Jump to content

Queen of the South VS Sevco: 2015 Playoff QF


Recommended Posts

What's qots home record like compared to their away record...

13 home wins and 4 away wins.

It's safe to say that the pitch does give them an advantage but our performances doon there haven't been acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 603
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Of course a team who plays on this surface week in week out and who trains on it will have an advantage.

No more so than any team who trains on their own pitch (which Queens dont). Almost every side does better at home than away - the only exception in this league is Cowden, who have an awful grass pitch. Look around the league and come back with some actual evidence to suggest sides with artificial surfaces have any additional benefit.

As Bennet said, Queens home record is significantly better than our away one. The same doesnt apply, though, to almost all of the other teams in Scotland with artificial pitches.

As for denying the ball reacts differently...well if you are not willing to concede even that then you are beyond reasoning with.

Of course it reacts differently, as DHD said its more consistent. The bounce is slightly higher too, particularly when the ball drops from height. What Im denying is your claim that there is a "huge difference", clearly implying something inferior. That is, plainly, nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First choice for me would be Queen of the South then who ever is second bottom in the premier.Failing that its between Dumb and Dumber

with Rangers being Dumb and h1b5 being Dumber.So then I would have to plump for Dumb as no way would I want Dumber up.They laughed when we went down but we are back I hope h1b5 rot in that league or lower for eternity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No more so than any team who trains on their own pitch (which Queens dont). Almost every side does better at home than away - the only exception in this league is Cowden, who have an awful grass pitch. Look around the league and come back with some actual evidence to suggest sides with artificial surfaces have any additional benefit.

As Bennet said, Queens home record is significantly better than our away one. The same doesnt apply, though, to almost all of the other teams in Scotland with artificial pitches.

Of course it reacts differently, as DHD said its more consistent. The bounce is slightly higher too, particularly when the ball drops from height. What Im denying is your claim that there is a "huge difference", clearly implying something inferior. That is, plainly, nonsense.

As I thought...You are just being a tit.

I see you are agreeing the ball reacts differently. I never implied in any way it was inferior

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I thought...You are just being a tit.

I see you are agreeing the ball reacts differently. I never implied in any way it was inferior

Im being a tit? :lol:

You're the one who claimed it gave the home team a significant advantage and that there was a "huge difference" in the way the ball reacts.

I suggest you either back up these claims with actual evidence or shut up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No8 is clearly very uptight about this tie.

He's desperate to invent squabbles all over the boards.

He keeps losing them.

Yeh because I lost the argument when Mr X agreed with my point about the ball reacting differently......

As far as not believing QoS have an advantage with their plastic pitch...I think it was Bennett provided the proof for that this season....13 of their 17 wins being at home.

Eta....Believe me I have more to worry about this weekend than a game of football...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No more so than any team who trains on their own pitch (which Queens dont). Almost every side does better at home than away - the only exception in this league is Cowden, who have an awful grass pitch. Look around the league and come back with some actual evidence to suggest sides with artificial surfaces have any additional benefit.

Sides with artificial surfaces do indeed have an additional benefit compared to their opponents. That benefit is they're well used to playing on the surface so they know better how much weight to put on a pass, how high the ball will bounce, which direction it will bounce etc..

Rangers will obviously be putting in some extra training on their artificial pitch at Auchenhowie, but even then that surface may play differently to the one at Palmerston.

This isn't obvious?............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sides with artificial surfaces do indeed have an additional benefit compared to their opponents. That benefit is they're well used to playing on the surface so they know better how much weight to put on a pass, how high the ball will bounce, which direction it will bounce etc..

Rangers will obviously be putting in some extra training on their artificial pitch at Auchenhowie, but even then that surface may play differently to the one at Palmerston.

This isn't obvious?............

Simply put and I totally agree. Similar to the advantage of playing at home. It is the same advantage consistently playing on a different type of surface.

Surely the posters who have played on both grass and artificial will confirm there is a difference and takes time to get used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...