- This topic has 51 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The last time we had the pitch re laid if im right i hear it cost £500.000 did they who wreck it pay out towards it. if it happens again will they pay.NO not a penny.CHUBBIES OUT.TAKE LINDSEY WITH THEE :lol: ;) :lol:
Why should a tenant pay towards the repair of a part of something that they are already paying rent on? Its the landlords responsibility to keep the fixtures & fittings up to scratch, including fair wear & tear, which playing on it is. You only have to look at the state of the pitch every February to see what causes the most damage. Compare that to the state of it every September, when it suddenly appears to be pristine again!
Football + Winter + Building a pitch on a historical flood plain = Sh !t pitch in Springtime!!!
As an aside, if Whelan was so worried about the condition of the pitch, why was the rearranged game against Bolton changed to a month when there was already 5 sporting fixtures being played on it? They could have fitted it in midweek between 24 April and 9 May when the grass will be growing and no other games, apart from Hull City on 1 May, are taking place.
It’s a fallacy that the rugby ruins the pitch. Over-use does the damage, clearly, but there is an argument that the game of football cuts up the pitch more than rugby does.
A couple of reasoned responses above without the vitriol usually associated with this ongoing topic.
I think the reason the Bolton game was re-arranged for this period is purely financial, i.e. improved cash flow, money in the bank in early February rather than in April / May.
I also agree that the Rugby does far less damage than the football, in that the sliding tackles in football tend to dig into the pitch.
The one thing that does puzzle me a little is that Wigan RLFC were given their first two games at home in February, but I guess no-one foresaw the Bolton postponement or the cup replay.
A couple of reasoned responses above without the vitriol usually associated with this ongoing topic.I think the reason the Bolton game was re-arranged for this period is purely financial, i.e. improved cash flow, money in the bank in early February rather than in April / May.
I also agree that the Rugby does far less damage than the football, in that the sliding tackles in football tend to dig into the pitch.
Both clubs are a victim of circumstances.
Everytime this issue is dragged up it’s by the misinformed press, at which point the RL lot go off on a tangent and portray Latics fans as a bunch of thugs who beat up their dear old granny!
Latics suffer from this press treatment week in, week out, we get a ‘poor’ crowd in the FA Cup, it’s all over the national press, you get a sub 5k crowd in the early rounds of the Challenge Cup, it isn’t even mentioned, that’s the way it goes.
Pitches always get **** up at this time of year, but most other clubs can give their pitch some rest, we can’t.
The last time the pitch was repaired it cost £500k, a SL clubs income is only a couple of million, so your rent won’t be much more than a few hundred thousand per season. Latics Premiership income is around £50m, even in the Championship it would be around the £10m+ mark.
Ultimately both clubs would be happier with seperate grounds, but unless you go through with your back-up option at a revised LSV, it isn’t going to happen.
PS, I’ve never been convinced about the football causing more damage than rugby argument, based on nothing more than myself seeing the pitch first hand. Not only are sliding tackles a thing of the past in football, surely every rugby tackle is equivalent to a sliding tackle?
If and this a big if DW sell out to someone else will the stadium stay in the ownership of welco or would it be in the ownership of the new owners ?
The problem with the pitch was caused by Wigan Athletic training on it during the bad weather when they were unable to use their own training facilities.
.[/quote]Haha you must not be very clever. Made me laugh that comment :lol: is that why it’s the same every year even though they dont train on it every year haha.. Actually can’t stop laughing at that stupid comment :lol:
A couple of reasoned responses above without the vitriol usually associated with this ongoing topic.
I think the reason the Bolton game was re-arranged for this period is purely financial, i.e. improved cash flow, money in the bank in early February rather than in April / May.
I also agree that the Rugby does far less damage than the football, in that the sliding tackles in football tend to dig into the pitch.
[/quote]Both clubs are a victim of circumstances.
Everytime this issue is dragged up it’s by the misinformed press, at which point the RL lot go off on a tangent and portray Latics fans as a bunch of thugs who beat up their dear old granny!
Latics suffer from this press treatment week in, week out, we get a ‘poor’ crowd in the FA Cup, it’s all over the national press, you get a sub 5k crowd in the early rounds of the Challenge Cup, it isn’t even mentioned, that’s the way it goes.
Pitches always get **** up at this time of year, but most other clubs can give their pitch some rest, we can’t.
The last time the pitch was repaired it cost £500k, a SL clubs income is only a couple of million, so your rent won’t be much more that a few hundred thousand per season. Latics Premiership income is around £50m, even in the Championship it would be around the £10m+ mark.
Ultimately both clubs would be happier with seperate grounds, but unless you go through with your back-up option at a revised LSV, it isn’t going to happen.
PS, I’ve never been convinced about the football causing more damage than rugby argument, based on nothing more than myself seeing the pitch first hand. Not only are sliding tackles a thing of the past in In the we have shared with a rugby team.Blackpool Borough and they got fired off for ruining the pitch.at least we did lease em a short stay not like our lodgers who fooked them off.that shows true loyalty of the eggchasing family (poor springfield park 3 herd of cattle would,nt cause that much damage :lol: ;) :) :lol:
Look at the KC pitch – fine.
The pitch is fooked because of where the stadium is built simple as.
Oh and the groundsman has said that the football ruins the pitch more than the rugby, which if you think is about right. Look where the worst areas are. The goalmouth. Rugby is very rarely played in this area. Also, look at the damage done when a player slides on his knees celebrating a goal.(granted doesn’t happen much with us at the mo) That doesn’t happen at rugby. If you don’t believe me then fall on your garden and then get up again thirty-forty times. Then slide on it six or seven times. You’ll see that the slide affects it far more.
Absolute Bolliards! Backpool Borough rlfc were given 6 months notice
to quit playing at Spingfield Park in January 1988 due to the pitch
suffering from overuse!.
Regarding the KCstadium maybe they can spend alot more money maintaining the playing surface seeing as Hull rlfc payed more rent in their first season at the KC in 2003,
“THAN OUR FAT CHUBBY LODGERS PAY NOW” :?:If you say so, although I’d rather take the word of the groundsman and the look of football and rugby pitches across the country.
Oh and look at the state of Bloomfield Road which has no rugby on it at all except for one day a year in May.
It doesn’t matter who causes the damage, the point is there is no recovery time once the rugby season starts.
Neither does it matter what Latics, the rugby or Whelan thinks, once the Premier League get involved action has to be taken.
How come everytime this topic comes up everyone and his dog claims to have had a deep and meaningful conversation with “the head groundsman, who is fuming, dont you know” about the fine art of preparing a strip of grass for a sporting event.
I’m not saying these people who go hunting for the groundsman should get a life or anything………………….. :roll:
And the owd chubbie rant against the tics as now spread to nine pages oh dear :lol:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
