|
Post by RobTheShirt on Feb 23, 2020 12:40:13 GMT
In my opinion, change is needed in the way that pitches are assessed by the match referee and using last weeks late postponement against Hendon, here’s why. There are no rules for the referee to follow, just guidelines so it is a subjective decision by just one person. We all know that our pitch is a mess and until we move we are going to be subjected to countless disappointments in wet weather. It’s not the whole pitch, just a small portion of it. The stand side is usually OK as is the changing room end. The top eastern corner is the root of the problem and even so it’s less than half of that area, say 10% of the entire playing surface. Last Tuesday the pitch had passed a qualified referees inspection at 13:30 but between then and the ref’s arrival we had another downpour. The ref inspected the pitch and found that in one small area, the ball would not bounce or roll very far. He therefore declared the pitch unplayable based on the state of this one small area. The pitch inspection was witnessed by the managers and representatives of both sides and they agreed between them that regardless of the condition of that small spot, they would still like the game to go ahead. Chris Reeves put this to the ref but he would not take the opinions of both interested parties into consideration and would not let the game go ahead. If the affected area was 10% then arguably it would have been in play for 10% of the match, about 9 minutes out of 90 and we know full well that players tend to avoid a dodgy area so probably 5 minutes of playing time So here we are. All the management personnel of both teams; all the directors and officials; all the players and all the supporters (probably in excess of 300) wanted the game to go ahead but were overruled by one person working to guidelines. If we are going to have a set of guidelines, at least let’s include a section whereby there is some sort of meaningful consultation with both sides and how much the problem area would affect the game overall.
|
|
|
Post by expat on Feb 23, 2020 14:37:22 GMT
VAR in the big leagues;Pitch inspections in the NL!! Lets give the game and decision making back to the man on the spot. The Ref we have all seen our share of good and bad ones but TBH VAR is ruining the great game and Pitch inspections are done for the safety of everyone involved..broken limbs not least.If the Ref gets that wrong he is the man responsible. Never mind this aggro let us turn all our attention to getting out of Tatnam ASAP otherwise we will be back in the Sydenhams!!
|
|
settman
Dolphin Forum Full Member
Posts: 218
|
Post by settman on Feb 23, 2020 20:55:00 GMT
We shouldnt expect semi pro players who have jobs and families to play on pitches that in todays terms are deemed dangerous because managers and officials both want the game played. These guidelines are there to protect players and if a ref allows a game to be played when only 10% of a pitch is unplayable the he is responsible for that i imagine,and what about the players stuck on that 10% of the pitch. It doesnt help when people from the club post pics of england playing on a mudbath in the 1980s,times have changed. This season has been an exceptionally wet one hopefully soon it will get dry,fingers crossed
|
|
|
Post by BD on Feb 24, 2020 10:36:03 GMT
With regards to pitch inspections. As Poole are in the 7th tier, the match officials that can perform the inspections should only be those who can referee at that level, that would be a level 3 referee or above. This was a directive from the FA. If you notice on the ten point guideline document that I have attached, you will notice points four, five, six and nine. Its not whether the players, the managers the BOD or Bob And his dog want the game on. Saftey is paramount.
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Feb 24, 2020 12:59:20 GMT
BD thanks for posting this. They are good guide lines but could be improved. My comments would be that I was told that the ref was accompanied by Salisbury's Assistant Manager during his inspection and for that match, I did check the pitch and I could not see how it was unsafe and why any player could not show their skills on the pitch 10 minutes after the game was called off. Of course as the document says, my opinion does not matter in this case.
For the Hendon game, the guidelines do say that the referee should take account of the weather forecast. I did not see the pitch that night, but was assured it was in a similar condition to the pitch for the Swindon match. Of course no matter how expert the person that told me, it was hearsay. However the downpour in the second half was forecast and the game could, and probably should, have been called off at lunchtime.
If there was a test for playability (as there is with artificial 3G/4G) for grass pitches we would all be better informed and the inspecting referee could give a definitive report, not an opinion, to the match referee on the playability or otherwise of the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by John Anderson on Feb 24, 2020 13:00:48 GMT
In my opinion, change is needed in the way that pitches are assessed by the match referee and using last weeks late postponement against Hendon, here’s why. There are no rules for the referee to follow, just guidelines so it is a subjective decision by just one person. We all know that our pitch is a mess and until we move we are going to be subjected to countless disappointments in wet weather. It’s not the whole pitch, just a small portion of it. The stand side is usually OK as is the changing room end. The top eastern corner is the root of the problem and even so it’s less than half of that area, say 10% of the entire playing surface. Last Tuesday the pitch had passed a qualified referees inspection at 13:30 but between then and the ref’s arrival we had another downpour. The ref inspected the pitch and found that in one small area, the ball would not bounce or roll very far. He therefore declared the pitch unplayable based on the state of this one small area. The pitch inspection was witnessed by the managers and representatives of both sides and they agreed between them that regardless of the condition of that small spot, they would still like the game to go ahead. Chris Reeves put this to the ref but he would not take the opinions of both interested parties into consideration and would not let the game go ahead. If the affected area was 10% then arguably it would have been in play for 10% of the match, about 9 minutes out of 90 and we know full well that players tend to avoid a dodgy area so probably 5 minutes of playing time So here we are. All the management personnel of both teams; all the directors and officials; all the players and all the supporters (probably in excess of 300) wanted the game to go ahead but were overruled by one person working to guidelines. If we are going to have a set of guidelines, at least let’s include a section whereby there is some sort of meaningful consultation with both sides and how much the problem area would affect the game overall. But of course the referee and his assistants at least got their expenses and did not have the inconvenience of having to wash muddy kit (sorry cheap dig).
|
|
|
Post by WelshDolphin on Feb 24, 2020 13:20:37 GMT
Interesting that taking the ball out is only a suggestion in that plan. I note that it does say this is the best visual aid to supporters or onlookers.
To me it seems the most common sense one too. If the ball won't bounce or roll through an area then you shouldn't play on it. If it 'skids through' rather than bounces high then that is fine by me but as soon as it starts sticking in puddles it does become a farce and safety might be compromised.
|
|
|
Post by BD on Feb 24, 2020 13:29:35 GMT
Interesting that taking the ball out is only a suggestion in that plan. I note that it does say this is the best visual aid to supporters or onlookers. To me it seems the most common sense one too. If the ball won't bounce or roll through an area then you shouldn't play on it. If it 'skids through' rather than bounces high then that is fine by me but as soon as it starts sticking in puddles it does become a farce and safety might be compromised. Like I said, they are only guidelines. Ultimately the match day ref will have thr final say. If he or she deems the pitch unplayable and or unsafe, then, regardless of anyone else's opinion, the game should not go ahead.
|
|
|
Post by RobTheShirt on Mar 12, 2020 10:41:14 GMT
I still stand totally behind what I said. The guidelines are there to assist the referee and are not rules to blindly follow. There should be a clause that states that the opinions of all parties should be considered. Everyone except the referee wanted this game to go ahead after they had possession of all of the facts. I cannot see where a sticky patch is considered dangerous and nor do I believe for one moment that the managers would ask their own players to play if injuries were likely. That could have far worse effects for the remainder of the season.
|
|
|
Post by RobTheShirt on Mar 12, 2020 10:59:42 GMT
Anyway, the real reason for reopening this topic is to suggest a temporary solution to the problem. Apparently the pitch inspections fail not because of standing water but because of the very soft ground conditions in that area. Somehow we need to harden them up. My idea is to beg, borrow or purchase some large steel trays. The bigger the better. Place these on the soft area and fill them with wood.( With Chris K having a tree surgery business, this should be readily available) Set fire to the wood and allow it to evaporate the waterlogged ground into steam and bake the ground beneath. I don't know how long this would take but I'm sure that we could get enough volunteers to keep the fires well stoked. I doubt if the grass beneath would remain unscathed but that's easily remedied in the close season. I agree with you that it's a very Heath Robinson solution but surely better than losing money and supporters by ground sharing 25 miles away.
|
|
|
Post by expat on Mar 12, 2020 12:29:01 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong(is that possible Ha Ha) but was it not the temporary artificially supported corners that contributed towards our exit from the SXXXXXM? The efforts of the BOD must be to exit Tatnam asap before it leads to our demise
|
|
|
Post by Bay Dolphin on Mar 12, 2020 16:20:17 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong(is that possible Ha Ha) but was it not the temporary artificially supported corners that contributed towards our exit from the SXXXXXM? The efforts of the BOD must be to exit Tatnam asap before it leads to our demise You're a smart one and no mistake expat. I remember that. At the four corners the football pitch encroached onto the surrounding speedway track. I suppose it had to be like that to sustain a reasonably sized playing area for matches. So four chunks of the pitch were on liftable pallets (or something like that) that could be moved for speedway events in the summer. Not ideal, and - as you say - could well have been a factor in our demise.
|
|
|
Post by RobTheShirt on Mar 12, 2020 17:41:25 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong(is that possible Ha Ha) but was it not the temporary artificially supported corners that contributed towards our exit from the SXXXXXM? The efforts of the BOD must be to exit Tatnam asap before it leads to our demise You're a smart one and no mistake expat. I remember that. At the four corners the football pitch encroached onto the surrounding speedway track. I suppose it had to be like that to sustain a reasonably sized playing area for matches. So four chunks of the pitch were on liftable pallets (or something like that) that could be moved for speedway events in the summer. Not ideal, and - as you say - could well have been a factor in our demise. So what's that got to do with anything occurring now?
|
|
|
Post by benito on Mar 13, 2020 8:44:00 GMT
I’ve read some really ridiculous posts over the years on this forum but I have to say this is possibly the most ridiculous one yet. Get a grip people. Our support is melting away due to the pitch but hey let’s get loads of trays and volunteers to set fire to loads of bits of trees to harden the pitch, mind boggling. Also the neighbours would have a field day. We need answers from the BOD end of.
|
|
|
Post by RobTheShirt on Mar 13, 2020 9:54:04 GMT
I’ve read some really ridiculous posts over the years on this forum but I have to say this is possibly the most ridiculous one yet. Get a grip people. Our support is melting away due to the pitch but hey let’s get loads of trays and volunteers to set fire to loads of bits of trees to harden the pitch, mind boggling. Also the neighbours would have a field day. We need answers from the BOD end of. I take it you're not in favour then but of course you've never been in favour of anything that might involve doing a bit of work to help out the club 🖕
|
|
|
Post by expat on Mar 13, 2020 10:40:22 GMT
please read the chairmans Blog. Meagre numbers;playing "home" games 25 miles away and now an eastern virus to threaten us!! ...meanwhile the faithful are asked to pony up money BUT without being given the courtesy of where our next(and final??) home will be! You can't make it up!! Someone should bring out a PTFC poster in the wartime theme
Keep Calm and carry on Pumping.
I honestly believe that staying at Tatnam for next season could do us in. and Benito and others keep up the pressure otherwise we will a footnote in non League history
|
|
|
Post by bearwoodbob on Mar 13, 2020 10:51:37 GMT
Come on you Guys continually pumping this thread. Get a grip of your lives ( Pitch Inspections ) !!!!! Who really cares Hundreds if not thousands will die in UK over the next three months. The Season is over the Southern League will follow all other forms of Sport and Suspend if NOT cancel the remainder of the season. Take care of yourselves.
|
|