Jump to content
IGNORED

The pitch IS narrower...

EmersonsRed

By EmersonsRed
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

EmersonsRed

EmersonsRed

Posted
Posted

Thought this deserved a thread of its own following on from bits and bobs in the match day chat, bit boring for some, but I find it very interesting... We've had the largest available for some time I believe and I'm glad we've narrowed it, allows us to play a far more attacking game off the ball and press for 90 minutes. Think we may be a bit better defensively at home this season.

 

P.S Confirmed by Joe Bryan interview at https://www.bcfc.co.uk/bctv/

EmersonsRed

EmersonsRed

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Spoons said:

Good observation skills but not sure it really makes a whole lot of difference though? 

I promise at this level of football, it does. Everything matters. No matter how small.

The good old saying during the FA Cup when a large team goes to non-league opposition and commentators say "they won't like playing on this tight, narrow pitch" it's not a myth... In fact in the interview via the link Joe even says a few of his cross-field balls went out.

 

It affects your shape on and off the ball.  Pressing (as eluded to in OP).

Good recent example is Spurs' fantastic home form. 100 by 67 meters, struggle hugely at Wembley 105 by 65m... :)

Dollymarie

Dollymarie

Posted
Posted

Genuine question, because I honestly don't know. 

Are we allowed to do that? As in are there rules that say the pitch must be between this and this measurement for example? How narrow are we allowed to make it before someone official would take a look at things.  

RumRed

RumRed

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Dollymarie said:

Genuine question, because I honestly don't know. 

Are we allowed to do that? As in are there rules that say the pitch must be between this and this measurement for example? How narrow are we allowed to make it before someone official would take a look at things.  

There's quite a lot of variation allowed even up to international pitches, Wiki suggests at that level width of the pitch can be between 64m and 75m.  

Sure someone can correct this if Wiki is wrong.

iamalagerdrinker

iamalagerdrinker

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Dollymarie said:

Genuine question, because I honestly don't know. 

Are we allowed to do that? As in are there rules that say the pitch must be between this and this measurement for example? How narrow are we allowed to make it before someone official would take a look at things.  

Probably isn't the best fountain of knowledge but on Football Manger you can either keep it standard, narrower like we've done it or slightly wider! So I'd imagine if it's kept within the rules and  regulations we can do it 

P'head Red

P'head Red

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, City Ben said:

EFL website, rule 13.1 says length must be between 100 and 110m. Width between 64 and 75m. 

I'm surprised that they allow such a big variation, it must really affect cross field balls. 

RedM

RedM

Posted
Posted

I know at one time we had a bigger pitch than Wembley's which surprised me. I think the pitch size has to be kept in the correct ratio, i.e. If you are going to narrow it to the smallest width you can't then use the longest length measurement.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I remember bumping into Scott Murray at Norwich away and he said how good the Burton result was - because he didn't think many teams would get a result there due in part to the size of the pitch. So seems maybe some logic in it..

RoystonFoote'snephew

RoystonFoote'snephew

Posted
Posted

Football pitches are measured in yards (18 yard box, 6 yard box etc), not metres, and City's pitch has been 115 x 75 yds for as long as I can remember. This has traditionally put it amongst the largest pitches in the league, but certainly not the largest. Until they changed their pitch dimensions, Swindles, for example, was a yard wider. 

I have long believed that City play better on large pitches and can struggle for performance (if not always results e.g. Fulham) on small ones. However, The reduction to 73 yards wide hardly makes City's pitch a small one and therefore should not affect us.  If it helps us defend more easily then all the better. 

cidered abroad

cidered abroad

Posted
Posted

If the pitch has been narrowed, from the evidence of the extra quadrant at the SS end, it will be two yards narrower as the specified radius of a corner quadrant is one yard.

I've always believed our pitch is 75 metres x 110metres.

Thinking about it. Is the quadrant one yard radius or one yard diameter? I can't believe it's one yard from corner flag to outer edge of quadrant.

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, EmersonsRed said:

I promise at this level of football, it does. Everything matters. No matter how small.

The good old saying during the FA Cup when a large team goes to non-league opposition and commentators say "they won't like playing on this tight, narrow pitch" it's not a myth... In fact in the interview via the link Joe even says a few of his cross-field balls went out.

 

It affects your shape on and off the ball.  Pressing (as eluded to in OP).

Good recent example is Spurs' fantastic home form. 100 by 67 meters, struggle hugely at Wembley 105 by 65m... :)

One of the Western league pitches (Westbury) used to be wide and long.  Split and the touchline was another second away to normal, quite an odd feeling to start a game with.

exAtyeoMax

exAtyeoMax

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Phileas Fogg said:

You can see the old lines here.

IMG_0524.JPG

why would they have painted it twice? I thought the pitch had been re-seeded over the summer, or has there already been a match played?

Carey 6

Carey 6

Posted
Posted

Slightly off topic, but about the ground. took this picture last night.

Look at the T in Bristol. They've replaced white seats with red ones. Also under the C they've put two too many black seats in. The rest of the stadium looks class, least they could do is make the atyeo look the best it possibly can. 

 IMG_8205.thumb.JPG.69eda2ecab0f44731ab55e20769c3272.JPG

AppyDAZE

AppyDAZE

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Judda said:

Surely makes sense as wingers is one position we are lacking in... makes the game more compact...?

Yeah great. if you can't fix the problem on the pitch, change the pitch. I wonder if the drones told him to do it?

AppyDAZE

AppyDAZE

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Carey 6 said:

Slightly off topic, but about the ground. took this picture last night.

Look at the T in Bristol. They've replaced white seats with red ones. Also under the C they've put two too many black seats in. The rest of the stadium looks class, least they could do is make the atyeo look the best it possibly can. 

 IMG_8205.thumb.JPG.69eda2ecab0f44731ab55e20769c3272.JPG

Looks crap don't it. I prefer the wide looking pitch. What the **** are we doing. This sort of thing is more in line with the Pulis's of this world.

downendcity

downendcity

Posted
Posted

Perhaps LJ has asked for the pitch to be narrowed to help with the pressing game that some commented on last night.

The narrower the pitch the easier it is to press and close down the opposition defence, as they have less space available. It might not be a lot, but at this level it's all about small margins.

 

RoystonFoote'snephew

RoystonFoote'snephew

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

If the pitch has been narrowed, from the evidence of the extra quadrant at the SS end, it will be two yards narrower as the specified radius of a corner quadrant is one yard.

I've always believed our pitch is 75 metres x 110metres.

Thinking about it. Is the quadrant one yard radius or one yard diameter? I can't believe it's one yard from corner flag to outer edge of quadrant.

As I stated earlier, our pitch was officially recorded as 115 x 75 YARDS. A bug bear of mine, but I hate this modern mix of imperial and metric measurement. The laws of the game determined the pitch in imperial. The penalty area is 18 yards wide (not 16 metres 45.92 centimetres), the goal is 8 yards wide (not 7m 31.52cm) and there is a 6 yard box (not 5m 48.64cm). 

Red DNA

Red DNA

Posted
Posted

I think it was only done very recently as the grass would have grown out by now and I doubt if it had even been marked during the close season. 

I suspect the reason why they've done so late - and to only do the corner quadrants not the side lines, is to remind players when they see the old marking that taking corners they should take it into consideration. 

Portland Bill

Portland Bill

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Judda said:

Surely makes sense as wingers is one position we are lacking in... makes the game more compact...?

Exactly, and this is why I don't like Johnson's negative tactics. 

Personally I want to see a City team with width, his tactics have narrowed the pitch for the last 18 months, now he has just confirmed his tactics ( even though I thought the pitch was narrower last season as well).

Disapointing to say the least.

Portland Bill

Portland Bill

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, downendcity said:

Perhaps LJ has asked for the pitch to be narrowed to help with the pressing game that some commented on last night.

The narrower the pitch the easier it is to press and close down the opposition defence, as they have less space available. It might not be a lot, but at this level it's all about small margins.

 

Barcelona are probably the best pressing team in the world, they have a giant pitch, so it doesn't have to be this way.

Imo any manager who narrows his home pitch is clearly a negative manager.

Maltshoveller

Maltshoveller

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Portland Bill said:

Barcelona are probably the best pressing team in the world, they have a giant pitch, so it doesn't have to be this way.

Imo any manager who narrows his home pitch is clearly a negative manager.

105 x 68

 

TheCulturalBomb

TheCulturalBomb

Posted
Posted

I always assumed possession based football should be played with with wide pitches, i.e Arsenal, Barcelona, or Bristol Rovers. If it helps us defensively, great but a good chunk of last season our game vanished and we were the team chasing.

BS4 on Tour...

BS4 on Tour...

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Dollymarie said:

Genuine question, because I honestly don't know. 

Are we allowed to do that? As in are there rules that say the pitch must be between this and this measurement for example? How narrow are we allowed to make it before someone official would take a look at things.  

Yep there are length and width ranges within which you have to adhere as a pro club. I remember under Souness' management, Rangers narrowed their pitch to the absolute minimum for just one European match because the opposition had two good wingers...

Bristol Rob

Bristol Rob

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Hartcliffe red said:

Imagine the same rules in snooker table width

How do you make a snooker table laugh?

You put your hand in its pockets and tickle its balls!

Ska Junkie

Ska Junkie

Posted
Posted

I seem to remember, like others that we, along with Wolves, had the biggest playing area in the division. IIRC, wasn't QPR the smallest by some margin?

Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted

The corner quadrant is 1 yard radius

the penalty area in 18*44 yards

the six yard box is 6*22 ( if you drew a line from the posts outwards you've have 3 boxes of 6*6, 6*8, 6*6)

the penalty spot is 12 yards from the goal and the circle outside the penalty area is a line drawn 10 yards from that (imagine a paint brush on a 10 yd piece of string )

the centre circle is 10 yards radius (20yds diameter)

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TheCulturalBomb said:

I always assumed possession based football should be played with with wide pitches, i.e Arsenal, Barcelona, or Bristol Rovers. If it helps us defensively, great but a good chunk of last season our game vanished and we were the team chasing.

Not exactly because it will depend on formations. A diamond in midfield will be narrow. Do they want more or less pitch to cover when they lose it?

Barcelonas philosophy with its once short triangular passing, six second presses etc was played in tighter spaces. they have now moved away from this and use lots of width via Neymar etc. Bristol City obviously are not the zenith of brilliance!

Is it easier defend to defend v possession on a narrower pitch? Yes 100%. Does it make games more negative? Yes.

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

Good job it wasn't a response to what TheCulturalBomb said then really.

 

It was a response to your misleading point about negative football, your post insinuating that such tactics are the reason behind the change.

Pointing out that we continue to have one of the larger pitches contradicts that fallacy, as would the style of play at last nights game.

My post did not insinuate anything. It contained an opinion that you will find in any coaching book or FA course. If a team wants to negate the oppositions possession they make the pitch smaller via pressing/defensive lines. Trimming some of the width of the pitch off obviously makes the pitch smaller and thus makes it easier to control the space.

I regards to a possession based team it is not as straight forward, but if you have wide players/wingers - Inverted wingers, wing backs generally you want them to split in possession and make the pitch as wide as possible.

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
Just now, JamesBCFC said:

Following the thread of the conversation it did appear to insinuate as such.

TCB had said "If it helps us defensively, great but a good chunk of last season our game vanished and we were the team chasing."

So your part on defensive ease. "Is it easier defend to defend v possession on a narrower pitch? Yes 100%. Does it make games more negative? Yes."

Does carry such an insinuation.

What you say about narrow pitches is right, and I haven't even hinted at the vaguest suggestion otherwise.

What I have been saying, is that making one of the largest pitches 2 yards narrower (such that it remains at the larger end of the scale) DOES NOT mean there will be negative football, not even in the slightest.

Had we changed to a very small pitch, then yes, but we simply havent.

 

I have not insinuated Bristol City HAVE made the pitch narrower due to Mr Johnsons desiring it to be so for a tactical reason. Pitches have been mace smaller for advertising .. Who knows!

I answered a post by @TheCulturalBombregarding possession and width.

Your assertion that making a pitch narrower by two metres (?) if permanent etc is wrong. Its space a defending player does not have to cover. Its space a switching player cannot hit. It is space a player cannot bend a run into. It makes defending just a little easier.

 

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

My only assertions have been that we still have one of the larger pitches, and that the 2 yards taken off will not mean we will be playing negative football

The first is factually verifiable, the second is evident to anyone who has watched us.

Question. Does making a pitch smaller in length or width make it easier for the team defending possession to press and screen?

A yes there destroys your argument (and you do want one), a no don't even coach six years olds.

Guest mixer13

Guest mixer13

Posted
Posted

i was under the impression that they moving the pitch closer to the Landsdown stand  ??

so that maybe be why the old corner lines are still there ,unless you can see the lines on other side as well ....

 

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

Where have I said anything to the contrary of that?

Read what I post, rather than inventing something to reply to.

 

I have thoroughly read what you have posted ...You did not answer the question.

Pressing and screenings primary purpose is to negate (a negative) the oppositions possession. Making the pitch smaller makes this easier, thus this has to lead to some/more negative football from sides, it has to at points, that is the game.

Mr Johnson may have some interesting ideas that BCFC are going to become the BS3 geggenpressing monster ... That still follows the above nullifying of the team in possession and could benefit the pitch being narrowed. .

  • Admin
Ian M

Ian M

Posted
  • Admin
Posted

Whilst there is talk of making the pitch narrower being a negative tactic, I'd argue that if it is being done because the coach wants to employ a high press (a la Pochettino teams) then it is arguably a positive tactic as it's being done to potentially catch teams in possession higher up the field. Would anyone agree?

Cowshed

Cowshed

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ian M said:

Whilst there is talk of making the pitch narrower being a negative tactic, I'd argue that if it is being done because the coach wants to employ a high press (a la Pochettino teams) then it is arguably a positive tactic as it's being done to potentially catch teams in possession higher up the field. Would anyone agree?

Which is why I mentioned pressing. For a team in possession it is a negative. It has to be.

downendcity

downendcity

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Ian M said:

Whilst there is talk of making the pitch narrower being a negative tactic, I'd argue that if it is being done because the coach wants to employ a high press (a la Pochettino teams) then it is arguably a positive tactic as it's being done to potentially catch teams in possession higher up the field. Would anyone agree?

Yes, me.

5 hours ago, downendcity said:

Perhaps LJ has asked for the pitch to be narrowed to help with the pressing game that some commented on last night.

The narrower the pitch the easier it is to press and close down the opposition defence, as they have less space available. It might not be a lot, but at this level it's all about small margins.

 

 

Trueredsupporter

Trueredsupporter

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, bluebutterfly said:

When ian atkins was rovers manager he did this and i hated it.

Its a purely negative step to stop better quality footballers having space and time on the ball.

Francis did that at Twerton. No need for space as they wacked it back to front.

Tinmans Love Child

Tinmans Love Child

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, AppyDAZE said:

Looks crap don't it. I prefer the wide looking pitch. What the **** are we doing. This sort of thing is more in line with the Pulis's of this world.

I couldn't care less how big or small the pitch is as long as we win on it!

The writing in the Atyeo seats has looked terrible from day one when it was built, when people are sat on the seats it doesn't make any difference

 

Bar BS3

Bar BS3

Posted
Posted

A pointless bit of trivia, which I believe to be correct, having read it somewhere once....

Q) What stadium has had the smallest playing surface in English league football..? 

EmersonsRed

EmersonsRed

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Bar BS3 said:

A pointless bit of trivia, which I believe to be correct, having read it somewhere once....

Q) What stadium has had the smallest playing surface in English league football..? 

Crewe?

Bar BS3

Bar BS3

Posted
Posted
Just now, JamesBCFC said:

Something like Coventry or Northampton then?

One of the teams that would be put in the 'northern' part of the JPT, when more northern clubs would be in the 'southern' part. Or vice versa.

No. Nationally it was south, to us... north. 

downendcity

downendcity

Posted
Posted

Perhaps it's not the pitch that's narrower, but they've moved the  stands further apart.

Sixtyseconds

Sixtyseconds

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, asfred said:

Pulis used to have the pitch narrower at Stoke, to help with Delaps long throws.

Pulis, Atkins and Francis have all been mentioned in one thread.

I do not know which to snort first to cleanse my mind.

Disinfectant or bleach!

Bar BS3

Bar BS3

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, cynic said:

Has to be Swansea then - the old ground which had a very small pitch.

Vetch field, and it was a field with a big drop from the pitch into the terracing on one side. I don't remember a blade of grass on it when I played there many decades ago.

Interestingly (or not!)Wikipedia makes no mention of my trivia, so it could be complete bollocks, although I definitely did read it somewhere a few years ago! 

Bar BS3

Bar BS3

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, cynic said:

Right, my last attempt - Walsall.

Thats it, done.

Don't give up yet..! I'll give you one more clue.....

 

 

 

The current team is managed by someone who's mother is a bit of a slapper, allegedly! 

Bar BS3

Bar BS3

Posted
Posted
Just now, JamesBCFC said:

Was about to say "its gonna be Eastville or something"

Then you posted this and I got a particular terrace song in my head.

Eastville it was.

(I take no resonsibility for any literature I read being wrong!) 

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...