Not relevant to our pitch though. Completely different to old pitches. Other clubs share with rugby clubs of both codes with less affect than ours. Rugby union, which damages pitches more is played all through the winter months at the same time and pitches stand up to it better than ours. No groundsmen say rugby does more damage than football.
He doesn't need snaps, a walk to the beach has the same effect. The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
Not supposed to have lawns these days, meadows are the thing. Didn't you observe no-mow May? I did, it was great!
Don't agree Buck. Alex Ferguson wanted the RL final played on Old Trafford kicked off there for a reason and that was only one game a season. A pitch used only for football is always a better playing surface than one used for football and rugby. It has to be. Just simply by the less use of it. The pitch at the KC (MKM) has just been relaid, and they had a two week window to do it, because of the RL season, two weeks is not long enough for it to bed in.
I think the rugby have had to play away for 6 weeks due to the new pitch, I may be wrong but some rugger fan at worked mentioned something along those lines
I’m not sure about the two week thing but unless someone is suggesting that more use by heavier people running on grass is good for it or has no effect at all then it must be bad for it. Logically it must be harder to keep a pitch in good nick that’s used more. If we do have to have British bulldogs played there then they should at least only play in carpet slippers.
