:) ...Quote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
Printable View
:) ...Quote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
there is talk that synthetic or "astroturf" pitches increase injury to players. here in american sports there seem to be more knee and lower leg injuries on "turf" pitches. in my league the matches are played on turf. in the rain it does get slippery and you can slip and fall.
http://www.hss.edu/conditions_artifi...prevention.asp
Sean R, thats an interesting article debating how various types of artificial pitches work out for injuries in American sports such as American Football.Quote:
Originally Posted by sean r
Undoubtedly of more specific relevance is a FIFA study about soccer being played on FIFA 2 star rated artifical pitches.
http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afde...ts_1_11166.pdf
FIFA’s Medical Assessment and Research Centre (F-MARC) conducted a study of the injuries sustained at the FIFA U-17 tournament in Peru in 2005, which was played entirely on football turf, with the injuries sustained at previous FIFA U-17tournaments, which were played mainly
on grass. There was effectively no difference in the incidence, nature and causes of injuries observed during games played on artificial turf compared with those played on grass.
See page 9
There is also an interesting piece about the Oriel Park pitch and the impacts at Dundalk (pages 2 -5). Perhaps it gilds the lily in parts but the basics of it are correct.
There is a host of other interesting items including
EDIT - Here is a whole raft of other research which basically reaches the same conclusions that there are no additional incidents of injuryQuote:
“They did the maths,” explains Iñaki Alvaro, Event Director for the FIFA
World-17 Championship and also FIFA’s Head of Youth and Development Events. “A football turf field should last ten to twelve years“ and they worked out that it would only take three years to get a payback between the cost of installing new pitches, including maintenance, and the
upkeep of the grass fields.
http://www.syntheticturfcouncil.org/...Risk_of_Injury
sorry zek but he is talking through his ass tro the most a pich could return is about k50 a year after maintance and runninng cost not to mention 21% vat and a sinking fund to replace te surface in a number of years if it was running at that level there is not a hope in hell it would last 10 years.
there is a stark difference in installing a pitch for revenue or to use for LOI the former may bring in a profit (I would doubt it) the latter will not.
The Oriel Park experience indicates that both are possible (revenue and LoI/European football) - although thie revenue/profit issue cannot be said with absolute certainty until the pitch requires replacement.Quote:
Originally Posted by passerrby
wil not disagre with you zek but you must be turning close to k150 a year to be able to show a profit of K50 and that means close to 12 grand a month minumum
if it costs 250k or more to install how long before a club will see a substancial profit? they wont make 250k in a year with pitch rentals or other activities. they might same 50k year on not having to pay for a traning ground but how much before the club turns a profit? also what if a part of the pitch needs to be replaced. if it gets torn or warn out. that might cost a handy fee too.
Good reading in those links,thanks lads.
Dundalk have to be making good money on that pitch,an astute,no nonsense business man like Gerry Matthews would rip it up if it he didnt think it was a good investment for the club.
Can you play rugby on them? Ground sharing with a rugby team mightn't be the worst thing in the world. In particular, if Shels ever leave Tolka, I remember there being some talk of them moving to Donnybrook, but the major problem with that would have been the state of the pitch after schools rugby.
The back pitch in Lansdowne Road is an astro rugby pitch. There's astro rugby pitches in UCD too. Don't know if they're the exact same type, but it's certainly doable.
honestly wouldnt like to see astro/3g pitches in LOI grounds,takes away from the real football for me!
the "fake" surface may look better,but i think they'd cause more injuries and any profit gained from people renting the pitch would be spent on the extra medical care for players!
I feckin hate the astro pitches myself.
Used to go to the college in Athlone IT where they have one of these super amazing astro pitches.
Playing as a goalkeeper on one of those is a horrible experience. It just doesn't feel right and is sore as feck to dive on. It's too solid, sore on the back of your legs if you aren't used to it, and kicking a ball off it just isn't the same as regular grass.
I'm all for improving the state of pitches, but Astro or any other artificial surface is most certainly not the answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LOI_Fanatic
Thanks guys, I think I got it nowQuote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
Astro = non grass
3G = non grass
therefore Astro = 3G ???????
Ya 100% agree. I have played on a lot of them and use the fake one about twice a week at the moment. Its heavy going on the joints and I left a load of skin on it on day after going for my first and last sliding tackle. Seen a guy bang his head on the ground before too, it wasnt much of a bang but he was knocked out cold. Too solid as nigekl has said and not enough give in them.Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
Bit like a pair of fake titties really. They may look the business and have a nice shape but when you get down to it, it just not the same.
your anology is all wrong if you "get down to it" your in tha wrong area completely thats astro turt areaQuote:
Originally Posted by redobit
1. 3G do not cause more injuries than natural grass (neither do astroturf - it's normally burns and grazes like the horrible old ones next to the UCD sports centre). However there is a higher risk of injury for players moving from one type of surface to the next without proper adjustment, I've seen that regularly in countries where 3G and grass co-exist. Knee and ankle injuries are common.
2. It is possible to do more than 8 hours on a 3G pitch, plus to accommodate other sports. In Oriel the club allowed the county hurlers use it when Dowdallshill was out of bounds.
3. When you use the proper 3G surface on a regular basis it's a dream to play on, you have less odd bounces of the ball, less impact injuries and the downside is if it's not watered properly then it can play more difficult.
I believe there is a UEFA scheme in place to co-fund the installation of 3G pitches for clubs. I saw this happen in Croatia, Malta and Russia, so surely Irish clubs, via the FAI, can go for it if it helps revenue and consistency?
The thing that really attracts me to the idea of a 3G pitch is the idea is that instead of having people in your stadium once a fortnight or thereabouts they'll be in there every day. It's a great way to have your ground at the heart of the community, especially since you can host a lot more local finals etc than you would otherwise be able to.
Very important intangible benefit Mr A. It is great to see Oriel a hive of activity most nights of the week, often a first time at the ground for some. Add in the YDC and its increasing role in the town (eg if it wasnt for another event the recent election count for Louth would have been held in Oriel Park) well we kinda have taken the Mountain to Mohammmed!
very true mr A gortakeegan full most evenings with inderage and Junior games great to see it at the heart of the community while i have my doubts about revenue generating on a pitch used for LOI the worth to the community is very positive.
Last year there were 25 first team games in Oriel Park.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
I don't know the exact numbers but because of the 3G pitch Oriel Park hosted matches on about 350 days.