Should football clubs be banned from having rugby played at grounds.

[norfolkchance1 0]

Something thats bugged me for a long while has been clubs who ground share rugby and football. Looking through our stats by my reckoning there are 6 grounds which rugby is played on (Correct me if wrong) and we''ve only won once at Sheffield United (who are hopeless anyway) .Elland Road which plays some international rugby games on it occasionally I haven''t counted as its only about once a season I think.

Doncaster - Rugby - defeat

Reading - Rugby - draw

Swansea - Rugby - defeat

Hull - Rugby league - draw

Watford - Rugby - draw

Sheffield U - Rugby League - win

It annoys me that we played on the saturday at Hull after Hull FC rugby league had played the night before and the pitch was poor.

Another thing having played two away games both at rugby grounds - saturday and tuesday we now have a striker who has a hamstring/ cramp injury probably gained from playing on two overused pitches.

I know we didn''t play well in some games and clearly the pitch isn''t the sole reason we''ve lost or drawn games but I think football authorities should take ten points off each team that shares ground with rugby club or should give a financial bonus to teams that don''t. At the very least it should be 3 or 4 days between playing a rugby game and a football game so those dopey green lines they paint over the white rugby lines which you can still see when watching a football match have a chance to go altogether and not assist or hinder the linesmen more than grounds who don''t have those lines.

I admit I may have deviated and sound like a bad loser with this rant but I think playing rugby on football pitches spoils football.

[Harry 0]

Yes the FA should ban Clubs having Rugby played on their pitches.

[Salopian 1]

From comments made by some players and also by posters on this board, the pitch was a disgrace.

Does it give the home side an advantage? Possibly, unless the visitors try to play route one style like Watford. But it puts Watford at a disadvantage on true football pitches. They won at Carrow Road, admittedly, but we were very poor that day.

[I am a Banana 0]

look at it financially though. Share a ground = less expenses more income [y] its the way football is going

[Excited Canary 19]

To be fair you can''t complain about the Swansea pitch at all, it was like a carpet! But yeah, pitches like Watford shouldn''t be allowed in the league and if getting rid of  the rugby games off of it means that the pitches  are better than so be it!

[morty 0]

I think that if a club doesn''t maintain its pitch to an acceptable standard they should be fined.

[Phyxius 0]

The Reading pitch was fine. Huddersfield are another club that have a rugby team also present and it didn''t stop us winning there last season.

[Snakepit Lass 0]

if the pitch is not rite then yes like i have seen in many grounds, but if they can get them back to scratch then i don''t see it being a problem

[norfolkchance1 0]

Trouble is though it devalues standard of football, think they should have a pitch inspector like they used to have in cricket when pitches were poor.

I can understand poor pitches at grass roots but the professional levels of the game should be showcasing the best examples of technique and talent and available and that has more chance of happening on better pitches hopefully encouraging more people to sport in future.

If teams can''t play good football because pitch is crap then people aren''t going to pay and watch ( may get 5,000 less on gate each game than they would get if they were playing good football as a rough guess) Therefore they would make more money and wouldn''t feel need to have rugby invading space.

Who wants to go and watch two teams putting ball over bar from 6 yards because of divots in goal mouth and a bare area in middle of field with no grass meaning both teams boot ball 60 yards bypassing midfield at every opportunity. Who is that encouraging to go down to their local youth club and play on a sunday morning.

I admit people mind less if they are winning and things are going well but its a bad advert for football.

[norfolkchance1 0]

Yeah I accept that if a team can make pitch decent then thats more acceptable but far too often it just seems to be a business decision to try and do as much as possible to detriment of football which is predominantly (or should be ) played on the ground.

I watched a Notts County game against Charlton on Sky earlier in season and that pitch was a disgrace neither side could stay on their feet. Leading to amateurish mistakes.

[Phyxius 0]

Doncaster (Sept 14) - Rugby - Played their last home fixture 3 weeks before ours.

Reading (Nov 13) - Rugby - Played 2 weeks before our game and the pitch wasn''t to blame for the result.

Sheffield U (Jan 22)- Rugby League - Season starts in Febuary and ends in September

Not exactly determined our season

[Jacko 0]

To be honest I think all the surfaces mentioned (Watford aside) have been pretty good. It was a bad surface but both sides still looked much better when they attempted to get the ball down and play. Which we didnt in the first half. Instead we were content with knocking the ball down the channel and playing route one.

[Chelmsford Canary 0]

[quote user="Excited Canary"]To be fair you can''t complain about the Swansea pitch at all, it was like a carpet! But yeah, pitches like Watford shouldn''t be allowed in the league and if getting rid of  the rugby games off of it means that the pitches  are better than so be it![/quote]

Watford are trying to oust Saracens - so they are trying!

[DDD In The Fine City 1]

Its not up to the football club its the people that own the stadiums

[Ruddygore 0]

As a by the by, Saracens are hoping to be on the move by muscling in at the Copthall Stadium in North Londoin, current home of SSML non league side Kentish Town (although they have a lease until 2013 - I think).

[Mark 0]

We do..the trouble with our pitch is that its a 10 year surface currently in its 13th year.

For some reason the previous board members didn''t see fit to improve the surface and we are too skint to change that now.