4evablu wrote: ↑Mon Nov 03, 2025 11:54 am
i think taking the knee is a load of bollox tbh...but would never boo it....
symbolism in football is a bit of double standards i think....taking the knee was throughout time always seen as a sign subservience...so why do it for "against racism" ?
taking your shirt off to celebrate...brings a booking as showing your torso off is frowned upon in some religions....yet players of certain religions can kneel down pointing skywards and praying is allowed....players can make the sign of the cross when going on the pitch....aren't these signs of racism ?
In sport/football don't highlight them...just let them happen..if players wish to do any of them...let them get on with it....
I think there's a benefit to players taking the knee tbh, it's great when a young kid asks why they're doing it and you can then explain to them about racism and discrimination.
Does it stop people being racist? No, and I think the longer it's been done the less impact it has... but I still think there's a place for it even if it's just to educate younger people who are the people you'd hope create a more tolerant society down the line.
That's probably a bit of a eutopian view on things as kids of racist parents are going to adopt their values, and we've seen with politics worldwide we're heading in the completely wrong direction, but I dunno... every little helps imo.
The new stadium will surely be hosting more big matches soon. With Everton only playing once at home next April, Hill Dickinson looks likely to host a triple header – Challenge Cup semi-finals and England v France women – next season, and it must be high up the list of potential venues for the Kiwis’ tour in 2027.
It's funny seeing the amount of people who still think pitches are out of the 70s and 80s and moaning about the pitch getting torn up. Totally forgetting that rugby pitches all around the country get played on every week, modern hybrid football pitches host NFL games and all cope perfectly well with a bit of extra wear and tear, plus it was rugby league so not like there's 16 men shoving in different directions for scrums.
I think as a fanbase some are really struggling at times to adapt to having a new stadium and all the events that can attract and ultimately bring more money in for the club.
I still want Saturday 3pm kick offs though but that's got fuck all to do with the stadium.
That the pitch was only 94 metres try line to try line, rather than the minimum standard of 100, I would have thought was a bit of an issue, especially for an international match. Perhaps no suprise it was a low scoring game.
I wonder if the lack of line marking was also due to not wanting to further highlight this as the players were not consistently brought back the 10m after each tackle, as the ref had little visual help to enforce it.
I get we want fans right next to the pitch for our games, but maybe a bit of an oversight if HD is looking to host other sports like RL.
NFL has shorter pitch requirement so wouldn't be that much of an issue if its ever played there.
Cods wrote: ↑Wed Nov 05, 2025 7:43 pm
That the pitch was only 94 metres try line to try line, rather than the minimum standard of 100, I would have thought was a bit of an issue, especially for an international match. Perhaps no suprise it was a low scoring game.
I wonder if the lack of line marking was also due to not wanting to further highlight this as the players were not consistently brought back the 10m after each tackle, as the ref had little visual help to enforce it.
I get we want fans right next to the pitch for our games, but maybe a bit of an oversight if HD is looking to host other sports like RL.
NFL has shorter pitch requirement so wouldn't be that much of an issue if its ever played there.
94m is the minimum, and the HD is 105 end-to-end. Sure, the in goal areas were smaller than you typically see but the pitch (playing area) was fine.
There's plenty of moaning in the Aussie media re: markings (standard) but that surely is just to do with the fact that it's first and foremost purpose is as a football stadium, and when we play there we don't want to be seeing RL markings, especially based on a one off game (not a scenario like at Wigan where there is an acceptance that it's a shared ground/pitch)
Jamokachi wrote: ↑Thu Nov 06, 2025 11:24 pm
94m is the minimum, and the HD is 105 end-to-end. Sure, the in goal areas were smaller than you typically see but the pitch (playing area) was fine.
There's plenty of moaning in the Aussie media re: markings (standard) but that surely is just to do with the fact that it's first and foremost purpose is as a football stadium, and when we play there we don't want to be seeing RL markings, especially based on a one off game (not a scenario like at Wigan where there is an acceptance that it's a shared ground/pitch)
I take your points, but think when guidelines for adult play is near as possible to 100m between goallines, especially in an international game I just think its a bit poor. (not that I'm from League territory anyway).
94 is apparently miminum for Union so hopefully we'll get a few of their games.
I'm not sure how other sports would take it, would NFL be happy with less than 120 yards total? It's not like it would have been as bad as the Hammers stadium to accomodate it.
Presume you'd be familiar with Clarke and Dawe even if this was likely before your time here.
