[Blue5]

moondog, on 26 June 2023 - 03:40 PM, said:

As the Trust reversed this state of affairs as soon as they could it's not difficult to work out who made the decision.

I'm beginning to think we live in a parallel universe when it comes to the use of the pitch!

[Security66]

[quote name='dim view' timestamp='1687796979' post='1749870']
On the contrary, you've made the assumption that it won't.
[/quote
I haven’t posted anything regarding that it will or won’t hold up.

[dim view]

azul, on 26 June 2023 - 04:44 PM, said:

Not in Sheffield apparently unless they are hosting rugby or American football

Their decision to relocate will be based on the enormous nett cost of opening The Lane, not on spoiling the pitch.

Our decision is based on the risk of spoiling our pitch compared to the nett profit. I'm just glad that we have somebody in charge at last who has the gonads to back his judgement.

[azul]

dim view, on 26 June 2023 - 04:53 PM, said:

Their decision to relocate will be based on the enormous nett cost of opening The Lane, not on spoiling the pitch.

Our decision is based on the risk of spoiling our pitch compared to the nett profit. I'm just glad that we have somebody in charge at last who has the gonads to back his judgement.

I’m happy to give Kerr the benefit of the doubt regarding the running of a football club, just as I gave DA the benefit of doubt

[martatcross]

And we’ll probably be promised one of their young stars
[/quote]

Yes just like last time

This post has been edited by martatcross: 26 June 2023 - 05:02 PM

[Bonnyman]

Security66, on 26 June 2023 - 04:07 PM, said:

Another qualified groundsman.

Well to be honest I have my level 2 maintenance certificate,was a free course through fa,so although unable to comment what a full time groundsmen can do with that type of surface,I'd be pretty sure the ones at chesterfield were asked their opinions...so yes your right,more qualified than you.

[Fact Checker]

Goku, on 26 June 2023 - 04:34 PM, said:

One or two letting their blades dislike cloud their judgment here imo

Agreed. At some point we have to start to trust that those now running the club are making decisions for the benefit of the club.
I’m pretty confident those in charge haven’t just accepted a bag of balls for the privilege to allow the Blades on our pitch.
It’s a commercial decision and I’m sure a savvy one at that.
We’re now in the realms of signing the Will Griggs and Tom Naylors of this world, let’s not kick off when we allow some slight inconvenience to our pitch to fund that.

This post has been edited by Fact Checker: 26 June 2023 - 05:10 PM

[Blue5]

dim view, on 26 June 2023 - 04:53 PM, said:

Their decision to relocate will be based on the enormous nett cost of opening The Lane, not on spoiling the pitch.

Our decision is based on the risk of spoiling our pitch compared to the nett profit. I'm just glad that we have somebody in charge at last who has the gonads to back his judgement.

Either the pitch can sustain that level of use or it can't. We've previously been told by club officials that it can't.

[clarevoyant.]

Blue5, on 26 June 2023 - 05:10 PM, said:

Either the pitch can sustain that level of use or it can't. We've previously been told by club officials that it can't.

It's a bit tricky that one, when considering the imponderables ie weather.

[Security66]

Bonnyman, on 26 June 2023 - 05:08 PM, said:

Well to be honest I have my level 2 maintenance certificate,was a free course through fa,so although unable to comment what a full time groundsmen can do with that type of surface,I'd be pretty sure the ones at chesterfield were asked their opinions...so yes your right,more qualified than you.

So you’re not a qualified groundsman then, thought not.

[Bonnyman]

Blue5, on 26 June 2023 - 05:10 PM, said:

Either the pitch can sustain that level of use or it can't. We've previously been told by club officials that it can't.

It may be that the last time it could not be sustained,without making a loss,this time may be a completely different deal,how do inter Milan ac Milan cope?

[tomjoad]

dim view, on 26 June 2023 - 03:41 PM, said:

Don't be daft.
it's a massively underused asset that can take loads more than 25ish games.

Im being daft not wanting what will be positive for Sheffield and derrimental to us? Terrible decision

[tomjoad]

dtp, on 26 June 2023 - 03:46 PM, said:

Don't forget that when our pitch suffered the worst our manager insisted on taking training on it in addition to the blades young'uns.

Our board have now authorised heavy expenditure on our training facilities so, logically, that issue will be taken out of the equation.

Then, our board have to try and maximise income with a view to reducing losses and if Sheffield United are paying a reasonable rent for the facilities then it should make sense in that respect.

Years ago we used to play first team and Central League reserve matches at Saltergate and that pitch stood up well to that. The stadium is our biggest asset but an under used asset. Commonsense decisions made to maximise the income from that asset should not simply be dismissed as "garbage".

Reasonable rent? Thar makes it ok.
No thanks
I bet our groundsmans estatic.

[JonB]

moondog, on 26 June 2023 - 04:18 PM, said:

I think a reason we are getting decent crowds and a feel good factor as high as its been for years, possibly ever is because the community are behind the club which feels like it belongs to the town, decisions like this undermine this good work in my opinion.

We got 1,100 recently for a ladies match at the stadium, yes it was free but the attendance dwarfed what the Blades fixtures ever drew which were free for their season ticket holders.

I doubt the vast majority of folk will even know they are using the ground let alone care too much about it. If we start promoting the games via our social media then it may become an issue but if it’s just they roll up and play most will be oblivious to the fact.

[tomjoad]

Should be reveresed.
We didnt get any help last time player wise.
They are takinhmg the urine.

[SALTERGATE]

Shocking decision, sometimes this club simply do not understand, they have to reverse this with immediate effect, why do they keep irritating the fans

[clarevoyant.]

SALTERGATE, on 26 June 2023 - 06:02 PM, said:

Shocking decision, sometimes this club simply do not understand, they have to reverse this with immediate effect, why do they keep irritating the fans

Or explain the benefits to CFC, so we can make an informed judgement.

[JonB]

SALTERGATE, on 26 June 2023 - 06:02 PM, said:

Shocking decision, sometimes this club simply do not understand, they have to reverse this with immediate effect, why do they keep irritating the fans

Possible option here….we kick them off and have to pay back the money that was letting us sign Dallas? You’d rather that?

[calvin plummers socks]

SALTERGATE, on 26 June 2023 - 06:02 PM, said:

Shocking decision, sometimes this club simply do not understand, they have to reverse this with immediate effect, why do they keep irritating the fans

I don’t understand what’s shocking about it?
Financial decision obviously.
Pitch will be maintained to its normal standard.
It’s (probably) a game fitting in with Towns schedule- ie. A game a week.

[born in 1866]

Not totally happy with this but people are trying to compare eggs and apples.

Last time we had an outsourced groundsman who came once a week to mow and white line the pitch.

Sheff U kids not only played on it they also trained on it.

And of course, James Rowe chose to train on it.

I'm sure this decision has not been taken lightly and without consultation with relevant parties at the club. Let's hope it's worth it ££££ wise

Only time will tell if letting them play around 15 games on it is too much. Those saying it will/won't may have a slice or two of humble pie to eat in 10 months time, so best to reserve judgement.