I think some are getting too carried away with the impact of Carvalho. The reality is that we've lost Delap and Philo, and instead have Carvalho (maybe) playing his first game for us. If we had all 3 then I'd be getting carried away too, but we haven't.
Leeds, Coventry, Chelsea, Bradford all had pitch issues, even Wembley have now decided to replace the pitch all the time, as they've found it impossible to actually grow grass inside the stadium.
Anyway the good news is I'm not going to this. I can't remember the last time I watched (from the stadium) us win
On the whole I agree and think it'll be the end of the month before we really benefit from Carvalho. Tonight I think the fact he's on the pitch will maybe have more impact than what he actually does on the pitch himself. Big night for the rest of the front 4 as they're the ones who can benefit.
Maybe 'had' is the key word? Looked pretty good to me (12 days ago) ..... https://www.skysports.com/watch/vid.../leeds-3-0-birmingham-championship-highlights
Point does stand. Historically we’ve always had pitch issues whether the rugby is on or not. The sun just doesn’t get to it and the weather has been brutal past couple of weeks with a busy winter schedule at home. Not saying they couldn’t do more but sometimes it’s difficult
Boothferry Park playing surface was one of the best playing surfaces in the country, and it didn't have under soil heating, just good drainage and no rugby ......until Robinson salted and sanded it to get a RL international game played when the pitch was frozen and it was never the same again. MKM/KC, the pitch as we know is shared with rugby league, perhaps someone might let is know if we also share the cost of maintaining it? We now have more groundstaff, overhead heaters, all the modern technology etc etc etc and the pitch is re laid frequently, yet it doesnt last a season out. Perhaps it is over used and not given time to recover during the summer months, and why is that?
The old Wembley pitch was ruined by staging the Horse of the Year show on it. The football clubs you mentioned all had horrendous playing surfaces for as long as I can remember. Perhaps they didn't have the knowledge our old groundsman at Boothferry Park had or didn't take as much care over the pitch as City did? Not forgetting the BP pitch was one of the newest playing surfaces in the Football League and it was built above ground level, if you remember, with a proper drainage system.
We need our own stadium with exclusive access to it. However, the KC/MKM was built with the purpose of ground-sharing between City and FC and I don't think HCC will budge on that. Even if Acun was more diplomatic in his approach than the Allams, I think the Council still wouldn't entertain the idea. A new stadium in the next 10 years might be possible but when, where and how much is anyone's guess. I think Acun would want to see our attendance gradually increase for the time being before shelling out for a bigger, better stadium. If we become an established PL team after several years and there's increased demand for memberships, it's more likely. The state of the pitch recently has been shocking. Big dead patches of grass in areas is poor for a Championship team.
I blame the rugby . Would it have been better if the two tier stand was built on the Eastern side? At least they might have got a bit more sun on the pitch? I obviously did not read all the contributions before I posted this.
Sky. NowTV day pass. Time it right and you'll get Coventry v Leicester and Ipswich v Sunderland anarl.
Agree with all of the above and if Acun is serious about Premier League football and sustaining it I'm afraid the stadium issue will have to be tackled. It's difficult enough to sustain a Premier League club for a club of our current size and expecting to do it with gates of under 24,000 is nigh on impossible. I know Bournemouth are currently doing it, but Hull isn't Bournemouth. I'm sure Acun is well aware of that. Our pitch was reported as being unsuitable the last time we were in the Premier League, and I don't see any improvement in it. Or should I say it looks fine until the clocks go back, then it starts looking threadbare. Hull Fc are looking at extending their current leasehold on the stadium, if they can come to a better agreement financially, which to me means they are not looking at paying more money, if anything considerably less. So decisions have to be made if Acuns dream bares fruit. Something dramatic has to happen Plus the 'Sporting Village' idea appears to have gone off the boil. Last I heard City had employed a consultant to look into funding and the actual possibility of putting it on walton street, and his term must be coming to end soon.
Are you sure about that? Most grounds are built with goals at vaguely north/south with the sun setting over a notional west stand, also most PL stadiums have far higher stands than ours - how do you think Old Trafford, The Etihad or Anfield manage with the lack of sunlight?
So the pitch isn't over used? What is causing the problem then? And don't tell me lack of sunlight, this is Hull not Bondi beach.
