‘Grossly unfair’ – 4 SPFL clubs question sporting integrity over plastic pitch projects

“In response to the proposal to ban artificial playing surfaces in the Scottish Premiership, over recent months we have sought constructive dialogue both with the SPFL’s Competitions Working Group (CWG) and directly with Scottish Premiership clubs.

“We have done so because we believe the proposal is fundamentally flawed on many levels and, if approved, will cause significant long-term damage to Scottish football by undermining sporting integrity, having a impact on the wider game and creating huge financial barriers to entry to the top league. We wholeheartedly support the desire of Premiership clubs to ensure that playing surfaces are always of high quality. why we have worked together to create what we believe to be a constructive and well-considered alternative proposal, which we are releasing today.

“We recently had the opportunity to present our ideas to the Competitions Working Group and Premiership clubs not involved in the CWG, and we thank them for taking the time to listen to us. We are, however, disappointed to learn that Premiership clubs intend to vote on a blanket ban on artificial surfaces from the 2026/27 season, and that none of the elements of our alternative proposal have been met. been adopted or integrated into their final proposal. .

“We are publishing our article today to promote public debate on the subject. We believe this decision has been poorly thought through and we do not believe it is acceptable for just twelve clubs to make this decision, which could have a lasting negative impact on Scottish football, as serious as the unfortunate 10,000 stadium rule -seat. We believe that all clubs with the ability and ambition to reach the Premiership should be encouraged to do so, without unnecessary obstacles being created to demotivate and deter them.

“Scotland is the northernmost non-arctic country in the world, and our climate is simply not always conducive to perfect grass pitches due to high rainfall levels, minimal sunshine and limited cover. high cloudiness. The costs associated with achieving the highest possible standard of grass pitches, all year round, could amount to over £750,000 per year, a significant percentage of which is attributed to electricity needed to power grass growing lights. This makes it very difficult for the majority of Scottish clubs to achieve the highest possible standard of playing surface as it is too expensive. There is no doubt that a top quality, UEFA approved artificial surface is far superior in every respect to an inferior turf pitch, which we regularly see during the winter months of football Scottish.

“We ask supporters and supporters groups of all clubs to read our newspaper and make their views known to their respective clubs. We believe our recommendations are reasonable, practical and proportionate to address the issue that Premiership clubs wish to address. These include strict criteria around the age and quality of the Premiership’s artificial pitches, significantly reduced usage and a robust testing regime, comparable to the standards required by UEFA for the Champions League, ensuring they always conform to the highest approved standards.

“Such criteria go well beyond the quality standards currently in force for artificial surfaces, so that a significant improvement in the quality of the pitch would be achieved immediately. There are currently no quality standards for grass pitches in the Premiership. “If Premiership clubs choose to move forward and vote for a blanket ban on all artificial surfaces, we are calling on them to establish a fund to support any club that achieves promotion to the Premiership, to cover the cost of implementing the level of turf pitch they want, which could cost between £1.2 million and £1.5 million.

“The planned increase in UEFA solidarity payments, currently around £6 million and expected to exceed £10 million, 100% of which currently goes exclusively to Premiership clubs, appears to be a ready-made source for financing such an initiative. Other countries, such as Germany, have already obtained agreement from UEFA to distribute solidarity funds below their top league, in order to improve the flow of funds within their football.

“The Dutch League has also introduced a grant fund, financed by clubs participating in European competitions, to which all clubs can apply to ensure a higher standard of grass pitch in their top league. We call on Scottish Premiership clubs to follow this example. Clubs with artificial surfaces invested huge sums of money in installing pitches and infrastructure, at a time when artificial pitches fully met the current criteria. The goalposts are now moved, without any consideration for the consequences of such a decision on many clubs who will not get a vote on the issue.

“We believe this is completely unfair and contrary to the solidarity promised in 2013, when the SPFL was created through the merger of the Scottish Premier League and the Scottish Football League. Indeed, these unilateral actions are strongly reminiscent of the old SPL. If this vote were to pass, we fear that no lessons will have been learned from past mistakes, particularly regarding the 10,000 stadium seat rule. If this is to be the case, financial support for the clubs concerned is essential, if there is to be any semblance of sporting integrity and justice in this decision.