Pitch markings

[Mr Plow]

Been watching plenty of classic Super League And NRL games this week and noticed that we don’t have as many markings on the pitch (cue the Toronto pitch jokes). But before we have 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 meter numbers marked and the sponsor in the middle of the pitch.

I know we obviously can’t do it at football grounds but clubs like Warrington, Hull KR, Saints ect could do it

[Dunbar]

I was watching the Cronulla Melbourne game this morning and noticed that although the stands were empty the actual pitch looked superb with the full markings.

[Rupert Prince]

I may be missing the point of this thread.  So sorry. But I thought all clubs had 10m lines.

[ATLANTISMAN]

Its nothing more than cutbacks the pitch markings in Europe are done by a great little company from Lancashire LINEMARK UK (Jan Korib) back a few years ago when RL had some larger sponsors POWERGEN GILLETTE etc they were always willing to fork out the extra cash for the branding I guess that this is not the case nowadays.

Also on OZ TV much of the branding is actually super imposed  and not painted on the real pitch.

 

Paul

[Mr Plow]

5 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Its nothing more than cutbacks the pitch markings in Europe are done by a great little company from Lancashire LINEMARK UK (Jan Korib) back a few years ago when RL had some larger sponsors POWERGEN GILLETTE etc they were always willing to fork out the extra cash for the branding I guess that this is not the case nowadays.

Also on OZ TV much of the branding is actually super imposed  and not painted on the real pitch.

 

Paul

SL have had images super imposed before. I don’t know why Sky don’t do it every game. Can’t be that expensive

[ATLANTISMAN]

I AGREE its all about presentation but I guess that the money then would go to SKY?

 Also I do know that its actually copywrited (The ability to actually do the pitch markings) LINEMARK UK have the exclusive rights.

 

 

[Rupert Prince]

21 minutes ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

Its nothing more than cutbacks the pitch markings in Europe are done by a great little company from Lancashire LINEMARK UK (Jan Korib) back a few years ago when RL had some larger sponsors POWERGEN GILLETTE etc they were always willing to fork out the extra cash for the branding I guess that this is not the case nowadays.

Also on OZ TV much of the branding is actually super imposed  and not painted on the real pitch.

 

Paul

The point then is the advertising not the lines?

 

[ATLANTISMAN]

For me they are BOTH great just makes it look soooo professional 

[TIWIT]

1 hour ago, Mr Plow said:

SL have had images super imposed before. I don’t know why Sky don’t do it every game. Can’t be that expensive

Someone would have to pay for it.

No one wants to.

[Big Picture]

3 hours ago, Mr Plow said:

Been watching plenty of classic Super League And NRL games this week and noticed that we don’t have as many markings on the pitch (cue the Toronto pitch jokes). But before we have 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 meter numbers marked and the sponsor in the middle of the pitch.

I know we obviously can’t do it at football grounds but clubs like Warrington, Hull KR, Saints ect could do it

And why pray tell can't it be done at soccer (I presume that's what you meant) grounds?  Are their staff incapable?  Is the RFL/SL incapable of mandating correct field markings as per the Plan which forms Part of the Laws of the Game for senior RL competitions?

[Mr Plow]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

And why pray tell can't it be done at soccer (I presume that's what you meant) grounds?  Are their staff incapable?  Is the RFL/SL incapable of mandating correct field markings as per the Plan which forms Part of the Laws of the Game for senior RL competitions?

Yeah football/ soccer. It leaves a mark on the pitch. I think it was 2015, England FC played at Wembley after the Challenge Cup final and you could still see Ladbrokes on the pitch

[TIWIT]

Maybe they could just wrap the field like they do with racing cars?

[Whippet13]

Personally I find adverts all over the pitch irritating, it's bad enough the players are already plastered in them without having to navigate my eyes over multi-coloured grass as well. Exception being the in goal zones which I think the NRL tend to favour and works well. They are kind of "outside the normal pitch" but a key focus area.

If there was profit in blanket pitch adverts they would be everywhere, there clearly is some benefit but it is selective. If it was an amazing concept soccer pitches would be covered in them, but they are not.

I do like the 10m, 20m, 30m, 40m line markings though, you'd think there would be a simple marking material that would wash out with water for shared pitches.

[TIWIT]

29 minutes ago, Whippet13 said:

 

I do like the 10m, 20m, 30m, 40m line markings though, you'd think there would be a simple marking material that would wash out with water for shared pitches.

Uh, rain?

What do they use for the markings I wonder? Alcohol-based paint? Latex?

[ATLANTISMAN]

Around 15 years ago MacDonalds offered millions and millions  to FIFA for having their famous logo put right in the centre circle for the World Cup which was turned down.

 

 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

12 hours ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

I AGREE its all about presentation but I guess that the money then would go to SKY?

 Also I do know that its actually copywrited (The ability to actually do the pitch markings) LINEMARK UK have the exclusive rights.

 

 

The projected advertising images are done by an independent company at the expense of the sponsor - there is then a piece of work required to liaise with Sky for camera angles etc. Regarding Linemark - to my knowledge they provide the paint and marking machines, however they have no say in how the pitch is actually marked out. That is determined by each clubs groundsman, within the games guidelines of course. 

[ATLANTISMAN]

What I was trying to say is the EXCLUSIVE means that Linemark UK have trademarked etc this form of business several organisations have tried to replicate them over the years but have backed down after legal action was forthcoming.

 

[Bulliac]

15 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

I may be missing the point of this thread.  So sorry. But I thought all clubs had 10m lines.

10, 20, halfway and 10 metres each side of halfway are mandatory, so far as I know. The 30 is, I believe, optional and is the one often misplaced/dotted when the ground is not full size.

 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

1 hour ago, Bulliac said:

10, 20, halfway and 10 metres each side of halfway are mandatory, so far as I know. The 30 is, I believe, optional and is the one often misplaced/dotted when the ground is not full size.

 

You’re correct, Dave. I read somewhere (can’t remember where just now) that the shortest a ‘short 10’ between 30 and 40 metre markers is 2 metres. Which looking at SL pitches I’d say Cas are the closest to. A bugbear of mine is why Hudds and Hull FC both have pitches with very slight (maybe 8m) short 10s when both stadiums knew they’d be hosting RL from the start? 

[Rupert Prince]

1 hour ago, Bulliac said:

10, 20, halfway and 10 metres each side of halfway are mandatory, so far as I know. The 30 is, I believe, optional and is the one often misplaced/dotted when the ground is not full size.

Yes. I was keeping things simple when I said 10m.

Those clubs with short pitches are embarrassing us.

I do not like the 10m line, I would have it 8m at most. It would give the overall length 96m. And in an ideal world a 8m in goal.   Hear ended the lesson.

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Bulliac said:

10, 20, halfway and 10 metres each side of halfway are mandatory, so far as I know. The 30 is, I believe, optional and is the one often misplaced/dotted when the ground is not full size.

 

In fact the 30 is mandatory too, for two reasons.  It's part of the Plan which is Part of the Laws of the Game, and as you know (or ought to), drop-outs have to go 10 metres and drop-outs from the 20 follow penalty goal attempts which go dead in-goal.  Therefore all the lines are mandatory and they should always be an equal distance apart and numbered accordingly which as I've said before they even manage in third world PNG, so what''s wrong with the RFL and SL that they can't manage it?

31 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

You’re correct, Dave. I read somewhere (can’t remember where just now) that the shortest a ‘short 10’ between 30 and 40 metre markers is 2 metres. Which looking at SL pitches I’d say Cas are the closest to. A bugbear of mine is why Hudds and Hull FC both have pitches with very slight (maybe 8m) short 10s when both stadiums knew they’d be hosting RL from the start? 

That seems like laziness/lack of professionalism on the part of the club and/or league in Huddersfield's case at least.  As you can see right here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8c7swBFamY#t=33s, (I timestamped it to a point where you can see the 20, 30 and 40 metre lines [a Kiwi player is standing on the 40] in the frame) that wasn't always the case there although even for a World Cup match the 10, 30 and 40 metre lines were poorly marked.

[Big Picture]

3 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Yes. I was keeping things simple when I said 10m.

Those clubs with short pitches are embarrassing us.

I do not like the 10m line, I would have it 8m at most. It would give the overall length 96m. And in an ideal world a 8m in goal.   Hear ended the lesson.

Indeed those inconsistent field markings are an embarrassment.

In an ideal world all fields should be the full 100 metres long and the goal areas should be 10 metres deep.  In this world, where on occasion matches are played in venues where that's not possible the minimum length should be 95 metres with the distance between the lines across the field reduced marginally in proportion so that it looks like a full 100 metres and (just as important) it feels like that to the players.

[Rupert Prince]

3 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Indeed those inconsistent field markings are an embarrassment.

In an ideal world all fields should be the full 100 metres long and the goal areas should be 10 metres deep.  In this world, where on occasion matches are played in venues where that's not possible the minimum length should be 95 metres with the distance between the lines across the field reduced marginally in proportion so that it looks like a full 100 metres and (just as important) it feels like that to the players.

Fair points, but for me I do not think 10m is the right off side line. I'd prefer 8m max.  Given sensible "gridiron" lines then I would have a standard length of 96m. This is close to 104 yards which is close to 110yds pre metric pitch.... although I do wonder if the original length years ago was 100yards.

[Big Picture]

4 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Fair points, but for me I do not think 10m is the right off side line. I'd prefer 8m max.  Given sensible "gridiron" lines then I would have a standard length of 96m. This is close to 104 yards which is close to 110yds pre metric pitch.... although I do wonder if the original length years ago was 100yards.

I'm sure that the original length was 110 yards, that's why Canadian gridiron fields are that length and why RU fields in stadiums like Twickenham and Murraryfield were (as far as I know) always that length.  100 by 53-1/3 yards in US gridiron is from the space limitations at one of the Ivy League schools back in the day, Yale I believe.

[JF1]

I had occasion to email the rfl about an incorrectly marked pitch.

The reply was that in the event of a full length pitch not being available,the distance between the 30m line and the line 10m from halfway should be not less than 6m and on such an occasion,the 30m line should be a broken line.

Therefore,the minimum possible distance between the 2 goal lines is 92m.