Most tinpot thing I ever heard. (tinpot thread)

[chief]

Funny how the only supporters advocating the use of 3G pitches, are those from clubs who will have to tear theirs up if they go up.

 

[JaredSUFC]

Funny how the only supporters advocating the use of 3G pitches, are those from clubs who will have to tear theirs up if they go up.

Not really, since we're the ones with the ongoing experience. Strange post

 

[chief]

Not really, since we're the ones with the ongoing experience. Strange post

That's literally what I just said.

 

[JaredSUFC]

3G pitches are shit - they just don't behave the same way, and there are still questions about their safety. If you need it to survive, fair enough, but you knew the football league rules before you installed it so there is no point whingeing now.

No two grass pitches behave 'the same way'. Plus having seen some of the mud baths this weekend they are crap. Our pitch like all 3G pitches is rigoursly tested, so it's very safe.

If you told us in 2015 when we put the pitch in that within 3 years we'd be challenging for promotion to the Football League you would have been sectioned. And now we're being hampered by the ineptitude of others.
(And as I've mentioned in the past 3G wasn't allowed in the Conference National when we put it in, and yet here we are)

 

[Master D]

TURF them out.

 

[The Jovial Forester]

TURF them out.

You rotten SOD

 

[Pablosammy]

No two grass pitches behave 'the same way'. Plus having seen some of the mud baths this weekend they are crap. Our pitch like all 3G pitches is rigoursly tested, so it's very safe.

If you told us in 2015 when we put the pitch in that within 3 years we'd be challenging for promotion to the Football League you would have been sectioned. And now we're being hampered by the ineptitude of others.
(And as I've mentioned in the past 3G wasn't allowed in the Conference National when we put it in, and yet here we are)

Sorry, whose ineptitude is hampering you?

72 football league clubs, with thousands of years collective experience, debated this at length very recently. Despite the fact that it would be in the interest of many of the clubs to install 3G pitches, they still voted against allowing them. But hey, what do they know? Sutton obviously know better, and they don't have a vested interest at all...

 

[GuiseleySteve]

No two grass pitches behave 'the same way'. Plus having seen some of the mud baths this weekend they are crap. Our pitch like all 3G pitches is rigoursly tested, so it's very safe.

If you told us in 2015 when we put the pitch in that within 3 years we'd be challenging for promotion to the Football League you would have been sectioned. And now we're being hampered by the ineptitude of others.
(And as I've mentioned in the past 3G wasn't allowed in the Conference National when we put it in, and yet here we are)

Lose a few games, issue resolved

 

[Tranmerewhite]

Going to be great when Sutton finish 8th “we were reffed out of it mate”

 

[Andy Harrier]

For all of the arguments about how the ball bounces on an artificial pitch - this is non-league! How many times have we seen our teams play matches on a grass pitch that's cut up and is more mud than grass where the ball still bounces oddly or sometimes doesn't bounce at all? Is that better?

Additionally, you see the amount of teams struggling financially at this level and then you get teams installing an artificial pitch that they are able to monetise, and they are prevented from progressing because of it. These aren't the same artificial pitches that were around in the 80s and the surface has to meet certain standards.

 

[The_Boss]

For all of the arguments about how the ball bounces on an artificial pitch - this is non-league! How many times have we seen our teams play matches on a grass pitch that's cut up and is more mud than grass where the ball still bounces oddly or sometimes doesn't bounce at all? Is that better?

Additionally, you see the amount of teams struggling financially at this level and then you get teams installing an artificial pitch that they are able to monetise, and they are prevented from progressing because of it. These aren't the same artificial pitches that were around in the 80s and the surface has to meet certain standards.

There's still a gigantic difference between meeting a certain standard and playing anything like a grass pitch.

 

[Pablosammy]

For all of the arguments about how the ball bounces on an artificial pitch - this is non-league! How many times have we seen our teams play matches on a grass pitch that's cut up and is more mud than grass where the ball still bounces oddly or sometimes doesn't bounce at all? Is that better?

Additionally, you see the amount of teams struggling financially at this level and then you get teams installing an artificial pitch that they are able to monetise, and they are prevented from progressing because of it. These aren't the same artificial pitches that were around in the 80s and the surface has to meet certain standards.

If they were better than grass, then they'd be in Premiership grounds. As it stands, they're a compromise suited to leisure centres, training grounds and non league football clubs who need to 'monetise' their pitch just to survive.

I don't see Sutton's problem. If they truly want league status, they should be prepared to get the grass seed out. The football league clubs, with all their sports scientists and world class physios, voted against plastic pitches for a reason.

 

[Andy Harrier]

If they were better than grass, then they'd be in Premiership grounds. As it stands, they're a compromise suited to leisure centres, training grounds and non league football clubs who need to 'monetise' their pitch just to survive.

I don't see Sutton's problem. If they truly want league status, they should be prepared to get the grass seed out. The football league clubs, with all their sports scientists and world class physios, voted against plastic pitches for a reason.

Where have I said 'better than grass'? Yes, a good quality grass pitch is probably better than an artificial pitch, however in the lower end of the football league and in non-league, there are a lot of below par grass pitches which probably aren't 'better' than 3g pitches. Sutton's 'problem' is that they don't want to put a 119 year old football club at risk for the sake of ripping up their pitch for a (potentially short) spell in the football league. It would be a huge financial risk. Where mismanagement of clubs has lead to numerous well documented cases of clubs disappearing completely, surely a team like Sutton should be applauded for their stance and trying to push through change that would benefit them and potentially enable other smaller clubs to make the switch to an artificial pitch to try and make themselves more sustainable?

Your club doesn't have to go to an artificial pitch if a rule change is made, and looking at the home record table, it's not like it's giving Sutton/Maidstone a massive advantage either so I don't really see the problem.

 

[Pablosammy]

Where have I said 'better than grass'? Yes, a good quality grass pitch is probably better than an artificial pitch, however in the lower end of the football league and in non-league, there are a lot of below par grass pitches which probably aren't 'better' than 3g pitches. Sutton's 'problem' is that they don't want to put a 119 year old football club at risk for the sake of ripping up their pitch for a (potentially short) spell in the football league. It would be a huge financial risk. Where mismanagement of clubs has lead to numerous well documented cases of clubs disappearing completely, surely a team like Sutton should be applauded for their stance and trying to push through change that would benefit them and potentially enable other smaller clubs to make the switch to an artificial pitch to try and make themselves more sustainable?

Your club doesn't have to go to an artificial pitch if a rule change is made, and looking at the home record table, it's not like it's giving Sutton/Maidstone a massive advantage either so I don't really see the problem.

Football league clubs didn't vote against them out of spite, or fear of change, or to suppress the little clubs. As you point out, smaller football league clubs could potentially make themselves more sustainable with a 3G pitch, and yet they still got a 'no'.

 

[Andy Harrier]

Football league clubs didn't vote against them out of spite, or fear of change, or to suppress the little clubs. As you point out, smaller football league clubs could potentially make themselves more sustainable with a 3G pitch, and yet they still got a 'no'.

Again, where did I suggest that they did? Merely pointing out Sutton's problem that you said you couldn't see. My personal opinion is that I don't see a problem with artificial pitches and that a lot of the arguments that go against them aren't that strong - you're entitled to the opposing opinion, it's fine. This forum would be boring if we all agreed!

 

[Pablosammy]

Again, where did I suggest that they did? Merely pointing out Sutton's problem that you said you couldn't see. My personal opinion is that I don't see a problem with artificial pitches and that a lot of the arguments that go against them aren't that strong - you're entitled to the opposing opinion, it's fine. This forum would be boring if we all agreed!

I should clarify - I fully understand Sutton's dilemma, but I don't understand their problem. They're being very vocal and critical about the football league's ban, without respecting the decision that football league clubs have already deliberated over at length and recently decided on.

There's no point writing war and peace on Twitter about it. They're simply the rules. There are still plenty of concerns over rubber crumb - have a look at what's happening in Holland for example.

Anyway, as you say, we're all entitled to our opinion.

 

[PaulHaddock]

Shape up or shit out imo.

 

[JaredSUFC]

Sorry, whose ineptitude is hampering you?

72 football league clubs, with thousands of years collective experience, debated this at length very recently. Despite the fact that it would be in the interest of many of the clubs to install 3G pitches, they still voted against allowing them. But hey, what do they know? Sutton obviously know better, and they don't have a vested interest at all...

I was referring to the ineptitude of clubs in this division - a part-time team such as ourselves ahead of so many big names. People talk about how much money we made from the FA Cup last season, but it wouldn't cover Tranmere's yearly budget. Yet here we are competeting at the top end of the table.

BTW the last time the FL voted, the vote was a draw. So they didn't really 'vote against'. And they'll be voting again in June, albeit to allow them in from 2019. So we may face the issue of ripping up the pitch for half a million pounds (the cost of installing a new pitch has to be taken into account) not having a pre-season on it, all whilst knowing a year later our pitch would have been OK.

 

[JaredSUFC]

Football league clubs didn't vote against them out of spite, or fear of change, or to suppress the little clubs. As you point out, smaller football league clubs could potentially make themselves more sustainable with a 3G pitch, and yet they still got a 'no'.

A lot of them actually said yes (especially the League 1 and 2 clubs) it was the Championship clubs that voted against (or didn't even vote at all). And they'll be voting again in June

 

[JaredSUFC]

If they were better than grass, then they'd be in Premiership grounds. As it stands, they're a compromise suited to leisure centres, training grounds and non league football clubs who need to 'monetise' their pitch just to survive.

I don't see Sutton's problem. If they truly want league status, they should be prepared to get the grass seed out. The football league clubs, with all their sports scientists and world class physios, voted against plastic pitches for a reason.

They're also suited to international Football, Champions League, top-flight domestic Football in many countries. Obviously they're all not as smart and well researched with all there sports scientists and world class physios

 

[Farleigh]

Funny how the only supporters advocating the use of 3G pitches, are those from clubs who will have to tear theirs up if they go up.

There was huge scepticism at Maidstone about 3G when it first came in. But I literally cannot remember the last time a Maidstone fan suggested we get rid of it. We have tasted Football League and are as ambitious as any set of fans you will meet. Yet nobody wants to get rid of the pitch. It's certainly not because of the home advantage, because we play better away. Many people even say they would rather remain in the National League than give up the pitch.

Why would this be, if all we want is promotion? First, the consistent high quality of the surface and the passing game it encourages. Second, instead of being used once a fortnight, all kinds of community groups and kids play on it every day and evening of the week. The generation of fans we lost are returning and feeling a sense of ownership. Finally, we look at all these clubs at risk of going out of business, while we make a profit and grow every year. Who wants to emulate them?

 

[Pablosammy]

They're also suited to international Football, Champions League, top-flight domestic Football in many countries. Obviously they're all not as smart and well researched with all there sports scientists and world class physios

The pinnacle of the game is the elite leagues of the Premiership, La Liga etc. When they install a 3G pitch at Wembley or in the Nou Camp, you'll have a point. In the meantime, your examples are very much exceptions that prove the rule.

 

[JaredSUFC]

The pinnacle of the game is the elite leagues of the Premiership, La Liga etc. When they install a 3G pitch at Wembley or in the Nou Camp, you'll have a point. In the meantime, your examples are very much exceptions that prove the rule.

Er, they have a 3G pitch at the stadium that's hosting the World Cup final if you're talking pinnacle of the game.....

 

[Pablosammy]

Er, they have a 3G pitch at the stadium that's hosting the World Cup final if you're talking pinnacle of the game.....

No they don't.

 

[JaredSUFC]

There was huge scepticism at Maidstone about 3G when it first came in. But I literally cannot remember the last time a Maidstone fan suggested we get rid of it. We have tasted Football League and are as ambitious as any set of fans you will meet. Yet nobody wants to get rid of the pitch. It's certainly not because of the home advantage, because we play better away. Many people even say they would rather remain in the National League than give up the pitch.

Why would this be, if all we want is promotion? First, the consistent high quality of the surface and the passing game it encourages. Second, instead of being used once a fortnight, all kinds of community groups and kids play on it every day and evening of the week. The generation of fans we lost are returning and feeling a sense of ownership. Finally, we look at all these clubs at risk of going out of business, while we make a profit and grow every year. Who wants to emulate them?

It's the same at Sutton in terms of pitch use. We have everyone from the under 8 boys and girls teams to the adult ladies and men's first team who train and use the pitch, as well as our community teams (adult learning disabilities) and senior walking Football teams. Every Primary School game in the London Borough of Sutton is played at GGL as well. It's helped us grow as a club

 

[JaredSUFC]

No they don't.

Well England did play Russia on a 3G pitch at the Luzhneki Stadium and that's the host stadium for the 2018 final.......

 

[Pablosammy]

Well England did play Russia on a 3G pitch at the Luzhneki Stadium and that's the host stadium for the 2018 final.......

It's not 3G, it's SISGrass which is 95% natural turf with some artificial turf threaded through it for durability. I'm a big fan of that surface, and yes, it is fit for the pinnacle of the game. It's even used in the Premiership.

 

[Farleigh]

Here are Eastbourne fans in March 2016 before their pitch was installed:
http://eborosupporter.proboards.com/thread/6789/3g-lane
Everyone was sceptical, some outright hostile.

Here are Eastbourne fans in January 2018 discussing finances.
http://eborosupporter.proboards.com/thread/7027/
One fan suggesting they get a second 3G pitch behind the main stand.

Fact is, if you give 3G a chance nobody asks to go back to grass. Given the resistance of football fans to change, it is amazing how those who have experienced artificial turf have been virtually unanimously won over. It's only those who haven't experienced 3G who cling to tradition.

 

[Pablosammy]

Here are Eastbourne fans in March 2016 before their pitch was installed:
http://eborosupporter.proboards.com/thread/6789/3g-lane
Everyone was sceptical, some outright hostile.

Here are Eastbourne fans in January 2018 discussing finances.
http://eborosupporter.proboards.com/thread/7027/
One fan suggesting they get a second 3G pitch behind the main stand.

Fact is, if you give 3G a chance nobody asks to go back to grass. Given the resistance of football fans to change, it is amazing how those who have experienced artificial turf have been virtually unanimously won over. It's only those who haven't experienced 3G who cling to tradition.

Well, the Russian stadium mentioned above dug up their 3G pitch to move back to grass, and there and hundreds of 3G pitches being demolished in Holland due to safety fears. So, it's not a 'fact'.

I've played on 3G plenty of times. It hasn't won me over, clearly. Anyway, I'm bowing it of this little debate, we'll have to agree to disagree for the time being. I do think it will ultimately be allowed in the lower football leagues... hell, we could probably benefit from it, our pitch is awful at the moment... but I think there are plenty more controversies to go yet.

 

[Tranmerewhite]

Here are Eastbourne fans in March 2016 before their pitch was installed:
http://eborosupporter.proboards.com/thread/6789/3g-lane
Everyone was sceptical, some outright hostile.

Here are Eastbourne fans in January 2018 discussing finances.
http://eborosupporter.proboards.com/thread/7027/
One fan suggesting they get a second 3G pitch behind the main stand.

Fact is, if you give 3G a chance nobody asks to go back to grass. Given the resistance of football fans to change, it is amazing how those who have experienced artificial turf have been virtually unanimously won over. It's only those who haven't experienced 3G who cling to tradition.

You’re talking about a very small club there and the main reason behind that being financial gains for them. That isn’t the main factor for any proper league club.

Are you trying to suggest players in our league prefer playing at Maidstone or Sutton to Tranmere? Proper football is played on grass and it’s up to clubs to maintain that properly. Sutton can not afford to do that so they have a plastic pitch. Can’t have it both of ways.