28 Mar 2003 by me
pitch of the year
i have just read darrens article on the subject and i do feel a lot of sympathy for him for the reasons he has stated are quite accurate.i for one believe that it should be renamed pitch of the year rather than the groundsman of the year because it is not just one person that looks after the majority of pitches and this can be frustrating for the other members of staff i would imagine who come over from the training ground to help out or the stadium staff who help the actual head groundsman.the best thing i think as darren said would be to ask all the groundsmen up and down the country,or maybe pitchcare could do a voting section each week for each division with the winning groundstaff and not just the head groundsman getting a certificate-its not about the money and free holidays its is just about having the hard work appreciated and recognised-there are far more deserving people out there than we realise.
28 Mar 2003 by Robbo
competion
I was both ammused and embaresed when I found out that we had been nominated for groundsman of the year. Our pitch this season has not been as good as it was last season and certainly since christmas it has been one of the worst surfaces I have looked after. Their is a whole list of reasons why the pitch has been so bad which I wont go into, surfice to say refferees and managers who judge this competition are not aware of these problems so I fail to see how on appearence my pitch could be nominated.
It seems that the managers probably have a letter thrust on their desk asking them to nominate a pitch, I guess that a lot of them have little or no time to think about the best pitch and this letter gets passed on to some one else, and that as we have a nice stadium and last year and the first part of the season a good surface we get nominated.
I agree that the judging should be changed, I feel that it would be best to get to a final three by asking the league groundsmen who know what their piers are having to deal with should be asked. I understand why referees are asked and I believe their criteria is marks out of 5 for before, during and after a match which is great but I have never seen a referee look back at the pitch after the final whistle.
Let the groundsmen decide on the final 3 and let the STRI decide on a winner.
28 Mar 2003 by Clive
Groundsman of the year
Whilst i agree with Darren about how the award is made i feel that it should be the best pitch award along with the division the team play in.
Groundsman of the year award should encompass all sports from schools to the local sports club which can have very good groundsmen.
Perhaps this is an area were local branch IOG can take a roll and then up through the system till just a few are left and then a decision made taking into account budget and equipment. There should be a panel that oversees the final decision with unannounced visits to the grounds made.
There are enough people who do care about our profession to pull off something.
Then we would have an award that really is Groundsman of the year.
28 Mar 2003 by me
again
do they have this problem in other sports?ie rugby,cricket?
28 Mar 2003 by cp
"local pitches"
the FA and IOG do have nominations for the local leagues and schools pitches and they are judged by appointed groundsman who know the criteria in maintaining pitches.Which are being judged at the moment.
However in regards to the professional football club the judging is done (initially) by "untrained, been in the game" personnel, then the STRI drop in to make a decision on the final three nominees. Based on rescources,games/training sessions,environment,staff and the groundsman's skill.
The timing of these nominations are too early and should be done at the end of April when majority of the games have been played. The award is not received by the winner until Saltex in September anyway.
29 Mar 2003 by fred
sour grapes
well i agree with all! but is this sour grapes?? some one has to win why not one of the three. to be fair my old council pitch looks better than two of them. oh well we all have to keep on cutting and waiting for the next subject to moan about. Maybe the IOG verus pitch care? does the result of this make any difference anyway myself and many others know what this trade is like, people kissing butt get far, there are many colourful people out there in the wrong jobs. I recon if you do any job in this trade and do it to the best of your budget and resorces you should be the best g man in the country ! SCRAP THE AWARD AND HAVE A YEARLY PARTY! AWARDING ALL THE GUYS AND DOLLS WHO MAKE SPORT PLYERBLE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR!!!!
29 Mar 2003 by me
fred
but dare you say which two arent as good as your council pitch?????????
30 Mar 2003 by fred
me
sorry me didnt mean to upset anyone, I feel i cant and couldnt comment on any of the aboves qualities (i dont wk for the IOG and dont know anything about what the football groundsman has to go through to achieve every week, i can imagine the hardship hassles from mangers etc.) i do feel for all in this position but do belive that there should be only one winner here all of us groundsmen whatever the sport (unless there is simalar competions set up for all types of sports including schools to golf courses) Lets just have a big party get drunk talk a load of S--t about grass and all be a winner. Good luck to all FRED x
31 Mar 2003 by Turfman
Voting
I understand where Darren is coming from on this matter. I don't think that most football club managers treat this a seriously as we think they should. There are a number of ways to make this fairer but I think that the STRI should have more of a say at the initial judging rather than Dr.Baker visiting the division winners at the end. I propose that all the regional agronomists at the STRI should visit their clubs and then tot up with their colleagues the best three in that division. You are then getting an unbiased opinion of these experts and a much fairer result. It shouldn't be left to groundsman alone as you might get a ' I'll vote for you if vote for me scenario '
31 Mar 2003 by Dave
agree
well said fred
4 Apr 2003 by me
this bloody award!
i think the point which really gets to me is that it is called the groundsman of the year and not pitch of the year-the work is not just done by one person but by many,alright it may be the head groundsmans responsibility but that does not neccessarily mean it should just be awarded to him as the other people who help out work on their own initiative at times-i am very fortunate that the groundsman that i work for is very appreciative of the work that each and every one of the staff put in to the pitch,right down to the lad who gets rid of the grass clippings and is always encouraging us to do what we feel is right and is prepared to listen to our opinions and admit that one of the lads may have a different idea or approach which may be better than his.also random,unannounced visits from the stri would be a waste of time as at times everyone may be at the training ground/in meetings/seminars/courses so then a wasted visit is made and possibly false assumptions by the person visiting.
it would be nice to keep this award going but we all know that the more it is done in its present format,the more people will lose interest.
if anyone thinks that this is another whinging groundsman moaning because he hasnt been nominated then they are wrong,because we have and even i recognise the need for change despite our nomination whether we or any other club warrant it.
Back to Top - Go to Next Unread Message
This Message is closed, you may not post a reply at this time
