Home Form : Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:15 am  

Just a thought...

Is our home record (1 from 3) this season as a result of the size of our pitch at Wheldon Road? When you think about our away wins (3 from 3) and where they've come, they've been in stadia with full size, wide fields which obviously suits our attacking style of play.

Are the dimensions of the field at the Jungle limiting our attacking options and allowing teams who play less expansive rugby to capitalise?

I realise there's little that can be done about it, however it highlights a need for our defence to be absolutely spot on when we're playing at home. It also adds more fuel to the fire of an ever increasingly desperate need for the new stadium to progress.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:39 am  

just having this conversation at work with a rhino fan now!!

i 100% agree

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:39 pm  

I'm sure i remember my dad telling me that they mentioned on SKY that our pitch was something like 20 metres shorter than everyone else's in SL

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:42 pm  

My opinion fwiw is that the players play with a greater sense of freedom when playing away and are more under pressure when in front of the home crowd. There is a greater expectation for us to win more at home and this is often reflected with players forcing the play and perhaps being guilty of over-playing. The players appear to more relaxed when on the road, playing more 'off-the-cuff' rugby and letting their game come more naturally.

Just a theory in my lunch-hour, nowt much.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:59 pm  

WRE wrote:

just having this conversation at work with a rhino fan now!!

i 100% agree

You're talking to a rhinos fan? Yuk!

Re: Home Form : Tue Mar 24, 2009 4:08 pm  

Bonzo wrote:

Are the dimensions of the field at the Jungle limiting our attacking options and allowing teams who play less expansive rugby to capitalise?

I await this point to be talked about on BnA this week once one of the researches has scoured RLfans.

Quite possibly it could be a reason because we do like to throw the ball about a bit, but...

ParanoidAndroid wrote:

My opinion fwiw is that the players play with a greater sense of freedom when playing away and are more under pressure when in front of the home crowd. There is a greater expectation for us to win more at home and this is often reflected with players forcing the play and perhaps being guilty of over-playing. The players appear to more relaxed when on the road, playing more 'off-the-cuff' rugby and letting their game come more naturally.

Just a theory in my lunch-hour, nowt much.

....i was actually thinking more on the lines of this reason. We have some right whinging buggers in the Cas ground and at the slightest hint of anything not going our way they are on peoples backs. We still have a mentality that we are by far better than the small teams such as Wakey, Hudds, Quins, Catalan, Salford, Hull KR (not my opinion of course before fans of the respective clubs pipe up) and if we aren't 20 points up after ten minutes these fans think everyone should feck off back to Oz, New Zealand, which ever Pacific island, Wakey or where ever because they aren't as good as Hardisty, Hepworth, Reilly or Atkinson (no disrespect to the previously named legends of course).

I'm still of the opinion that if we actually supported our team at home as we have done away at Wigan, Catalan and Hull the players would respond much better and we might actually make our home support work in our favour rather than against us.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 4:59 pm  

casman2 wrote:

I'm sure i remember my dad telling me that they mentioned on SKY that our pitch was something like 20 metres shorter than everyone else's in SL

It will be the minimum length of 88 metres.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:08 pm  

redeverready wrote:

It will be the minimum length of 88 metres.

That'll be over 250 feet then.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:14 pm  

casman2 wrote:

I'm sure i remember my dad telling me that they mentioned on SKY that our pitch was something like 20 metres shorter than everyone else's in SL

If you look at the markings, from the 30m line to the 40m line in both halves is only about 4 metres. Add onto that the in-goal areas at 6m each and you've got a 100m playing area, but a field of play of only around 88m.

I think the fields were once measured in yards anyway, which would've made it about right back then.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:38 pm  

Bonzo wrote:

If you look at the markings, from the 30m line to the 40m line in both halves is only about 4 metres. Add onto that the in-goal areas at 6m each and you've got a 100m playing area, but a field of play of only around 88m.

I think the fields were once measured in yards anyway, which would've made it about right back then.