3g or not 3g...that is the question?

[DaveP]

Don't Widnes play on an artificial pitch?

[orpheus]

NO. U could see from the highlights that the players were not going "in" for the ball. Afraid of the terrible injuries that can happen on a pitch like this. The ball was coming off the surface at 100 miles an hour and with Dixon's sometimes hopeless long kicks its a wonder the ball stayed in play.
Better to be good on our fantastic surface.

[spirit of 1990]

Afraid of the terrible injuries that can happen on a pitch like this.

I agree, these pitches aren't for me either but after getting that reply off Sean Riley I think that statement is a bit wide of the mark.

[geobarrovian]

In the national rugby union leagues Burnage also have a 4G (fourth generation) surface and saracens have one also.

Newcastle Falcons as well.

[EHB]

Like them or loathe them they are the future of lower league and amatuer football. Clubs just can't maintain grass pitches. Although the capital expenditure is high the upkeep costs are minimal and you can get 50-60 hours a week out of one.

That said, if the cancer claims prove true then they'll all be ripped up.

[EHB]

Just watched the highlights of the Sutton game. Tbh pitch played well didn't particularly notice much diffrence to grass. Also didn't really notice any world class Dixon saves that people were going on about on another thread either tbh. Didn't have much to do.

[russell_anderson]

Just watched the highlights of the Sutton game. Tbh pitch played well didn't particularly notice much diffrence to grass. Also didn't really notice any world class Dixon saves that people were going on about on another thread either tbh. Didn't have much to do.

Watching the highlights I wouldn't have thought there was much difference either. Watching the match live I certainly did. Don't forget the highlights showed 11 mins where the ball got where it was supposed to go but there was another 79 mins where it didn't. Re Dixon, I don't remember people going on about "world class" saves although he did make a couple of excellent saves. What WAS very impressive was his handing of the ball on a very tricky and extremely fast surface and the fact that he caught every cross hoisted into the penalty area most, of course, which weren't shown on the highlights.

[Southcoaster]

Just watched the highlights of the Sutton game. Tbh pitch played well didn't particularly notice much diffrence to grass. Also didn't really notice any world class Dixon saves that people were going on about on another thread either tbh. Didn't have much to do.

Watching the highlights I wouldn't have thought there was much difference either. Watching the match live I certainly did. Don't forget the highlights showed 11 mins where the ball got where it was supposed to go but there was another 79 mins where it didn't. Re Dixon, I don't remember people going on about "world class" saves although he did make a couple of excellent saves. What WAS very impressive was his handing of the ball on a very tricky and extremely fast surface and the fact that he caught every cross hoisted into the penalty area most, of course, which weren't shown on the highlights.

Spot on with the difference between 11mins and the missing 79+mins.
Highlights are good but never tell the full story.

[K_BFC]

Remember watching Joe Royle's Oldham Athletic on a plastic pitch. It was no coincidence that their good cup runs and rise to the top flight occurred during that time. Visiting teams struggled to cope with the high bounce and fast pace. It definitely has an effect on the game.

The bounce is more consistent on these pitches, but watching the highlights it is clear there is still a spring to the bounce of the ball that isn't there on grass. When the ball runs loose you can see it bobbling a lot where on grass it would settle and roll. The bounce appears to cause the ball to travel further than it would on most grass surfaces, it doesn't slow down as quick (EDIT: Was it wet?). I noticed the players a couple of times having to put on a bit more of s spurt to keep up with it, but also noticed it allowed for some longer passes along the ground that due to the pace were harder to intercept. It's a million miles away from what we saw in the 80's, where the ball would bounce over the heads of everyone and Sutton's pitch doesn't look too far of the mark.

They are getting pretty close but I wouldn't want us to use one unless everyone was forced to. Pitches can be as unique as the team's and grounds and the fans. If we all had the same type of 3G pitches, I think a unique part of home advantage would go out the window. Sadly the wide and varied world of non-league is the most likely place these pitches will be adopted, as teams look at ways to increase revenue. I'm still saying no to 3G.

Sutton United's league record...
Home, Played 10, Won 6, Drawn 2, Lost 2
Away, Played 10, Won 1, Drawn 3, Lost 5
Sutton also also beat Forest Green 2-1 at home in FA Cup as well,.

I thought there might be something in these results and the pitch definitely plays some part but Barrow did similar after promotion on grass in 89-90...
Home, Played 21, Won 11, Drawn 8, Lost 2
Away, Played 21, Won 1, Drawn 8, Lost 12
Barrow won the FA Trophy at the end of that season, Sutton for the Trophy!

[mall]

A plastic pitch would be of little or no advantage to us at the moment, we don't train in Barrow.

[Hadrian]

It would be available to use by the community daily, though, bringing people and income to the ground.