Pre-season friendlies

[Ezeikial]

The issue with your pitch has never been about it's all-weather capabilities. It'sth about that it appears to generate injuries you wouldn't get elsewhere and that it tends to give the home side an advantage.

Yawn - this has been beaten to death!

Like it or loath it, there is no basis (researched, scientific or even anecdotal) to support your injuries claim.

Logically, playing on your home pitch every fortnight should give each home team an advantage (unfortunately for Dundalk, this has not been case in any of the four seasons back in the Premier Division)

[sligoman]

That was a bit of a hike for yous. Is there some link there?

Baraclough lived there for a while. They wanted a game in preparation for their tournament in San Marino and so invited us over. Cost us very little as most of it was paid for.

[Town Legend]

Baraclough lived there for a while. They wanted a game in preparation for their tournament in San Marino and so invited us over. Cost us very little as most of it was paid for.

Do ye not have lots of money down there?? Our friendly with Sligo was cancelled cos Sligo wanted us to pay for THEIR bus to Longford!!

[Charlie Darwin]

Baraclough lived there for a while. They wanted a game in preparation for their tournament in San Marino and so invited us over. Cost us very little as most of it was paid for.

I'd have thought you'd be making a bit of money to be flying all that distance.

[bullit]

Baraclough lived there for a while. They wanted a game in preparation for their tournament in San Marino and so invited us over. Cost us very little as most of it was paid for.

By Sligo!

[sligoman]

I'd have thought you'd be making a bit of money to be flying all that distance.

Well it wasn't just a friendly. We had a training camp there for a couple of days aswell so I'm sure we'd have had to pay something towards it, but it wouldn't have been much.

By Sligo!

Aye, good man.

[gormacha]

Like it or loath it, there is no basis (researched, scientific or even anecdotal) to support your injuries claim.

It's peculiar kind of brand loyalty that the only people who defend these pitches are the supporters of the clubs who have them. It's ok to support your club yet disagree with aspects of what they do. I support Waterford United yet hate the fact that there is a running track around our pitch, and would agree with anyone who says it sucks the atmosphere out of the RSC.

There is plenty anecdotal evidence at the very least. The fact that clubs have refused to play friendlies against ye suggests quite a few people do see a problem.

Logically, playing on your home pitch every fortnight should give each home team an advantage

Of course playing on your home pitch is an advantage for all sorts of reasons, but we both know that is not the same as an advantage arising out of the fact that the pitch behaves differently.

[GCdfc]

The issue with your pitch has never been about it's all-weather capabilities. It's about that it appears to generate injuries you wouldn't get elsewhere and that it tends to give the home side an advantage.

Where is the proof about the injuries?

Doesn't every club have an advantage when playing at home? Pitches are different sizes, different cambers, different lengths of grass....

Of course playing on your home pitch is an advantage for all sorts of reasons, but we both know that is not the same as an advantage arising out of the fact that the pitch behaves differently.

Your argument has no basis at as every grass pitch in Ireland behaves differently.

[Ezeikial]

It's peculiar kind of brand loyalty that the only people who defend these pitches are the supporters of the clubs who have them.

Not so - John Giles for example:
http://extratime.ie/newsdesk/articles/5161/

For the record I would prefer to see grass restored to Oriel Park - but when people make incorrect, unreasonable or unsupported assertions as you did (about increased injuries and unfair advantage) it is fair game to challenge.

There is plenty anecdotal evidence at the very least. The fact that clubs have refused t o play friendlies against ye suggests quite a few people do see a problem.

This is one of the disadvantages - although both Celtic and Chelsea have played in recent seasons without any quibble.

Clubs reportedly opting out of friendlies is hardly anecdotal evidence of the pitch causing increased injuries.

All the available evidence indicates otherwise

Of course playing on your home pitch is an advantage for all sorts of reasons, but we both know that is not the same as an advantage arising out of the fact that the pitch behaves differently.

Like the Belfield at the early part of last season, Gortakeegan at nearly any time of the season, United / HD Park - these pitches don't behave differently to Showgrounds, Tallaght or RDC?

Of course they do!

[stann]

Leaving the injury question aside for a moment, as personally I'm not all that sure with the 3 and 4G pitches if there is that much difference anymore (unlike the earlier versions), and while there is plenty of anecdotal evidence for the occasional freak injury from artificial pitches (cf our own Peter Keegan for one), there's as many from real pitches too with studs getting stuck in the grass etc.

However, if ye both really are trying to maintain that the slight and random differences between various grass pitches around the League are even in the same ball park as the differences between a synthetic pitch and any grass one, well I think the rational aspect of the discussion must end there...

[gormacha]

Do you see what I mean about the rush to defend the pitch from the supporters of the club who has one?

If we did a poll of players, managers, coaches, fans, in fact anyone connected to football, I would wager that nearly all would like to see the pitches done away with for the reasons - anecdotal or not - I outlined. You may regard it as irrational - that I can't provide "scientific evidence" - but the fact that they are universally disliked by those in the game should perhaps give you some pause for thought.

To try and support your argument by saying that all grass pitches behave differently is really grasping at straws. Of course they behave differently due to weather and condition, but they are predictable - all players know in principle how the pitch will behave and can adjust quickly. That is untrue of plastic pitches, where its obvious that players who don't play on one week in week out are regularly nonplussed by bounce, pace etc.

[GCdfc]

If we did a poll of players, managers, coaches, fans, in fact anyone connected to football, I would wager that nearly all would like to see the pitches done away with for the reasons - anecdotal or not - I outlined. You may regard it as irrational - that I can't provide "scientific evidence" - but the fact that they are universally disliked by those in the game should perhaps give you some pause for thought.

Waterford are universally disliked too. Should you pause for thought?

The latest artificial pitches allow football to be played. If a player is good he will be able to adjust to the surface and measure his passes etc. If he is bad then he won't cope as well and will probably resort to hoofing the ball like he probably does week in week out on grass pitches.

Those in the game know their own limitations and the limitations of their squad and that can be a factor in their level of dislike. Pundits generally don't have a clue because they have not played on the surface.

[nigel-harps1954]

So...pre season friendlies?

Harps won last night 3-0 against the Letterkenny IT team.

[Dillonman]

The issue with your pitch has never been about it's all-weather capabilities. It's about that it appears to generate injuries you wouldn't get elsewhere and that it tends to give the home side an advantage.

Defo not proven. Over the 2 years under Ian Foster, the team trained on both the "plastic" pitch(as ye would seem to call it) as well as grass pitches. And quite remarkably 90% of the injury ravaged squads he had were all picked up away from home and not on our pitch.

[nigel-harps1954]

Because they're so used to running on a hard surface that it was a shock to their systems to run on grass? I'd blame the hard surface in that instance.

For the record, I have permanently bad heels from playing for two years on turf in Athlone.

[GCdfc]

Because they're so used to running on a hard surface that it was a shock to their systems to run on grass? I'd blame the hard surface in that instance.

For the record, I have permanently bad heels from playing for two years on turf in Athlone.

Yeah....we should replace all footpaths with grass. It would save crippling the nation.

[gormacha]

Yeah....we should replace all footpaths with grass. It would save crippling the nation.

That's a very good point.

[nigel-harps1954]

Yeah....we should replace all footpaths with grass. It would save crippling the nation.

Because footballers train on footpaths?

[GCdfc]

Because footballers train on footpaths?

No, because people mainly walk on hard surfaces. Think of all the injuries that would be prevented when they decide to walk on grass or carpet.

[Sam_Heggy]

Yeah....we should replace all footpaths with grass. It would save crippling the nation.

I reckon half of the government were on grass, look where that got us.