Jump to content

Queen of the South VS Sevco: 2015 Playoff QF


Recommended Posts

Adding my part with regards to grass/artificial parks.

These artificial parks are the way forward for scotland at all levels.

I watched my mates team play on an artificial park last week and both teams played good football, and not the long ball/hit and run style they are used playing due to pitches similar to Cowdenbeaths shambles.

Obviously top teams can afford the tools to maintain top grass parks but this is scotland not the English Premiership.

Embarrassed for Rangers if they blame palmerstons pitch if they don't win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 603
  • Created
  • Last Reply

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.

Im sure you wont mind providing some facts to back up this, so called, advantage then? I think No8 forgot

Yep. We know.

Good grief :1eye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sure you wont mind providing some facts to back up this, so called, advantage then? I think No8 forgot

Good grief :1eye

.

Bennett beat me to it. You must have missed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are these plastic pitches nowadays the same as they were a few years ago? My abiding memory of playing at Riccarton is the massive burns you'd get on your elbows and legs from attempting slide tackles. Surely this isn't the case on the real pitches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are these plastic pitches nowadays the same as they were a few years ago? My abiding memory of playing at Riccarton is the massive burns you'd get on your elbows and legs from attempting slide tackles. Surely this isn't the case on the real pitches?

It isn't, they now play rugby on them as well, which obviously wouldn't work if you ended up with massive burns all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

Bennett beat me to it. You must have missed it.

Oh dear, you really are flailing around wildly now, arent you?

I already responded to Bennets post and acknowledged that Queens home record is much better than their away record. I also pointed out that this doesnt hold true for the vast majority of other sides with artificial pitches.

If there was this huge advantage that you keep claiming then, statistically, it would be obvious from the home records of all clubs who have them. It isnt, unless you want to provide proof that it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is alwayss an advantage for home teams for various reasons. Having an artificial pitch and being used to playing on that surface is an obvious advantage when playing a team that normally plays on grass.

If you cant accept that then....well you are just being a tit for the sake of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is alwayss an advantage for home teams for various reasons. Having an artificial pitch and being used to playing on that surface is an obvious advantage when playing a team that normally plays on grass.

If you cant accept that then....well you are just being a tit for the sake of it.

Rangers have the EXACT same pitch available to train on at Murray park. Queens train on a different type of pitch. Advantage Rangers you would think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is alwayss an advantage for home teams for various reasons. Having an artificial pitch and being used to playing on that surface is an obvious advantage when playing a team that normally plays on grass.

If you cant accept that then....well you are just being a tit for the sake of it.

That would be why Falkirk won the same number of games away from home as at home, Alloa won just two more game at home and why Hibs won more away games than home games, which would have included 6 trips to grounds with artificial pitches - and included a win at Palmerston - and why Hearts and Rangers only won 1 more game at home than away.

And thats just our division. The same pattern is true in all the other leagues.

As Monkman pointed out, Queens dont even train on the same kind of pitch, yet have a better home record than Falkirk and Alloa who do train on the same pitch they play on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be why Falkirk won the same number of games away from home as at home, Alloa won just two more game at home and why Hibs won more away games than home games, which would have included 6 trips to grounds with artificial pitches - and included a win at Palmerston - and why Hearts and Rangers only won 1 more game at home than away.

And thats just our division. The same pattern is true in all the other leagues.

As Monkman pointed out, Queens dont even train on the same kind of pitch, yet have a better home record than Falkirk and Alloa who do train on the same pitch they play on.

All this reasoned argument is too much for some. Let us just perpetuate the myth that all plastic pitches are poor.

Ultimately the Rangers players hate it and are not looking forward to playing on it again. This will hopefully translate into another miserable defeat for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this reasoned argument is too much for some. Let us just perpetuate the myth that all plastic pitches are poor.

Ultimately the Rangers players hate it and are not looking forward to playing on it again. This will hopefully translate into another miserable defeat for them.

You're right.

Plastic pitches are awful. Down with this sort of thing!

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...