Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
Premiership Rugby / Premiership Cup
Artificial Pitches
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RedruthRFC" data-source="post: 783956" data-attributes="member: 58362"><p>[USER=67273]@ratsapprentice[/USER] I'm involved in a discussion about these pitches and the RFU's scheme to build 100 more of them on another forum. Do you have a link to an article referencing the studies that you mention or the studies themselves that I could share on that forum please?</p><p></p><p>In answer to OP's question, my impression based on anecdotal evidence is that they players aren't keen. Tweets from players to this effect have been posted here in the past, as I believe has an article in which Rob Baxter says that having chosen to rest Jack Nowell rather than risk his recovering knee at Kingston Park, they need further investigation.</p><p></p><p>From a spectator's (purely selfish) perspective, they must be a good thing - less chance of a match being postponed and less chance of a mud wrestle (although we are told further up the thread that this isn't always the case). I believe that when they came in, one of the selling points was less reset scrums. As usual with new innovations / trials in rugby, I've yet to see any sort of analysis of the material effect that they are having on matches (if any). It would be interesting to see a comparison of the number of reset scrums, time taken to complete scrums (and various metrics) on 3G vs Desso vs pure grass.</p><p></p><p>Apropos of nothing and talking of the other forum I mentioned above, I've read comments suggesting that there are clubs at lower levels with a more forwards based approach that have stymied themselves by fitting a 3G surface and failing to adapt their approach to suit the new surface.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RedruthRFC, post: 783956, member: 58362"] [USER=67273]@ratsapprentice[/USER] I'm involved in a discussion about these pitches and the RFU's scheme to build 100 more of them on another forum. Do you have a link to an article referencing the studies that you mention or the studies themselves that I could share on that forum please? In answer to OP's question, my impression based on anecdotal evidence is that they players aren't keen. Tweets from players to this effect have been posted here in the past, as I believe has an article in which Rob Baxter says that having chosen to rest Jack Nowell rather than risk his recovering knee at Kingston Park, they need further investigation. From a spectator's (purely selfish) perspective, they must be a good thing - less chance of a match being postponed and less chance of a mud wrestle (although we are told further up the thread that this isn't always the case). I believe that when they came in, one of the selling points was less reset scrums. As usual with new innovations / trials in rugby, I've yet to see any sort of analysis of the material effect that they are having on matches (if any). It would be interesting to see a comparison of the number of reset scrums, time taken to complete scrums (and various metrics) on 3G vs Desso vs pure grass. Apropos of nothing and talking of the other forum I mentioned above, I've read comments suggesting that there are clubs at lower levels with a more forwards based approach that have stymied themselves by fitting a 3G surface and failing to adapt their approach to suit the new surface. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
Premiership Rugby / Premiership Cup
Artificial Pitches
Top