Newcastle - Pitch markings

[Barley Mow]

I've just been watching the highlights from the weekend and cannot work out why on earth the RFL let Newcastle play on a field marked with union markings.

I first noticed this at the beginning of the season, had kept an eye on it over the weeks and was going to post about it a few weeks ago. Then for the Oldham game they seemed to have made some sort of effort and tried to paint the league markings alongside the union ones, so I didn't bother with the post.

This week they were back to union only markings. The Newcastle union team's last home match seems to have been 5th June.

24 out of 36 clubs in the British/European professional/semi-pro pyramid share their facilities with teams playing another code of football. All except Newcastle have rugby league markings when they play. How can a second tier team be allowed to play on a field marked out for another sport? If the RFL knew this was the case from previous seasons, surely it should have been addressed before Newcastle were given the final Championship place?

It is an artificial surface, so perhaps the union markings are permanent, but Widnes and both London clubs manage to have different markings for different sports on their artificial pitches. The artificial surface was installed at Kingston Park before Thunder relocated there, so if permanent union markings is the issue, the RFL should have been aware of it then.

Kingston Park is to host three matches in the World Cup this year. Are they really going to be playing these on a field marked out for a different sport? If not and they will have league markings for the World Cup, why don't they for matches this season?

Edited July 13, 2021 by Barley Mow

[hunsletgreenandgold]

There are RL markings....but they're in dark green....on a green pitch.......

Edited July 13, 2021 by hunsletgreenandgold

[Mr Frisky]

51 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I've just been watching the highlights from the weekend and cannot work out why on earth the RFL let Newcastle play on a field marked with union markings.

I first noticed this at the beginning of the season, had kept an eye on it over the weeks and was going to post about it a few weeks ago. Then for the Oldham game they seemed to have made some sort of effort and tried to paint the league markings alongside the union ones, so I didn't bother with the post.

This week they were back to union only markings. The Newcastle union team's last home match seems to have been 5th June.

24 out of 36 clubs in the British/European professional/semi-pro pyramid share their facilities with teams playing another code of football. All except Newcastle have rugby league markings when they play. How can a second tier team be allowed to play on a field marked out for another sport? If the RFL knew this was the case from previous seasons, surely it should have been addressed before Newcastle were given the final Championship place?

It is an artificial surface, so perhaps the union markings are permanent, but Widnes and both London clubs manage to have different markings for different sports on their artificial pitches. The artificial surface was installed at Kingston Park before Thunder relocated there, so if permanent union markings is the issue, the RFL should have been aware of it then.

Kingston Park is to host three matches in the World Cup this year. Are they really going to be playing these on a field marked out for a different sport? If not and they will have league markings for the World Cup, why don't they for matches this season?

I'm just pleased you never went to a Toronto home game if this bothers you.

[Barley Mow]

17 minutes ago, Mr Frisky said:

I'm just pleased you never went to a Toronto home game if this bothers you.

I think it should bother us - whether at Newcastle, Toronto or anywhere else.

Are the markings not there for a reason?

As I understand it, union has a line on 40m like us, so judging 10m from a kick-off should be okay, but how is the ref supposed to judge a 40/20 or 20/40? If held up in goal, there is no 10m line to show where the play the ball is to be. Same for a 20m restart. I'm sure there will be other examples.

Should we really be happy for, not only our second tier domestic competition, but also matches in the world cup to be played on a different sport's playing field? Should Hull FC be allowed to play on their pitch when marked out for Hull City?

Which other sport would allow it?

Edited July 13, 2021 by Barley Mow

[Spidey]

Think its full size though... some clubs can't manage that

[The Frying Scotsman]

1 hour ago, Barley Mow said:

I've just been watching the highlights from the weekend and cannot work out why on earth the RFL let Newcastle play on a field marked with union markings.

I first noticed this at the beginning of the season, had kept an eye on it over the weeks and was going to post about it a few weeks ago. Then for the Oldham game they seemed to have made some sort of effort and tried to paint the league markings alongside the union ones, so I didn't bother with the post.

This week they were back to union only markings. The Newcastle union team's last home match seems to have been 5th June.

24 out of 36 clubs in the British/European professional/semi-pro pyramid share their facilities with teams playing another code of football. All except Newcastle have rugby league markings when they play. How can a second tier team be allowed to play on a field marked out for another sport? If the RFL knew this was the case from previous seasons, surely it should have been addressed before Newcastle were given the final Championship place?

 

I totally agree with you. It wouldn't be the first time though... London Broncos were playing on a pitch with no scrum line in some games start until fairly recently. Some posters on here tried denying it, but I saw it with my own eyes. 

Temporary markings are EASILY available nowadays for artificial pitches, so I have absolutely no idea how the RFL even entertain the concept.

It is yet another example of how tinpot Rugby League has become in the last few years. 

[Barley Mow]

1 minute ago, The Frying Scotsman said:

I totally agree with you. It wouldn't be the first time though... London Broncos were playing on a pitch with no scrum line in some games start until fairly recently. Some posters on here tried denying it, but I saw it with my own eyes. 

Temporary markings are EASILY available nowadays for artificial pitches, so I have absolutely no idea how the RFL even entertain the concept.

It is yet another example of how tinpot Rugby League has become in the last few years. 

I had a feeling when I was writing that there might have been some issue with Trailfinders in the past.

It isn't something I have noticed on video of Broncos at Ealing this year, so hopefully that's been sorted.

[The Frying Scotsman]

1 minute ago, Barley Mow said:

I had a feeling when I was writing that there might have been some issue with Trailfinders in the past.

It isn't something I have noticed on video of Broncos at Ealing this year, so hopefully that's been sorted.

I believe it has.

Not that I am in any way defending them (Broncos) but do we actually need a scrum line on the pitch any more? 

[daz39]

The RFL own, let and pay for a pitch that isn't even legal so it would be a tad impertinent of them to make another club paint lines on what i presume is a fully legal pitch!

[Barley Mow]

55 minutes ago, daz39 said:

The RFL own, let and pay for a pitch that isn't even legal so it would be a tad impertinent of them to make another club paint lines on what i presume is a fully legal pitch!

I thought this thread might quickly become refocused on Odsal.

Can't the RFL be wrong for allowing both?

Whether it is right or wrong to temporarily allow Bradford to play at Odsal until the field is back up to regulation size, it is a temporary thing. If it became permanent, I would definitely be criticising the RFL about it - especially because they had control over the changes that reduced the size of the playing area.

Newcastle have played on this pitch at Kingston Park since 2015. So either the RFL have let them play on a field that isn't marked out properly for 7 seasons without taking action or Newcastle have recently decided to stop marking the field properly and the RFL have not (publicly) said anything.

Either way, we have three matches in a show piece event at the ground later this year. We can't have them taking place on a rugby union pitch.

Edited July 13, 2021 by Barley Mow

[Newcastle Thunder]

The pitch is marked in for RL with blue lines, the same as London at Ealing 

[Barley Mow]

36 minutes ago, Newcastle Thunder said:

The pitch is marked in for RL with blue lines, the same as London at Ealing 

Thanks.

Do the lines stand out well against the green surface better when you're on the pitch/in the stands? They certainly don't on screen.

The highlights of the Oldham game I saw were recorded by a fan in the stands and the league markings can be seen. Perhaps it is the angles that RFL/OurLeague record from which make them merge into the pitch.

I still think that for Thunder's home matches there should be a way for the league markings to be more prominent than the union ones. For the World Cup games surely this is a must?

Edited July 14, 2021 by Barley Mow

[Scubby]

13 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

Thanks.

Do the lines stand out well against the green surface better when you're on the pitch/in the stands? They certainly don't on screen.

Newcastle have played a lot of home games. Have any coaches or players come out and said the lines are impossible to deal with? Remember these 4g pitches are installed so that they can have full community use and allow the professional club to survive in the modern era. I don't have a problem with it. I assume Widnes has a centre circle on it?

Edited July 14, 2021 by Scubby

[Barley Mow]

49 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Newcastle have played a lot of home games. Have any coaches or players come out and said the lines are impossible to deal with. Remember these 4g pitches are installed so that they can have full community use and allow the professional club to survive in the modern era. I don't have a problem with it. I assume Widnes has a centre circle on it?

I believe (just from watching video of the ground) that Widnes mark their pitch with traditional whitewash/paint for each match.

So for RL matches, you may still see the football markings if there has been a Widnes FC match recently, but they are faded depending on the time since that game and the newly painted RL markings will be more prominent.

Players, coaches, refs may well be happy with the Kingston Park arrangement. But it can't be an ideal situation if I have watched the highlights of most of the RL matches there this season and haven't been aware of there being any RL markings on the pitch. If the RL markings can't be seen on TV for the three World Cup matches (or even if they are less prominent than the RU ones) it really doesn't show our game in the best light.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Barley Mow

[Scubby]

13 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I believe (just from watching video of the ground) that Widnes mark their pitch with traditional whitewash/paint for each match.

So for RL matches, you may still see the football markings if there has been a Widnes FC match recently, but they are faded depending on the time since that game and the newly painted RL markings will be more prominent.

Players, coaches, refs may well be happy with the Kingston Park arrangement. But it can't be an ideal situation if I can have watched the highlights of most of the RL matches there this season and not be aware of there being any RL markings on the pitch. If the RL markings can't be seen on TV for the three World Cup matches (or even if they are less prominent than the RU ones) it really doesn't show our game in the best light.

I know what you mean but a few years ago we were looking at no professional club in the NE at all. What Newcastle Thunder have done is remarkable. If some dodgy pitch markings are the offset of that then I will take it.

With regards the WC. It is completely up to the RLWC organisers to knock Newcastle into shape. It should be a pre-requisite of Newcastle's tender that the pitch is marked clearly to international standards.

[Bleep1673]

9 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I know what you mean but a few years ago we were looking at no professional club in the NE at all. What Newcastle Thunder have done is remarkable. If some dodgy pitch markings are the offset of that then I will take it.

With regards the WC. It is completely up to the RLWC organisers to knock Newcastle into shape. It should be a pre-requisite of Newcastle's tender that the pitch is marked clearly to international standards.

Apart from when Gateshead had to merge with Hull, or was it the other way round

[Scubby]

2 minutes ago, Bleep1673 said:

Apart from when Gateshead had to merge with Hull, or was it the other way round

There never stopped being a team in Gateshead even after that.

[Barley Mow]

3 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I know what you mean but a few years ago we were looking at no professional club in the NE at all. What Newcastle Thunder have done is remarkable. If some dodgy pitch markings are the offset of that then I will take it.

With regards the WC. It is completely up to the RLWC organisers to knock Newcastle into shape. It should be a pre-requisite of Newcastle's tender that the pitch is marked clearly to international standards.

I'm full of admiration for what they are doing as a club. It is a great example of expanding our geographical footprint in the right way.

If there was no way to have more prominent RL markings on the pitch or if having to have them was going to put Newcastle Thunder out of business, then I may consider that an acceptable compromise up to a certain level on the pyramid.

Would the top or second tier of any other professional sport in this country allow matches to be played on a surface where the predominant markings were for another sport, and the relevant markings couldn't be seen at all on television? I'm sure the RFU would complain if the markings were coloured the other way round at Kingston Park.

I'm sure that there are ways of having an artificial pitch marked for different sports - Widnes for example seem to manage it - and I'm sure that wouldn't break the bank for the club.

I hope that the field being clearly marked for league was a condition of holding the World Cup matches and that the lines can clearly be seen on TV for those games (and for Newcastle's home games in the future too). 

[Scubby]

6 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

I'm full of admiration for what they are doing as a club. It is a great example of expanding our geographical footprint in the right way.

If there was no way to have more prominent RL markings on the pitch or if having to have them was going to put Newcastle Thunder out of business, then I may consider that an acceptable compromise up to a certain level on the pyramid.

Would the top or second tier of any other professional sport in this country allow matches to be played on a surface where the predominant markings were for another sport, and the relevant markings couldn't be seen at all on television? I'm sure the RFU would complain if the markings were coloured the other way round at Kingston Park.

I'm sure that there are ways of having an artificial pitch marked for different sports - Widnes for example seem to manage it - and I'm sure that wouldn't break the bank for the club.

I hope that the field being clearly marked for league was a condition of holding the World Cup matches and that the lines can clearly be seen on TV for those games (and for Newcastle's home games in the future too). 

Some good points. Widnes was one of the very early versions of new gen pitches laid. Most of the modern ones are pre marked because of the costs of continually remarking due to 7 days a week community use. Some pitches are split in half for two groups to use and sometimes other sports than full size football and rugby take place on them. I know Toronto was field hockey too.

[Barley Mow]

7 minutes ago, Scubby said:

Some good points. Widnes was one of the very early versions of new gen pitches laid. Most of the modern ones are pre marked because of the costs of continually remarking due to 7 days a week community use. Some pitches are split in half for two groups to use and sometimes other sports than full size football and rugby take place on them. I know Toronto was field hockey too.

That's all fine as long as when it comes to the primary purpose of the pitch (hosting a club's matches) markings are adequate for those taking part and watching (in person or on TV) and stand out more than markings for other sports played there.

[Griff]

34 minutes ago, Scubby said:

There never stopped being a team in Gateshead even after that.

If you include the amateurs, no.

The professional team had a year off.

[Scubby]

6 minutes ago, Griff said:

If you include the amateurs, no.

The professional team had a year off.

I meant in the years after the merger but you are right. Newcastle coming on board has been a game changer. Thunder would be like West Wales Raiders or even Hemel had it continued without backing.

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, Scubby said:

I know what you mean but a few years ago we were looking at no professional club in the NE at all. What Newcastle Thunder have done is remarkable. If some dodgy pitch markings are the offset of that then I will take it.

With regards the WC. It is completely up to the RLWC organisers to knock Newcastle into shape. It should be a pre-requisite of Newcastle's tender that the pitch is marked clearly to international standards.

Chances are it wasn't though.  The RFL has previously had televised Internationals where the RL markings were barely even visible:

 

[Scubby]

3 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Chances are it wasn't though.  The RFL has previously had televised Internationals where the RL markings were barely even visible:

 

I'm not holding me breath too.

[hunsletgreenandgold]

I'll never pass up an opportunity to go on my rants about consistent pitch markings and full length fields. That said, I will give credit to Wigan who have recently started marking out the DW with full lines (normally spaced line on 10 and 30m) and at first I assumed it was just because it was the football off-season, but looking back at old footage they've never done this before. No doubt it'll go back to spaced lines when football kicks back off but for now it looks great. No idea why Leeds still play with the spaced lines - the old excuse was the Union side but they're long gone now. Just odd there is no consistency.