Rec Pitch

[Fuggletim]

I guess that the biggest concession dropped was the Winter Fuel allowance, but heh, let’s not get political here…..

Going off at a tangent a bit, in the Philippines all you have to do at a lot of restaurants and entertainment venues etc is produce your ID to show you are over 60 and you get 20% discount. It doesn’t work in bars (well on the beer element unfortunately) and technically you should have Philippine Government ID, but I have had no problems using my UK Driving Licence to prove my age.

It is the state’s way (apart from a pension) to thank the older generation for their contributions over the years. Would be nice if the UK would do something similar.

Winter fuel allowance should be means tested and increased financially to those that need it.

When we increased the concession to 66 after the change in the pension act in 2014 I felt it was wrong, as I believe we were penalising those who couldn't afford it rather than those that could. But it fell on death ears.

Agree up to a point with your view on fuel allowances, and certainly those with an address outside of the UK should be automatically disqualified. However “Means Testing” is very inconsistently applied across the benefits system in my view and still has people falling through the net. I am not going say anything else and get into a political/personal issues debate on this as this is a football forum, but the unfairness of the system from a personal view is quite blatant.

Regarding concession payments (and LBS alluded to this), I was going to football locally whilst in my mid to late 50s, and often would be charged a “Senior” without asking! I used to make sure they were aware I wasn’t!

[Fuggletim]

I guess that the biggest concession dropped was the Winter Fuel allowance, but heh, let’s not get political here…..

Going off at a tangent a bit, in the Philippines all you have to do at a lot of restaurants and entertainment venues etc is produce your ID to show you are over 60 and you get 20% discount. It doesn’t work in bars (well on the beer element unfortunately) and technically you should have Philippine Government ID, but I have had no problems using my UK Driving Licence to prove my age.

It is the state’s way (apart from a pension) to thank the older generation for their contributions over the years. Would be nice if the UK would do something similar.

They do that in Canada, Tim, except that the qualifying age is just 55.

[dartmouth]

Can someone in the know, actually explain what needs to be done to return the Rec to being a pristine durable playing surface?
Is it drainage, irrigation, regular maintenance, garden machinery?

[brian bloomfield]

Can someone in the know, actually explain what needs to be done to return the Rec to being a pristine durable playing surface?
Is it drainage, irrigation, regular maintenance, garden machinery?

I presume Dartmouth, it's all of the above. Hence Deane saying we need to spend 150k to get it right, so complete new pitch.

[chimpster99]

Can someone in the know, actually explain what needs to be done to return the Rec to being a pristine durable playing surface?
Is it drainage, irrigation, regular maintenance, garden machinery?

I presume Dartmouth, it's all of the above. Hence Deane saying we need to spend 150k to get it right, so complete new pitch.

The drainage was fixed, but there's potentially more to be done to keep it functioning.
I imagine a lot of damage was done to the sub-layers during the waterlogging and a lot of work will be needed.
The irrigation system is functional but it looks like the grounds team are fighting with it at times.
Question marks have been raised by others about the capabilities of Larkstel in maintaining it.
There was talk last week of the main mower having broken down and not been fixed or replaced.

And we have a Board who appear to be skint, and may be reluctant to invest in a pitch that could get dug up or messed about with during the re-development*.

(*If it ever happens)

[Shot through (& throu]

Here’s hoping the powers that be at Aldershot recognise how much better we played on a proper flat surface with short grass yesterday. I’m not expecting that we could afford a Wembley pitch but surely the team deserves better than what they had to struggle on this season. Come on now let’s at least get back to having one of the best pitches in the league.

[stevieshot]

Traditionally theRec has had an excellent pitch. What the he'll has gone so wrong since Nunny left, and whose to blame ?

[karlready]

Traditionally theRec has had an excellent pitch. What the he'll has gone so wrong since Nunny left, and whose to blame ?

Depends how far back”traditional “ you want to go. When maintained by AldershotB.C.for 50 years or more it was a desert by April when local cup finals took place, and seasonal maintenance was basic. Much the same in the higher leagues; you can see for yourself on you-tube vids of 70’s 1st. Div matches. In reality, only the advent of Chelsea dramatically changed the pitch. Having said that, poor pitches were accepted, and players just got on with it.

[Reg's corner]

Can someone in the know, actually explain what needs to be done to return the Rec to being a pristine durable playing surface?
Is it drainage, irrigation, regular maintenance, garden machinery?

Walking around it on Monday night it appears it needs serious work ie replacing. It's in a terrible state

[steveshot]

Interesting. I'm guessing then we are not a sustainably run football club. Did he say why we are losing so much money. I think £23 is already a lot for bottom half, tier 5 football.

Shahid has continually said in the past "We are sustainable"

Music to my ears.

[Ian Rust]

The pitch at the Rec has traditionally been a very good surface.
However, when Chelsea used the Rec for reserve games they changed it to a better than excellent (superb) surface by throwing loads of money at it.
What they did was completely strip the turf and lay a silica ('Fibresand') sub-base reinforced with polypropylene fibres and then laid new turf over that.
This provided a fantastic surface, but at a price because to maintain that quality the turf has to be stripped every year to allow a new fibresand sub-base.

When Chelsea used the Rec a new fibresand sand sub-base was indeed laid every year and we played on a better than excellent surface for some years. However, since Chelsea left the sub-base has not been replaced and this has led to the decline that left our pitch in the awful state it is now.

The trouble is that a fibresand sub-base only provides a top quality turf surface if its replaced every year. Its not designed to be left under the turf because in the long term its not as good as a natural earth/sand sub-base and in time will be detrimental rather than advantageous.

These days top quality football pitches are 'prepared' every year rather than the existing turf being 'repaired'. See the link below that explains.
https://www.premierpitches.com/news/pit ... an-repair/

This summer the Rec pitch will definitely need to be completely stripped as the old fibresand sub-base will be knackered now and a hinderance. Once stripped the big decision will be whether to go back to a natural soil/sand sub-base (that should last a decade or so, but only provide a good surface) OR whether to lay a new artificial fibresand sub-base (that will need replacing in a year, but will provide an excellent surface).

[Gone West]

The pitch at the Rec has traditionally been a very good surface.
However, when Chelsea used the Rec for reserve games they changed it to a better than excellent (superb) surface by throwing loads of money at it.
What they did was completely strip the turf and lay a silica ('Fibresand') sub-base reinforced with polypropylene fibres and then laid new turf over that.
This provided a fantastic surface, but at a price because to maintain that quality the turf has to be stripped every year to allow a new fibresand sub-base.

When Chelsea used the Rec a new fibresand sand sub-base was indeed laid every year and we played on a better than excellent surface for some years. However, since Chelsea left the sub-base has not been replaced and this has led to the decline that left our pitch in the awful state it is now.

The trouble is that a fibresand sub-base only provides a top quality turf surface if its replaced every year. Its not designed to be left under the turf because in the long term its not as good as a natural earth/sand sub-base and in time will be detrimental rather than advantageous.

These days top quality football pitches are 'prepared' every year rather than the existing turf being 'repaired'. See the link below that explains.
https://www.premierpitches.com/news/pit ... an-repair/

This summer the Rec pitch will definitely need to be completely stripped as the old fibresand sub-base will be knackered now and a hinderance. Once stripped the big decision will be whether to go back to a natural soil/sand sub-base (that should last a decade or so, but only provide a good surface) OR whether to lay a new artificial fibresand sub-base (that will need replacing in a year, but will provide an excellent surface).

That’s interesting Ian, thanks. Do you know what the comparative costs would look like for those options? Is the artificial sub-base generally out of the reach of lower league clubs?

[TracoShot]

The pitch at the Rec has traditionally been a very good surface.
However, when Chelsea used the Rec for reserve games they changed it to a better than excellent (superb) surface by throwing loads of money at it.
What they did was completely strip the turf and lay a silica ('Fibresand') sub-base reinforced with polypropylene fibres and then laid new turf over that.
This provided a fantastic surface, but at a price because to maintain that quality the turf has to be stripped every year to allow a new fibresand sub-base.

When Chelsea used the Rec a new fibresand sand sub-base was indeed laid every year and we played on a better than excellent surface for some years. However, since Chelsea left the sub-base has not been replaced and this has led to the decline that left our pitch in the awful state it is now.

The trouble is that a fibresand sub-base only provides a top quality turf surface if its replaced every year. Its not designed to be left under the turf because in the long term its not as good as a natural earth/sand sub-base and in time will be detrimental rather than advantageous.

These days top quality football pitches are 'prepared' every year rather than the existing turf being 'repaired'. See the link below that explains.
https://www.premierpitches.com/news/pit ... an-repair/

This summer the Rec pitch will definitely need to be completely stripped as the old fibresand sub-base will be knackered now and a hinderance. Once stripped the big decision will be whether to go back to a natural soil/sand sub-base (that should last a decade or so, but only provide a good surface) OR whether to lay a new artificial fibresand sub-base (that will need replacing in a year, but will provide an excellent surface).

That's very interesting. Do you happen to know the approximate costs of either option ?