Tottenham Hotspur Pitch

[Big Picture]

16 minutes ago, Damien said:

What 

It's odd that you can say with certainty that the RU line is 22m but the 30m and 40m lines on the RL pitch are wrong.

Are you also trying to say those RU in goals are just 2.5 metres, which in itself would be way below their 6 metre minimum?

On reflection it is possible that their 22 metre lines weren't truly 22 metres from the goal lines, I hadn't considered that as I didn't think RU would allow that.

Update: Taking measurements from a still image at another part of the highlight video showing a closer view on the one end, the ratio of the measured distance between the goal line and the 22-metre line and the distance between the goal line and the 5-metre line is the same as 22 divided by 5, therefore I conclude that my original calculations were correct and the field was a full 100 metres as I'm sure the RU big shots would have wanted.

Edited May 22, 2022 by Big Picture

[Spidey]

Face it @Big Picture if you’ve not gone down and measured both the RU and RL configurations you haven’t got a scooby doo. Can we stop with this nonsense and move on. It really doesn’t matter 

[Big Picture]

Just now, Spidey said:

Face it @Big Picture if you’ve not gone down and measured both the RU and RL configurations you haven’t got a scooby doo. Can we stop with this nonsense and move on. It really doesn’t matter 

I disagree, the game should always be played on a full-length field of play with full depth goal areas wherever possible, and major finals (and Internationals) should only be played where that is possible.

[OMEGA]

If we ever needed an illustration of the gulf between Premier League Football and Super League it’s right there in that magnificent stadium at Tottenham.

While Wakefield scratch around for 3 decades trying to partially revamp a 130 year old stadium TH have built what is reportedly the most technically advanced stadium in the world and one of the best fan experiences anywhere.

[Dave T]

43 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I disagree, the game should always be played on a full-length field of play with full depth goal areas wherever possible, and major finals (and Internationals) should only be played where that is possible.

You basically want to rule out all sorts of quality stadiums all over the country, and indeed world, just because.... 

Pitch sizes can be within a range. It's fine, only a certain kind of person thinks this is any kind of issue. 

[Damien]

Just now, Dave T said:

You basically want to rule out all sorts of quality stadiums all over the country, and indeed world, just because.... 

Pitch sizes can be within a range. It's fine, only a certain kind of person thinks this is any kind of issue. 

Its not ideal but certainly no issue, its just one of those it is what it is things. As a sport we are not big enough to do much about these things and have to be pragmatic about that. It seems other sports like RU think the same.

I know I'd rather these games be at Old Trafford and the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium instead of the DW or Hull just to fit some sort of ideal pitch requirements.

[Dave T]

33 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its not ideal but certainly no issue, its just one of those it is what it is things. As a sport we are not big enough to do much about these things and have to be pragmatic about that. It seems other sports like RU think the same.

I know I'd rather these games be at Old Trafford and the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium instead of the DW or Hull just to fit some sort of ideal pitch requirements.

Grounds just aren't built for RL generally. Maybe we should change to yards like Gridiron. 

[Big Picture]

30 minutes ago, Damien said:

Its not ideal but certainly no issue, its just one of those it is what it is things. As a sport we are not big enough to do much about these things and have to be pragmatic about that. It seems other sports like RU think the same.

I know I'd rather these games be at Old Trafford and the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium instead of the DW or Hull just to fit some sort of ideal pitch requirements.

Tottenham Stadium can fit those requirements, they were just too lazy to do so in this instance or more likely the incompetent RFL didn't think to ask or require that.  Considering how much the stadium cost to build and their management's need to bring in all the bookings and revenue they possibly can to repay that cost, they'd be stupid to turn down business just because they didn't want to accommodate their customer's requirements.

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Grounds just aren't built for RL generally. Maybe we should change to yards like Gridiron. 

Good luck getting the Aussies to go along with that!  It's a metric world you know, every country in the world apart from a handful of laggards in the Anglosphere uses metric.

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Tottenham Stadium can fit those requirements, they were just too lazy to do so in this instance or more likely the incompetent RFL didn't think to ask or require that. 

They cant and you've been told why. A 105 metre long field cannot meet RL requirements, its as simple as that.

[Dunbar]

2 hours ago, Big Picture said:

On reflection it is possible that their 22 metre lines weren't truly 22 metres from the goal lines, I hadn't considered that as I didn't think RU would allow that.

Update: Taking measurements from a still image at another part of the highlight video showing a closer view on the one end, the ratio of the measured distance between the goal line and the 22-metre line and the distance between the goal line and the 5-metre line is the same as 22 divided by 5, therefore I conclude that my original calculations were correct and the field was a full 100 metres as I'm sure the RU big shots would have wanted.

I still don't understand how you can conclude with any certainty the distances involved by measuring the ratios.

Two things (like a pitch with markings) can be completely different sizes and have the same ratios.  You need to know the absolute distance of at least one of these elements before you can use ratios to conclude the overall size.

For example, a table top Subbuteo pitch can have exactly the same (and correct) rations as a full size pitch and so you could use ratios to conclude the Subbuteo pitch is full size.

Edit: and that isn't even taking into account the flaw of measuring ratios from a still image of video where the camera aspect will distort the distances involved.

Edited May 22, 2022 by Dunbar

[Mr Frisky]

17 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Tottenham Stadium can fit those requirements, they were just too lazy to do so in this instance or more likely the incompetent RFL didn't think to ask or require that.  Considering how much the stadium cost to build and their management's need to bring in all the bookings and revenue they possibly can to repay that cost, they'd be stupid to turn down business just because they didn't want to accommodate their customer's requirements.

Good luck getting the Aussies to go along with that!  It's a metric world you know, every country in the world apart from a handful of laggards in the Anglosphere uses metric.

Take it you won't be going to the CCF, the SLGF or even the World Cup final then lad.

I just hope your happy with Arsenal and Newcastle for Englands WC games or do we need to get Leigh ready to stage those games??

[Dave T]

I suspect BP is right, I expect there will loads of spare grass knocking around and we just forgot to ask if we could use it. 

[Big Picture]

10 minutes ago, Damien said:

They cant and you've been told why. A 105 metre long field cannot meet RL requirements, its as simple as that.

Yes they can, because the stadium has enough length between the seats at each end to fit an NFL field into it and that's a lot longer than 105 metres.  It's 117 metres between the broken yellow lines which are marked behind their end lines.

So the stadium can accommodate RL requirements, either they weren't interested in doing so or the incompetents at the RFL with their small time, cap-doffing pour cousin, make-do-because-that's-all-they-know ways of doing things didn't bother to raise the matter with them.

14 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I still don't understand how you can conclude with any certainty the distances involved by measuring the ratios.

Two things (like a pitch with markings) can be completely different sizes and have the same ratios.  You need to know the absolute distance of at least one of these elements before you can use ratios to conclude the overall size.

For example, a table top Subbuteo pitch can have exactly the same (and correct) rations as a full size pitch and so you could use ratios to conclude the Subbuteo pitch is full size.

Edit: and that isn't even taking into account the flaw of measuring ratios from a still image of video where the camera aspect will distort the distances involved.

Oh please!  Your mention of Subbuteo is nothing short of ridiculous.

Naturally I took account of how the camera aspect could distort the distances involved, that's why I measured between points on the relevant lines which I know to be in line with each other such as along the side line.  And I enlarged the images to full screen size to get a better view.  That's how I can be sure that I measured accurately.

I think we can be pretty sure that the RFU bigshots almost certainly wouldn't stand for a less than full size field at a showpiece event, they'd want everything about such an event to be just right.  So if all the ratios of distances between the lines on that field match the comparable ratios of a full length RU field (as they do in this case) I suggest that we can be confident that those prove that the field was the full length.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

Yes they can, because the stadium has enough length between the seats at each end to fit an NFL field into it and that's a lot longer than 105 metres.  It's 117 metres between the broken yellow lines which are marked behind their end lines.

So the stadium can accommodate RL requirements, either they weren't interested in doing so or the incompetents at the RFL with their small time, cap-doffing pour cousin, make-do-because-that's-all-they-know ways of doing things didn't bother to raise the matter with them.

Oh please!  Your mention of Subbuteo is nothing short of ridiculous.

Naturally I took account of how the camera aspect could distort the distances involved, that's why I measured between points on the relevant lines which I know to be in line with each other such as along the side line.  And I enlarged the images to full screen size to get a better view.  That's how I can be sure that I measured accurately.

I think we can be pretty sure that the RFU bigshots almost certainly wouldn't stand for a less than full size field at a showpiece event, they'd want everything about such an event to be just right.  So if all the ratios of distances between the lines on that field match the comparable ratios of a full length RU field (as they do in this case) I suggest that we can be confident that those prove that the field was the full length.

Why are you ignoring the slope on the grass pitch? 

Do you want RL on the NFL fake pitch? 

Gebuine question again, why are you ignoring this point! It's been pointed out time and again, and yiu even tried claiming it wasn't there. Photo evidence proved you wrong. 

Edited May 22, 2022 by Dave T

[Damien]

Just now, Big Picture said:

Yes they can, because the stadium has enough length between the seats at each end to fit an NFL field into it and that's a lot longer than 105 metres.  It's 117 metres between the broken yellow lines which are marked behind their end lines.

The NFL field is 1.6 metres below the Football field and removes the slope. You've been told this too.

[Damien]

I mean its pretty clear the difference and why there is a difference in length:

[Big Picture]

Just now, Dave T said:

Why are you ignoring the slope on the grass pitch? 

Do you want RL on the NFL fake pitch? 

Gebuine question again, why are you ignoring this point! It's been pointed out time and again, and yiu even tried claiming it wasn't there. Photo evidence proved you wrong. 

I'm not ignoring the slope, I'm saying that it didn't stop them from making the RU field the correct length.

What is wrong the the NFL field?  What's "fake" about it?

[Damien]

Just now, Big Picture said:

I'm not ignoring the slope, I'm saying that it didn't stop them from making the RU field the correct length.

Which was exactly the same length as the RL one. Yet you are trying to argue one is correct and the other isn't. Jesus wept.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

I'm not ignoring the slope, I'm saying that it didn't stop them from making the RU field the correct length.

What is wrong the the NFL field?  What's "fake" about it?

Beyond you saying you have counted, which is absolutely ludicrous, there is no evidence that RU has a 100m pitch. 

The NFL pitch is synthetic. Fake grass. 

[Oxford]

53 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Grounds just aren't built for RL generally. Maybe we should change to yards like Gridiron. 

What we should do is define our field and our uniform so that it is clearly and uniquely RL and therefore easily marketable.

TOOHS! O H S

Edited May 22, 2022 by Oxford

[Dunbar]

12 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Yes they can, because the stadium has enough length between the seats at each end to fit an NFL field into it and that's a lot longer than 105 metres.  It's 117 metres between the broken yellow lines which are marked behind their end lines.

So the stadium can accommodate RL requirements, either they weren't interested in doing so or the incompetents at the RFL with their small time, cap-doffing pour cousin, make-do-because-that's-all-they-know ways of doing things didn't bother to raise the matter with them.

Oh please!  Your mention of Subbuteo is nothing short of ridiculous.

Naturally I took account of how the camera aspect could distort the distances involved, that's why I measured between points on the relevant lines which I know to be in line with each other such as along the side line.  And I enlarged the images to full screen size to get a better view.  That's how I can be sure that I measured accurately.

I think we can be pretty sure that the RFU bigshots almost certainly wouldn't stand for a less than full size field at a showpiece event, they'd want everything about such an event to be just right.  So if all the ratios of distances between the lines on that field match the comparable ratios of a full length RU field (as they do in this case) I suggest that we can be confident that those prove that the field was the full length.

Yes, I agree that my mention of Subbuteo is ridiculous.  I was using it to emphasise how ridiculous it is to argue that you can measure distances accurately by using ratios when you don't have an accurate distance to base these ratio calculations on.

You need a fixed reference to start with to conclude anything using ratios.

[Big Picture]

25 minutes ago, Damien said:

Which was exactly the same length as the RL one. Yet you are trying to argue one is correct and the other isn't. Jesus wept.

If you think the RU field was exactly the same length as the RL one, then prove it.  I trust my measurements and calculations which say it wasn't.

22 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Beyond you saying you have counted, which is absolutely ludicrous, there is no evidence that RU has a 100m pitch. 

The NFL pitch is synthetic. Fake grass. 

I didn't say "counted", I said measured and calculated and I did that very carefully to ensure accuracy.

That NFL field is made by Turf Nation it would certainly be their top-of-the-line S5 product, about which they say:

"The S5 surface is engineered to be the ultimate professional grade surface, firm and fast. S5 surfaces are purposefully designed to enhance player performance and maximize player safety."

I see no issues with having RL played on that field if that's what's needed to have a correct field of play for a showpiece RL event.

[Damien]

9 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

If you think the RU field was exactly the same length as the RL one, then prove it.  I trust my measurements and calculations which say it wasn't.

Now you are talking nonsense.

The dead ball lines show that as they are in exactly the same spot on the Football goal line. Additionally the dyed goal area for both RL and RU is in exactly the same place, just before the try line. As both in goals are identical then both have to be less than 5.5 metres. That also means the field length is 105 metres. I trust actual Spurs Football pitch markings anyday over your calculations.

[Dave T]

I don't know if anyone watched the sporting drama of the Premier League. Pure world class sport. 

Nobody was talking about whether the pitches were 105m or 109 yards. 

 

[Big Picture]

4 minutes ago, Damien said:

Now you are talking nonsense.

The dead ball lines show that as they are in exactly the same spot on the Football goal line. Additionally the dyed goal area for both RL and RU is in exactly the same place, just before the try line. As both in goals are identical then both have to be less than 5.5 metres. That also means the field length is 105 metres. I trust actual Spurs Football pitch markings anyday over your calculations.

I know perfectly well that the FIFA maximum length of a soccer field is 105 metres.  However @Dave T's picture from the RU match doesn't show any soccer markings, so how do you know that the dead ball lines were in exactly the same place as the soccer goal lines?