PDA

View Full Version : UEFA Pitch Size Requirements



Keith_M
07-07-2010, 07:44 AM
There's been a lot of talk on here recently about the size of pitch required for clubs competing in European competitions. Hibs are supposed to be increasing the size of the pitch to meet minimum European standards, IIRC quoted as 105 x 69 metres (116 x 75 yds). Also, the Yams take regular slatings over their pitch being too small to be allowed for Euro competitions.

This has got me really confused, because Anfield has long been known for having a quite small pitch, despite the fact they play in Europe practically every season. I just checked and found out it's only 101 x 68 metres. It's also listed as being a UEFA Elite Stadium
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anfield)
I'm now really confused. Could anyone in the know about these things explain how that's allowed, if the stories we hear about the required sizes for ER and the PBS are true.


:confused:

HFC 0-7
07-07-2010, 08:19 AM
There's been a lot of talk on here recently about the size of pitch required for clubs competing in European competitions. Hibs are supposed to be increasing the size of the pitch to meet minimum European standards, IIRC quoted as 105 x 69 metres (116 x 75 yds). Also, the Yams take regular slatings over their pitch being too small to be allowed for Euro competitions.

This has got me really confused, because Anfield has long been known for having a quite small pitch, despite the fact they play in Europe practically every season. I just checked and found out it's only 101 x 68 metres. It's also listed as being a UEFA Elite Stadium
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anfield)
I'm now really confused. Could anyone in the know about these things explain how that's allowed, if the stories we hear about the required sizes for ER and the PBS are true.


:confused:


I believe these new dimensions only have to be enforced if there is development work undertaken and the stadium. So, if liverpool were to build a new stand they would need correct the pitch sizes. A lot of the requirements actually relate to the sizes of the run off areas to make sure that the fans are far enough away from the playing area.

--------
07-07-2010, 09:07 AM
I believe these new dimensions only have to be enforced if there is development work undertaken and the stadium. So, if liverpool were to build a new stand they would need correct the pitch sizes. A lot of the requirements actually relate to the sizes of the run off areas to make sure that the fans are far enough away from the playing area.


As far as I've read, this is correct.

Arsenal were OK as long as they were at Highbury. When they planned The Emirates they were obliged to lay out the pitch to the new dimensions with the required run-off areas around the touchlines and behind the goals. This is why the new East at ER is a wee bit farther away from the North and South Stands than the West is, and why Hibs took the front row of seats off the West when the work began on the relaying the pitch at ER.

UEFA aren't being picky or awkward in this instance - it's a matter of player safety. John O'Neil was injured a few years back when he ran into advertising hoardings that were placed very close to the pitch at Tynie.

Hearts are allowed to play on the present pitch at the Pigpen because the regulations came in after the three newer stands were completed. But as soon as they start on the MegaJamboDrome SuperStand, they'll have to make the requisite changes to all three of those stands to bring the pitch up to current standards.

Which, as the Unwashed Hordes have not yet worked out, could prove to be a major problem given the configuration of the stands in question.... :devil:

Kaiser_Sauzee
07-07-2010, 09:31 AM
As far as I've read, this is correct.

Arsenal were OK as long as they were at Highbury. When they planned The Emirates they were obliged to lay out the pitch to the new dimensions with the required run-off areas around the touchlines and behind the goals. This is why the new East at ER is a wee bit farther away from the North and South Stands than the West is, and why Hibs took the front row of seats off the West when the work began on the relaying the pitch at ER.

UEFA aren't being picky or awkward in this instance - it's a matter of player safety. John O'Neil was injured a few years back when he ran into advertising hoardings that were placed very close to the pitch at Tynie.

Hearts are allowed to play on the present pitch at the Pigpen because the regulations came in after the three newer stands were completed. But as soon as they start on the MegaJamboDrome SuperStand, they'll have to make the requisite changes to all three of those stands to bring the pitch up to current standards.

Which, as the Unwashed Hordes have not yet worked out, could prove to be a major problem given the configuration of the stands in question.... :devil:

So, Doddie, let me see if I'm getting this right...

Hearts currently cannot build their stand as they are absolutely skint. But if they somehow managed to find the £51M to build the stand, they couldn't build it as they have no room to extend the pitch?

:top marks

--------
07-07-2010, 09:36 AM
So, Doddie, let me see if I'm getting this right...

Hearts currently cannot build their stand as they are absolutely skint. But if they somehow managed to find the £51M to build the stand, they couldn't build it as they have no room to extend the pitch?

:top marks



:agree:

This is the situation as I understand it. Yes.

I'd guess they'll need to lose seating at the front of the present stands, which given their cheap-and-nasty design features like the big girders at each end supporting their roofs, may be slightly more difficult than us trimming the front row of the West was. :greengrin
















And I'm sure that you share their pain, just as I do. :devil:

Keith_M
07-07-2010, 10:15 AM
Thanks for all the answers, it's now as clear as mud :greengrin

Leithenhibby
07-07-2010, 10:25 AM
:agree:

This is the situation as I understand it. Yes.

I'd guess they'll need to lose seating at the front of the present stands, which given their cheap-and-nasty design features like the big girders at each end supporting their roofs, may be slightly more difficult than us trimming the front row of the West was. :greengrin

And I'm sure that you share their pain, just as I do. :devil:


:faf:

Now I understand why they are holding back with the development.....

But, we all know they are f****d anyway :devil:...

.Sean.
07-07-2010, 11:10 AM
So, Doddie, let me see if I'm getting this right...

Hearts currently cannot build their stand as they are absolutely skint. But if they somehow managed to find the £51M to build the stand, they couldn't build it as they have no room to extend the pitch?

:top marks
Golly gosh. Sure sucks to be a Jamo, huh? I'm sure Uncle Vlad'll see them right though.
















Not. Get it right roond ye ya Hearts fannys :hahaha:

Hibs Class
07-07-2010, 01:41 PM
Happy to be corrected, but I think our pitch already met European standards. Increasing the size now enables us to meet international standards, which are set out in FIFA's laws rather than UEFA regulations.

Ross4356
07-07-2010, 02:02 PM
Happy to be corrected, but I think our pitch already met European standards. Increasing the size now enables us to meet international standards, which are set out in FIFA's laws rather than UEFA regulations.

Think your right mate I thought it was made larger so we could get competitive international matches not just friendly's.

bighairyfaeleith
07-07-2010, 03:10 PM
Think your right mate I thought it was made larger so we could get competitive international matches not just friendly's.

Nope it was made larger so sproule could run like **** doon the wing past some lithuanian huddy in maroon. FACT:greengrin

I'm_cabbaged
07-07-2010, 04:26 PM
Happy to be corrected, but I think our pitch already met European standards. Increasing the size now enables us to meet international standards, which are set out in FIFA's laws rather than UEFA regulations.


:agree: