London Irish. WHY???

[Sun Tzu]

The rugby has no deterimental affect to the pitch - the reason it looks poor at the moment is down to the particularly cold and wet winter we've just had.

I think you will find cold and wet weather is quite common during the winter months.

I think you'll find it's been a bit wetter / colder for longer this winter than it has for a while.

Combine that with the relaying of the pitch, the root nematode infestation and the amount of use and you get the end result.

If Irish didn't use the pitch it might make a small difference, but the rugby isn't the sole cause and the anti LI voices aren't really looking at the whole story - we know some people are just perversley anti rugby and would rather the stadium stood empty than be used for top class sport.

It needs sorting, it's not great for any sport but using it as a stick to beat LI with is wrong IMHO.

[Royal Lady]

I thought we had undersoil heating, so the cold weather element doesn't really come into it, does it?

[Skyline]

ISTR reading somewhere that having the undersoil heating on for an extended period of time does serious damage to the root system of the grass. Someone with more gardening knowledge than me will be able to confirm or deny that I'm sure (where's the 17 Bus when you need him?)

[Muskrat]

Yes I believe it is true that prolonged use of the undersoil heating does damage the roots, i've definately heard that before and that's why it's only used as a last resort to prevent games being postponed.

I make no bones about it I don't like the rugby at the stadium and still believe that it has a significant and detrimental affect on the pitch. Why do you think that Rugby pitches are commonly referred to as "cabbage patches"?

I'll give you a clue it's not for their lush covering of grass...

[Terminal Boardom]

Yes I believe it is true that prolonged use of the undersoil heating does damage the roots, i've definately heard that before and that's why it's only used as a last resort to prevent games being postponed.

I make no bones about it I don't like the rugby at the stadium and still believe that it has a significant and detrimental affect on the pitch. Why do you think that Rugby pitches are commonly referred to as "cabbage patches"?

I'll give you a clue it's not for their lush covering of grass...

Have you been to a more traditional rugby ground? usually the grass is a good 2 inches long to cushion the impact of hard grounds.

But why do we have to put up with the rugby at the Mad Stad? How much is playing in the prem worth to the club? That money coming in would easily offset the money lost through the departure of LI.

[Whistle]

I believe it's worth around a million pounds a season for Irish to play at the Mad Stad penauts in Premiership terms. But a lot for a championship club, which is what we are.

I've heard it's less than half that in terms of profit - though we may off-set some costs against LI. In the context of PL football it is absolute peanuts - less than the difference between finishing 16th and 17th. Irritatingly we are not now in the PL.

To have extended the tenancy agreement long term shows a lack of ambition on the part of RFC. Surely having rugby in should only be a means to the true end which is a top football club?

[Wycombe Royal]

How much is playing in the prem worth to the club?

We aren't in the Premiership, and to say London Irish playing at the Mad Stad is the reason we aren't is just pure fantasy.

Other teams manage to come to the Madesjki and play on this pitch but for some reason it is being used as an excuse for us. Our players managed to perform at Home Park..........

[Stranded]

I believe it's worth around a million pounds a season for Irish to play at the Mad Stad penauts in Premiership terms. But a lot for a championship club, which is what we are.

I've heard it's less than half that in terms of profit - though we may off-set some costs against LI. In the context of PL football it is absolute peanuts - less than the difference between finishing 16th and 17th. Irritatingly we are not now in the PL.

To have extended the tenancy agreement long term shows a lack of ambition on the part of RFC. Surely having rugby in should only be a means to the true end which is a top football club?

I'm sorry but your last paragraph there is pure tosh. I can understand an anti rugby bias to some degree but to say agreeing to have a top union side use a stadium that would otherwise lay dormant for 340 days a year shows a lack of ambition is ridiculous.

The rugby club are an easy excuse to use when things aren't going well, when they are going well it's funny how it never seems to be an issue.

It does bring a substantial wedge in to the club, money that regardless of division otherwise wouldn't be made. The biggest crowd of the season at the stadium could well be there on Sunday for the rugby - the club will take a decent wedge of money spent in the ground and I can't see how this is a bad thing or a lack of ambition securing this income for the next 15+ years.

[Alan Partridge]

Oh, and I want them to be called Reading Irish if they are to play at the Mad Stad.

that's the football team.

[The 17 Bus]

Roots of plants are heated from the soil around them, and the plant above, many plants, grass included do not usually grow through the winter and are in fact dormant, hence why people do not need to cut the grass in the winter. Similar in the hot summer months, grass often goes yellow, this is to preserve the roots, which then start regrowth when rain and cooler weather happen. Maintaining a luch green pitch at a football ground throughout the winter is therefore working against the elements and the natural growth of the plant(grass).

Plants grown in artificial conditions, but exposed to the real elements will usually be weaker, and prone to damage, had the elements not been so bad the state of the pitch would have been better, had LI not used it it would have been better also, had we not been relegated and played fewer games it would have been in better condition.


One thing that they could do at RFC would be to widen the pitch again in the summer, giving players more area to play on, hence less work per sq metre.

[Sun Tzu]

Yes I believe it is true that prolonged use of the undersoil heating does damage the roots, i've definately heard that before and that's why it's only used as a last resort to prevent games being postponed.

I make no bones about it I don't like the rugby at the stadium and still believe that it has a significant and detrimental affect on the pitch. Why do you think that Rugby pitches are commonly referred to as "cabbage patches"?

I'll give you a clue it's not for their lush covering of grass...

No, it's because the ground at Twickenham was built on an area of land that had been a cabbage farm - there's a pub near the ground called The Cabbage Patch and the term is used as a nickname for the ground.

What eveidence are you presenting for rugby having a 'significant effect' ?

[West Stand Man]

Yes I believe it is true that prolonged use of the undersoil heating does damage the roots, i've definately heard that before and that's why it's only used as a last resort to prevent games being postponed.

I make no bones about it I don't like the rugby at the stadium and still believe that it has a significant and detrimental affect on the pitch. Why do you think that Rugby pitches are commonly referred to as "cabbage patches"?

I'll give you a clue it's not for their lush covering of grass...

No, it's because the ground at Twickenham was built on an area of land that had been a cabbage farm - there's a pub near the ground called The Cabbage Patch and the term is used as a nickname for the ground.

What eveidence are you presenting for rugby having a 'significant effect' ?

Not to mention that many decent rugby clubs have pitches that would be welcomed in most football stadiums. Twickers, for instance, has a superb lush pitch that Wembley would be proud of. It isn't rugby, per se, that causes the problems; it is a mix of poor grass, possibly poor maintenance, and poor weather. At least it hasn't also been a drainage problem this year.

[Sun Tzu]

It would be wrong to say that any use of the pitch doesn't impact the wear and tear and having rugby must increase that, but the pitch is designed to cope with the amount of use it gets so my issue is with those who claim the entire problem is the rugby and 'getting rid' of LI would give us a perfect pitch.

It might make a small difference, but seeing as they contribute significantly to the cost of the pitch it might actually make things worse !

I'd agree though that modern rugby actually needs a good, firm surface not a mud heap so they have almost as much interest in having a good pitch as we do.

[Whistle]

[/quote]I'm sorry but your last paragraph there is pure tosh. I can understand an anti rugby bias to some degree but to say agreeing to have a top union side use a stadium that would otherwise lay dormant for 340 days a year shows a lack of ambition is ridiculous.

The rugby club are an easy excuse to use when things aren't going well, when they are going well it's funny how it never seems to be an issue.

It does bring a substantial wedge in to the club, money that regardless of division otherwise wouldn't be made. The biggest crowd of the season at the stadium could well be there on Sunday for the rugby - the club will take a decent wedge of money spent in the ground and I can't see how this is a bad thing or a lack of ambition securing this income for the next 15+ years.[/quote]

Is less than half a mill substantial in a PL context?

Do Man U. Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal, Barcelona, Real Madrid all exhibit their ambition by hosting rugby or by having a stadium that's largely dormant!?

Having lodgers is a means to an end and sometimes the means get in the way.

[Sun Tzu]

Is less than half a mill substantial in a PL context?

Do Man U. Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal, Barcelona, Real Madrid all exhibit their ambition by hosting rugby or by having a stadium that's largely dormant!?

Having lodgers is a means to an end and sometimes the means get in the way.

I'm fairly certain that the figure is way above 500k.

Not sure what your point about the other clubs are - they all obviously have massively bigger earning power than us. Madrid are effectively under written by the city council, Barcelona are funded by the local community and both have a more or less bottomless pit of money. But of course they do use their stadia for other purposes - Anfield and the Emirates have recently staged big concerts on the pitch.

I've still not seen anyone explain why they are anti LI in any logical way, or why they have just decided the pitch problems are down to the rugby.

[The Quiet Man]

This isn't the first season the pitch has been poor - it was poor two seasons ago and had to be relaid and I also recall Keegan ages ago when Fulham played having a go at our pitch for the same reasons.

I think it is the Desso system which is poor and we should ask for a refund for what is supposed to be a fairly new pitch (18 months?). From where I sit you can see every scrum that has taken place on the pitch from when the rugby has been there and those scrum marks just haven't gone away this season which suggests that the grass just never really grows with the current system and what you end up with is a kind of hybrid sludge of mud over the Desso weave that doesn't cut up deeply like turf but just ruts on the surface once studs go in. This results in the ball running slower despite watering as there is no depth of grass and in unusual little bobbles that certainly reduce the players confidence in hitting first time balls (Armstrong in particular has had some really poor bobbles in the north west corner). This is totally in line with the problems we have had previously with the pitch (although somehow it doesn't seem so funny as watching Gordon going out with his fork and fighting a losing battle with the Elm Park puddles) as to be a known problem with pitches of this manufacture.

It would be interesting to know what arrangements someone like Swansea use, as they play passing to feet football, they have regular rugby, and it rains shed loads in that part of Wales.

[Muskrat]

Yes I believe it is true that prolonged use of the undersoil heating does damage the roots, i've definately heard that before and that's why it's only used as a last resort to prevent games being postponed.

I make no bones about it I don't like the rugby at the stadium and still believe that it has a significant and detrimental affect on the pitch. Why do you think that Rugby pitches are commonly referred to as "cabbage patches"?

I'll give you a clue it's not for their lush covering of grass...

No, it's because the ground at Twickenham was built on an area of land that had been a cabbage farm - there's a pub near the ground called The Cabbage Patch and the term is used as a nickname for the ground.

What eveidence are you presenting for rugby having a 'significant effect' ?

I wasn't talking about Twickenham, and I know about the Cabbage Patch pub - I have been to Twickenham before .

Report on Sale V Gloucester from last March which illustrates my point about the colloquial use of the term "Cabbage Patch":

"A dreadful playing surface - the pitch resembled a cabbage patch - did not help matters but Sale fully deserved their victory against a Gloucester side decimated by injury and Six Nations call-ups".

As for evidence - take a look at the pitch!! I would turn the argument around and say since we've been at the Madejski Stadium, there has always been rugby there, save for one brief spell when Richmond went under and rugby temporarily ceased on the hallowed turf.

So we don't know what the pitch would be like without them there - but I'd take a wager that it would be better than it is now by some distance. It's no use just putting on the blinkers and being in continual denial about it, the Club needs to take a positive decision on what it values more - the income from the Rugby, or a decent playing surface.

[Rex]

London Irish negotiated anextension at the Mad last season. Therefore it's clearly the rugby.

[Muskrat]

I suppose my question was bit rhetorical...

[Sun Tzu]

Report on Sale V Gloucester from last March which illustrates my point about the colloquial use of the term "Cabbage Patch":

"A dreadful playing surface - the pitch resembled a cabbage patch - did not help matters but Sale fully deserved their victory against a Gloucester side decimated by injury and Six Nations call-ups".

The quote actually illustrates how a bad playing surface is of no value to a rugby club. And there are plenty of football grounds (Old Trafford, Chelsea) where the descriptiion has been applied over the years. I don;t think the use of a cliche by a journalist gives much credence to a claim that London Irish have destroyed our pitch !

As for evidence - take a look at the pitch!!

That is evidence that the pitch is patchy, not why it is patchy. Given there is a lot more football played than rugby the arguement would be stronger (if a bit daft) that the football is the problem.

I would turn the argument around and say since we've been at the Madejski Stadium, there has always been rugby there, save for one brief spell when Richmond went under and rugby temporarily ceased on the hallowed turf.

So we don't know what the pitch would be like without them there -

But we do know that even with them there the pitch has been fine for a number of seasons. Which completely blows you arguement. You can;t have your cake and eat it. if the rugby causes the problem then how come it only does it some years ?

.

It's no use just putting on the blinkers and being in continual denial about it, the Club needs to take a positive decision on what it values more - the income from the Rugby, or a decent playing surface.

But you are the one with blinkers becasue you have just assumed that the rugby is the cause, despite the lack of anything other than a prejudice to back it up. The rugby is obvioulsy part of the cause as has been acknowledged by everyone including the club. The choice of either a good pitch or rugby isn't relevant. Both are possible and people need to take the blinkers off and stop being anti rugby !