer players are more likely to injure their nondominant leg while men tend to hurt their dominant leg. Video analysis demonstrated that 75% of all soccer ACL injuries occurred while defending. Defending requires more cutting and stepping in to reach for the ball. Defensive play also has more off-balance landing on one foot as a cause of ACL tears. This frequently occurs with landing after a head ball and regaining balance after kicking. Both situations place the knee at risk the critical extended valgus position.ā
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/23259671221114353?icid=int.sj-abstract.citing-articles.10
Here is a report which believes that it does carry an increased risk to woman.However, it also contradicts the other report about being an increased risk to men.I think it is certainly worth researching more.
I have actually torn both ACL`s and both occasions were on grass so it`s not as if I`m biased but I just don`t like artificial surfaces.I know from experience I certainly had more lower back pain paying on harder stuff not to mention plenty carpet burns on the legs.
Post Edited (Fri 24 May 22:44)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DJAS
Date: Fri 31 May 13:08
Now been voted for them to be phased out unsurprisingly.
Predictor league winner 2012/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Athletico
Date: Fri 31 May 13:17
That`s 6 league rivals that have just been financially torpedoed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Kdy Par
Date: Fri 31 May 14:12
Quote:
Athletico, Fri 31 May 13:17
That`s 6 league rivals that have just been financially torpedoed.
Real shame that this will affect Raith and Falkirk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Fri 31 May 14:24
Quote:
Kdy Par, Fri 31 May 14:12
Quote:
Athletico, Fri 31 May 13:17
That`s 6 league rivals that have just been financially torpedoed.
Real shame that this will affect Raith and Falkirk.
Only in the unlikely event that either of them were to win promotion. š
Falkirk should remember they were denied promotion (thus saving Motherwell, I think) because Brockville was not deemed good enough for Scotland`s elite clubs. That was scandalous, but if they are turned away again, knowing synthetic pitches will not be accepted.... hell mend them! š
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 31 May 14:30
Surely the three months or so of the close season will allow any club that won promotion to lay down a turf pitch in time for the new season? I mean Dundee have ripped up their old pitch and the new one will be ready for August if not much, much earlier.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: buffy
Date: Fri 31 May 14:37
Only if theyāve got the finances to do it TOWK. It might not have been included in a new season budget.
āBuffyās Buns are the finest in Fifeā, J. Spence 2019ā
Post Edited (Fri 31 May 14:38)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Kdy Par
Date: Fri 31 May 14:38
Huge outlay for potentially one season in the Premiership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 31 May 14:44
Well a club in that position would either have to change the pitch or there would be no relegation that season for the club due to be replaced from the Premiership because I`d be amazed if that promotion place then moved down to the next best placed.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DJAS
Date: Fri 31 May 15:15
Quote:
GG Riva, Fri 31 May 14:24
Quote:
Kdy Par, Fri 31 May 14:12
Quote:
Athletico, Fri 31 May 13:17
That`s 6 league rivals that have just been financially torpedoed.
Real shame that this will affect Raith and Falkirk.
Only in the unlikely event that either of them were to win promotion. š
Falkirk should remember they were denied promotion (thus saving Motherwell, I think) because Brockville was not deemed good enough for Scotland`s elite clubs. That was scandalous, but if they are turned away again, knowing synthetic pitches will not be accepted.... hell mend them! š
Sure it was Aberdeen.
Predictor league winner 2012/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Fri 31 May 15:36
It`s doable to swap a pitch during the close season but it`s not like for like. Under that astro will be a hardcore base covered in tarmac or a permeable surface. All that needs to be removed before top soil and turf is added. What Dundee did was a like for like swap and it would appear that it didn`t have enough time to establish itself as that pitch went to bits.
I don`t recall Raith or Falkirk backing us when we had to rip up the second pitch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Stanza
Date: Sat 1 Jun 02:49
Quote:
DJAS, Fri 31 May 15:15
Quote:
GG Riva, Fri 31 May 14:24[/i
Falkirk should remember they were denied promotion (thus saving Motherwell, I think) because Brockville was not deemed good enough for Scotland`s elite clubs. That was scandalous, but if they are turned away again, knowing synthetic pitches will not be accepted.... hell mend them! š
Sure it was Aberdeen.
You`re both right. Falkirk have actually been denied the chance of promotion to the top league 3 times.
In 1998 the Team 9 (Motherwell) v Team 2 (Falkirk) playoff was abolished during the season.
In 2000 Aberdeen were saved from.the playoffs as Falkirk didn`t have a 10,000 seated stadium. DAFC did and were promoted.
Motherwell were saved again in 2003 because of Brockville`s capacity. The SPL clubs rejected a proposal to groundshare with Airdrie United.
But it`s also worth remembering Falkirk were saved from relegation to the third tier in 1998 by the liquidation of Airdrieonians.
_________________
Support Dunfermline Athletic Disabled Supporters` Club (DADSC) when you shop online with one of 8000 firms: https://www.easyfundraising.org.uk/causes/dadsc[
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sat 1 Jun 07:40
The 10,000 seater rule was a joke and should have been challenged. I think we`ve only been close to that capacity once in recent years.
It was also farcical that we had to rip up our pitch at a moments notice, especially as it was part of a UEFA trial. I`d say any team promoted should be given a years grace period to swap their pitch. They originally did that with the 10k seater rule.
On the other hand, I like the idea of Raith crying into their Buckfast.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: fcda
Date: Sat 1 Jun 08:53
If the rules are in place at the start of the season, they can have no complaints. They choose to spend money on the squad when other teams are spending on the stadium.
For clarity, in 2000 they were denied a play off place against us, allowing us to be promoted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
