Artificial Pitches: What's the PR verdict of these?

All things Rugby
User avatar
bobbity
Posts: 5567
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Artificial Pitches: What's the PR verdict of these?

Post by bobbity »

Plastic Sarrie wrote:
Homer wrote:
Poshprop wrote:I've played on the artificial pitch at the Arms Park a couple of times and had no problems there. One lad had a nasty face rash from being dragged along the surface though. I have also played on rock hard grounds in Zimbabwe and here in September and May and lost way more skin on those. Don't think the artificial pitches are too much of a concern for anyone apart from the moneyed clubs and they have the resources to make them work. The main bonus of the artificial pitch is you never have to worry about the game being off
The other big advantage of an artificial turf pitch is that you can use it multiple times a day, every day of the week if you so wish...
It does reduce the lifespan though.

From a business point of view, I've been told that Worcester essentially rent theirs out 6 days a week to a 5 a side league. Makes for a nice, constant income stream.

Sarries can't do that because of the public use of the stadium as part of their agreement with the council.
Yep, usually five a side teams waiting for our mixed ability group to finish. It's great for that group to be able to train on a pro pitch in a stadium, otherwise impossible.
User avatar
LandOTurk
Posts: 13400
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Artificial Pitches: What's the PR verdict of these?

Post by LandOTurk »

Ulsters Red Hand wrote:The biggest complaint Scarlets seem to have is the fact that the surface they played on in Glasgow has caused "inconvenient" injuries which is hindering the training regime coming up to a big game, where players are strictly speaking available but can't train fully due to burns/blisters etc
Jonny McNichol is less than complimentary, but polite.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/44208537
User avatar
Kiwias
Posts: 41038
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Artificial Pitches: What's the PR verdict of these?

Post by Kiwias »

kiap wrote:
Kiwias wrote:The stuff above ground is natural grass.
Not quite.

Most of it, of course, is but the reinforcing fibres also extend a few centimetres above ground. It's hybrid turf, but it works well.

Image
I should have said it is effectively natural grass for the players.
User avatar
Thomas
Posts: 16569
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA!

Re: Artificial Pitches: What's the PR verdict of these?

Post by Thomas »

Poshprop wrote:I've played on the artificial pitch at the Arms Park a couple of times and had no problems there. One lad had a nasty face rash from being dragged along the surface though. I have also played on rock hard grounds in Zimbabwe and here in September and May and lost way more skin on those. Don't think the artificial pitches are too much of a concern for anyone apart from the moneyed clubs and they have the resources to make them work. The main bonus of the artificial pitch is you never have to worry about the game being off
I used to wear a pair of boots with small moulded studs in the pre-season here in Brisbane purely because every ground was essentially dirt coloured concrete. I once played in a Sevens tournament in February and nearly had to have skin grafts to my legs after being dragged down the pitch.
User avatar
David990
Posts: 746
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:56 pm

Re: Artificial Pitches: What's the PR verdict of these?

Post by David990 »

LandOTurk wrote:
Ulsters Red Hand wrote:The biggest complaint Scarlets seem to have is the fact that the surface they played on in Glasgow has caused "inconvenient" injuries which is hindering the training regime coming up to a big game, where players are strictly speaking available but can't train fully due to burns/blisters etc
Jonny McNichol is less than complimentary, but polite.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/rugby-union/44208537
And yet the Glasgow players have no issues from it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/44221143
Post Reply