I posted, when we were last promoted, that we should go for the smallest legal pitch because of the running our midfield would be doing. I was informed that the PL has a stipulated size.
However I have just come across the link below and discovered they are not one size fits all. I note that we have good away records at the clubs with the smallest areas.
I was checking dimensions after Martin Tyler said Liverpool could be leggy after playing on the bigger pitch at Wembley. He’s correct in that it is 115yds long and 75yds long.
https://www.football-stadiums.co.uk/art ... same-size/

Pitch sizes have always been variable, witching specified maximum and minimum lengths / widths, haven’t they? I never thought that the Premier League had a set size, as you’re suggesting.

The PL allow less variation than some other competitions do.

Really surprised at that - Molineaux being smallest and us being in the group of second largest. Wonder whether it makes any difference at all? Must do to teams that press.

The laws of the game have pretty wide parameters on pitch size but I think there is a standard size for the PL - 115x75? However they will allow some variation if the actual playing area within a stadium isn’t big enough.

I definitely remember a few years ago when he was at Chelsea, Conte was moaning about it being difficult for his team to find space on our small pitch. It turned out it was slightly bigger than Stamford Bridge!

I think you could have a square pitch if you had the maximum width and minimum length, it would be 100 yards square.
(Obviously under the laws of the game, not Premier rules.)

scouseclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:13 pm

The laws of the game have pretty wide parameters on pitch size but I think there is a standard size for the PL - 115x75? However they will allow some variation if the actual playing area within a stadium isn’t big enough.

I definitely remember a few years ago when he was at Chelsea, Conte was moaning about it being difficult for his team to find space on our small pitch. It turned out it was slightly bigger than Stamford Bridge!

He wouldnt be the only one, I remember a prat of a pundit blaming the small Turf Moor pitch when Burnley beat Liverpool 2.0 when Vokes and Gray scored. He said the Liverpool players were "frightened to hit long passes in case they overhit them into the crowd".
That game was switched to TM from Anfield because the building of their new stand overran. Although the pitch was widened as part of their alterations, up until then...youve guessed it Liverpool had a smaller pitch than Burnley!

gawthorpe_view wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:18 pm

I think you could have a square pitch if you had the maximum width and minimum length, it would be 100 yards square.
(Obviously under the laws of the game, not Premier rules.)

The laws explicitly state that the pitch must be rectangular, so you could have an almost square pitch if you go minimum length and almost maximum width.

gawthorpe_view wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:18 pm

I think you could have a square pitch if you had the maximum width and minimum length, it would be 100 yards square.
(Obviously under the laws of the game, not Premier rules.)

The touchline must be longer than the goal-line.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... ld-of-play

gawthorpe_view wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:18 pm

I think you could have a square pitch if you had the maximum width and minimum length, it would be 100 yards square.
(Obviously under the laws of the game, not Premier rules.)

A square is a rectangle.

distortiondave wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 20, 2022 9:01 am

A square is a rectangle.

Yes a square meets the definition for a rectangle so that’s not the actual reason that a football pitch can’t be square. I should’ve been more specific, but then Hipper identified the other explicit part of the law about touchlines being longer than goal-lines.

I don’t believe the members of IFAB care much for the specifics of a square being technically a type of rectangle though, but I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody pointing it out to them made them include the line about touchlines being longer than goal-lines in a later draft.

distortiondave wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 20, 2022 9:01 am

A square is a rectangle.

Controversial.

This has the potential to blow up big time.

A square has four sides of equal length a rectangle does not.
Therefore it is not possible to have a square rectangle.

sox8595 wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 20, 2022 3:05 pm

A square has four sides of equal length a rectangle does not.
Therefore it is not possible to have a square rectangle.

According to this dd is right!

And they are both oblongs and parallelograms!!

https://www.twinkl.co.uk/teaching-wiki/rectangle

..... but you could have a pitch where each half is a square.

Hipper wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:15 pm

According to this dd is right!

Twas ever thus.

All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.

The same is true of toads and frogs.

Didn't this come up when we had Eyres and McMinn as wingers? Our home form was amazing and our away form was dreadful, and many thought it was because our home pitch had a lot more space for them

distortiondave wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:19 pm

Twas ever thus.

All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.

The same is true of toads and frogs.

I've never seen a frog OR a toad that was either square or rectangular.

That's why I'm saying this is a BLUFF.

distortiondave wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:19 pm

Twas ever thus.

All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.

The same is true of toads and frogs.

I've been told I'm a square but no-one's ever called me a rectangle.

Hipper wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 20, 2022 6:34 pm

I've been told I'm a square but no-one's ever called me a rectangle.

Is that because you're an oblong?