Oh dear part 2.

[WonkyWasp]

So you are saying that the spanner in the works is the EFL.  Surely you can.t expect Wasps to over-ride the CG?

[SBSam]

I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.

[Shugs]

Of course Sam. But you take a very linear view. Sometimes circumstances disrupt plans - that’s life.

[Bloke in North Dorset]

I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.

OK. Now write that as a contractual clause that isn't subjective.

Just saying the referee called the game off isn't something that the groundsman can work with, they need a definition and stander to work to.

[Vespula Vulgaris]

I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.

And I'm sure they will, once the ground has been handed back by the CG, as all parties were fully aware of.  You'd be as well to complain that the pitch isn't safe for football in the middle of a game of rugby, or even a concert.  If it isn't safe after the 14th then you may have a point. Until then you are stirring for the sake of it.

As I understand it the main issue with rugby and football sharing the same ground is that the two sports prefer different lengths of grass.  Rugby does best on relatively long grass as it makes it more resilient and softer for impact.  However that kills the bounce and slows the ball for football.

I'd be very susprised if there wasn't a depressing compromise that works well for neither sport written into any agreement between Wasps and CCFC.

[Egret]

I think it could have been expected that Wasps would provide a suitable (and safe) playing surface for their long term tenants, as promised.

Given that the arena was block booked to the CG's, that Wasps had no idea what state it would be when handed back and ccfc wanted a favour, I would be surprised if the agreement was anything more than 'reasonable efforts' basis.

[SBSam]

I suppose a clause could be written something like this:-

“The playing surface must, as a minimum, be to a standard acceptable as safe and playable by an EFL referee at 6pm the day prior to the fixture.”

That would get round the mid concert or rugby match, let those dreadful huge stock car vehicles they have had.

I do agree that there is a fundamental difference between the ideal surface for both sports. I would be surprised if any of us can understand why this always seems such an issue in Coventry when other stadia seem to manage really well. Is insufficient money is being put into it, is the fundamental substrate on which the pitch stands is inadequate, or is there some truth in the rumour that a Leicester City shirt was buried there to curse the stadium?

CCFC will try to hold Wasps to account, they have no choice as there are thousands of angry and disappointed football fans who have been looking forward to a pleasant afternoon enjoying their pastime. I don’t know if they will be successful, but steps need to be taken to ensure this never happens again. We can but hope.

[SBSam]

PS Judging by some of the surprised comments from rugby fans about how the pitch was cutting up, I suspect that the damage and condition of the pitch was a shock to Wasps.

[WonkyWasp]

Sam,  This is not intended to be patronising etc,  but when you calm down you  are really quite nice, and sensible too.  I think  I've gone barmy.

[Bloke in North Dorset]

I’m not trying to be difficult or to catch you out, Sam, but I said it can’t be a referee’s subjective decision. The reason is that all ref’s will have a different opinion, even if marginally different, and that means you’d spend forever in court arguing about those differences.

Furthermore, how can a goundsman know from game to game what each referee expects. They need a very clear definition of what makes a surface dangerous and that goes in the contract definitions at the start of the contract. 

FWIW, I don’t have an axe to grind and I’d prefer to see both clubs getting along amicably, it’s in the commercial interests of both. If I was still a football fan I’d probably have made CCFC my second team after Wasps moved to Coventry.

[westwaleswasp]

Speaking with a soccer hat on, I genuinely think the last 20 years obfuscate the fact that for most of the last century we played on mudflats at every level of the game. We also played in conditions that would see the games today called off.

[SBSam]

I suppose you could devise something including length of grass, moisture content, pressure needed to apply to depress surface by n mm, a shear test could be devised, imitating say a 12 stone man sliding for 1 meter at 5 kph. That’s just me making something up.

You could look at rye EFL rules, which say:-

28 Playing Surface Standard / Slope of Pitch

28.1 The playing surface shall be grass and must be of a high standard, as defined by The Football League.

28.2 It must be flat and free from surface depressions and excessive undulations.

28.3 The maximum slopes allowable shall not exceed an even gradient of vertical to horizontal 1:41 in any direction.

28.4 Each Home Club shall provide full pitch frost covers and/or under soil heating (the specification of which shall meet the reasonable satisfaction of the Executive) which shall be operated to the extent necessary to procure, so far as it is reasonably possible, that the pitch is playable on the occasion of each match. A breach of this requirement which results in the postponement or abandonment of a match shall be dealt with in accordance with Regulation 28, and not Regulation 8.4.

Unfortunately I haven’t been able to find a written definition as referred to in 28.1

Or you could rely on an expert or experienced person, say a referee. The range of acceptability from such a person is likely to be relatively narrow

I’m pretty sure experienced groundsmen know what is likely to be acceptable to a referee. In any event, the state of the pitch at 6pm yesterday was very far from what would be acceptable on a council pitch, let alone for professional sport

[Bloke in North Dorset]

WWW,

I also understand why they want good pitches. There’s no doubt they have contributed to the skill levels that are way above those when I watched regularly. Indeed, my home team, Leeds, we’re the  last Div 1 winners in no small part because Old Trafford was a ploughed field by comparison to Eland Road and most other grounds.

[SBSam]

Speaking with a soccer hat on, I genuinely think the last 20 years obfuscate the fact that for most of the last century we played on mudflats at every level of the game. We also played in conditions that would see the games today called off.

But the game has change enormously, no longer hoofed from the back for the centre forward to win in the air. More possession and higher speed from more highly tuned, and hence more susceptible to injury, athletes.

[Neils]

Especially when they throw themselves on the ground so much.