Barrow AFC.net

Shaun wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2017 1:38 pm What the [SwearFilter]'s a '3 G pitch'??

tictactoe wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2017 10:00 pm Shoot me down but really I don't give a flying you know what about the ground/cross bar/3G pitches etc etc as long as the ground is league standard all I care about is what's on the pitch, a good team, good football and a team doing well - casson hasn't got the money for everything so if I was him I'd stop making promises sort out the team first and go from there

Suffolk Blue wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2017 9:52 pm 3G stands for 3rd Generation (artificial pitch).

The analogy with mobile phones is an obvious one. First generation plastic pitches were the ones that Luton, QPR and Preston used to play on in the 90s. I actually played on the one at Deepdale. They were very basic, heavily sanded to subdue the uneven bounce of the ball and when you landed on the pitch it would take the skin off your knees. These were subsequently banned by the FA for use in the professional game. They were and remain popular with clubs however because of course they don't take a great deal of looking after, rarely freeze and can be utilised virtually 24/7 bringing in additional revenue.

The pitches that you now see at Sutton and Maidstone are third generation (3G). These pitches have a different weave and a more grass like surface to them and technology has mostly sorted out the variable bounce problem. They are considered "true" pitches and as such have now been sanctioned by the FA. They are expensive to install but again make money in the longer term. Players to some extent however still seem to distrust them and at Sutton last year it was noticeable that whilst the bounce was true it still seemed higher than your average natural surface. Its much better than its predecessors however and normal tackling makes the game look more like a normal football game as players are happy to go to ground on them..

We now have 4th Generation pitches in the pipeline and these are ones that probably will ultimately be adopted by some league clubs. With 4G pitches the surface is actually I believe an amalgam of both plastic and grass so you get the benefits of both. Its very hardwearing but looks like a traditional pitch. From what I've seen these look really good with all the benefits of the earlier versions.

In my opinion, whatever we choose to call them, at some point in the not too distant future all pitches will contain both elements of natural turf and some form of polymer. In actual fact I believe this already happens to some extent. I may be wrong but I seem to recall that even the pitch at Wembley contains a minority of artificial material in it. As such its still seen as a grass surface but in reality the lines between natural and plastic become blurred. This stuff looks just like grass and behaves just like grass but lasts a great deal longer. Much to my surprise I discovered recently that the surface at Wembley had not been re-laid for quite a while (it was not relaid after the Joshua-Klitchko fight for example). The introduction of the polymer has been credited with extending the life of the surface which for the National Stadium is not cheap to re-lay. It also has helped get over the atmospheric problems at Wembley caused by the roof which initially led to frequent re-surfacing.

mickmike wilson wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2017 12:34 am I've always been in favour of a Proper Built new stadium on a new site with surrounding bars, restaurants & shops etc, A solid built stadium built to last not a modern souless lego affair, Built with the future in mind with everything both clubs need, Gyms, Treatment, Bars & Food outlets, Club Shops, Training facilities etc

Never going to happen though as the town is too inward looking to take the leap of faith required.

MikeRenney wrote: ↑Tue Aug 29, 2017 11:21 pm Ground sharing with the rugby is not something I would care for. I remember a Rochdale fan on this forum last season saying they had a terrible time and warning against it saying they had to pay Rochdale rugby when they wanted to move a game to a different date. You also have the wear and tear on the pitch and to me both codes playing on the same pitch is not sustainable. Remember when we played Oldham in the cup they had just got a rugby team off their pitch and it cost two hundred thousand pounds to put it right. Quite a few years ago that so what would be the cost now.
As for 3G or 4G pitches they are not for me. I think they do not replicate the conditions of a grass pitch and spoil the game, would probably give up watching if they were at the majority of grounds.
There is one other issue and that is they are being linked as a cause of cancer. Different studies have differing views but the American ones seem pretty negative about them. Gary Abletts widow is pretty damning about them as well insisting they played a part in his death.