Maybe so, however they have been training on it for weeks and had 2 (less intense obviously) hit outs against the 20's on it without complaints. Few players in discussions with others said it was the worst it's felt and that Cullen had told Paul Johnson (retired one) that it wasn't all that far off frozen. Though for some reason conditions still not being taken into account by some even though the game the next day proved grass could be much worse effected.



You seem to be missing the main idea of the pitch? Training, extra revenue from other games / etc. I get the feeling your club is one of many keeping a close eye on it as should you get a 'community stadium' that you maybe after a multi use surface would be absolutely ideal.

I think if we are being 100% honest if it turned out the only issues were that at -5 and lower temperatures a few players got knee grazes i'd say the pitch would be a roaring success.

Whether that will be the case when conditions change, we shall see.

No, I'm not missing that at all; but if it proves to be unfit for purpose, then any plans to that effect shouldn't come to fruition.



We shall.

How the criticism of the pitch has continued beyond the picture of Matty Ashurt's knees is unbelievable. Two games played in very similar weather conditions.
Hopefully more will become clear following the home game against Salford in two weeks time which should be played in better conditions. As has been said, this is a season long experiment.

Couldn't help but laugh out loud at the poster that claimed rock hard pitches only happen in the snow though. Terrific that.

Woolston Rovers went to Leigh East on saturday after the referee declared the 3G pitch there playable for the game. Fortunately I was still out injured so didn't have to endure the pain that others suffered

"We are happy for Widnes to continue using the iPitch," said spokesman John Ledger.

"The indications are that it posed no more danger to players than on any other surface over the weekend. We believe the extreme weather may have been an issue."

Widnes' academy match against Wakefield at the Stobart Stadium on Saturday was abandoned after 65 minutes after Vikings player Thomas Coyle suffered a compound leg fracture, but the RFL say the pitch played no role in the incident.

North Wales Crusaders played Halifax Under-23s on the pitch yesterday while Whitehaven held a training session there on Saturday morning.

I think there is clearly an issue with the ipitch in sub-zero temperatures. What the Matty Ashurst pictures show, is it isn't quite as bad as frozen turf.

We'll have to see how it reacts when the weather is better. It may then just be a case, at worst, of needing a bit of Vaseline or bandage, to prevent grazes. Given the benefits the ipitch could bring, that's a small price to pay.

The jury hasn't even seen all the evidence yet, never mind retired to give their verdict. So, condemning it after just one game makes no sense.

I think they're just trying to point out that you can scrape your knees on things other than an iPitch, and that the conditions may have had more to do with it than the pitch itself.


I've noticed blood in plenty of games. My TV is a 42" HD screen, so plenty big.


Apparently it got as low as -7°C. Parts of the pitch will have been frozen. It WILL have contributed.


No, but the fact that it happened once out of one time doesn't mean it will happen every time. That's the point you're failing to understand. The conditions will have played a part, just like they can, did, do and will at other grounds.


I have, and suffered a lot more, even on supposedly decent pitches. And I only play on the wing.
Players will get scrapes all the time. Some people just jump to conclusions too quickly. I'm surprised Keith Senior hasn't thrown in his two pennies worth yet.


So you don't care about facts, you just want to stick to your own conclusion because it backs you up? What's the point in discussing this then?

Skins take the sweat away from the body. The body sweats to cool down, which you are correct in saying. It does this because the heated moisture is excreted through the skin to the outside of the body so that the body temperature lowers. If that heat stays on the body, the body's heat will stay high (or higher than if it wasn't there). By getting the warm sweat away from the body, the body is kept cooler.

The fact that it's an "extra layer" apparently to you means it will make players warmer. This is just simply not the case at all, whether you refuse to believe it or not.

Perhaps the quality of the skins you were wearing weren't as good as the ones top athletes wear for you to notice a difference?

And some players don't wear them (or haven't tried them) for cultural reasons, i.e. "they look like tarts", similar to why a lot of players never tried them gloves. "Only wussies wear them." Some people will be convinced, not matter what facts tell them, that they aren't helpful. Some players might not get any benefits from them, but I very much doubt they will detract from anyone's game.


They are morons because they have spoken out against their club, who pay them, after one match, against something they have invested a lot of money in. It's moronic. Professionals should keep their opinions to themselves when it comes to the people that pay them.

Whether they or we think/know what caused their injuries is irrelevant. They are speaking out against their club's heavy investment after one round. It's like a Salford player saying their new ground is cr*p.


Apparently it got to -7, so it shouldn't have. You've come to a conclusion very quickly, so I don't see why you'd need to see what happens next.

I don't know how accurate car temperature gauges are, but it said -5 on mine when driving home.

So what if you can scrape yourself on other things? I can scrape myself on a brick wall if I choose to. That's no more relevant than comparing the ipitch to anything else.


So you're saying you've seen so many players with matching grazes/burns on their knees and elbows in one game before? I haven't, and I doubt anyone else has. Please don't try and claim this was normal, it clearly wasn't.


-7°C now was it? Originally it was -4°C. And I never said the weather didn't contribute, but we don't know to what degree (no pun intended).


I'm failing to understand nothing. You're choosing to ignore certain parts of my post and pick up on others.


Ok, if you say so. Odd how I play pack/centre and haven't really suffered?

Anyway, whether we've suffered injuries at amateur level is actually irrelevant. SL pitches are watered and for the most part, kept lush. I've not seen a SL player complain about grazes or burns in the history of summer rugby.

And the fact that players can pick up cuts and grazes on a normal surface is also irrelevant. What we shouldn't be doing is introducing an environment that MAY cause more of these injuries to occur.


Fine, these wonderful materials can cool you in the hottest temperatures (if you believe the sales hype, of course). I'm not arguing about how good these skins are - frankly I don't care. Wearing additional layers in peak temperatures is simply stupid.

Until they are being recommended by the majority of clubs and being worn by players in scorching temperatures, I'll take it with a pinch of salt.


Rubbish. They're entitled to speak out if something bothers them, and if I was a Widnes player convinced the ipitch had cut my legs and arms to ribbons I'd be a bit concerned. Let's not forget Wakefield players also made the same point.

Besides, whether you think they should have spoken out is irrelevant. It's the subject of their complaints that is the issue.


Thanks for that advice. I think I've explained myself enough times. I'm not convinced by the ipitch and as it stands I think it was responsible for plenty of injuries on Friday - BUT - I'm happy to wait for a more temperate game before condemning it.

That clear enough?

According to Widnes' chief executive, Julie Gaskell, it went down to -7. Like I said, my car was only reading -5, so someone's thermometer was out a bit. Probably mine.

rlhttps://www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME

As no complaints have been made can we now purely refer to any players comments as 'moans'. Thanks in advance

People seem to be confusing the -10 is still playable thing with it not effecting the surface one bit. Technically Salford's pitch was 'playable' yet most would agree also affected.