Did anyone else notice that the pitch markings seemed to be in Yards and not metres?


The pitch is marked out for about three different sports, all in different colours but the 10 YARD yellow soccer centre circle was touching both the white 10 METRE rugby lines. In dual use stadia in the UK there is always a gap since metres are longer than yards, which means that either the 10 yard circle is really a 10 metre circle (pretty unlikely) or more likely the rugby pitch is marked in yards not metres as required under the laws of the game. Oh dear, I'd have expected Nobby to notice that..

Doesn't really matter. its the same for both sides.

It does matter it's against the rules . How do you tell if a kick off has gone 10 metres when the lines are in yards? You really can't have teams doing their own thing on the basics, surely?

To be fair 10m at Cas's ground isn't what 10m is at Wigans. The pitch markings do need sorting but i had to laugh at some of the moans on twitter, considering the state of some of the grounds some SL teams play at, to have the cheek to moan Toronto looked amateurish because of the markings.

Nah mate it doesn't really. Whats the dirrence it actual distance between 10 yards and metres, minimal at best. As long as the game is officiated consistently for both sides on the day and there's no advantage being gained then it really doesn't matter imo.

Those people seem to think that a club which is about 2 years old should have it's own ground that they don't share with anyone else. Hardly any of the Super League clubs have that! It's just that Toronto's ground happens to be shared with a football team and what looked like maybe Hockey? It appears to be an artificial pitch too, which means repainting it repeatedly just isn't practical. I thought the different colours for the different sports worked fine, you could clearly see which were the irrelevant lines.

Admittedly I didn't notice the difference in yards and metres. As much as I understand Bulls4Champs' point about it not making much difference, you could use the same argument for someone grounding the ball just short of the line. Do you say "Well the rules say it has to be on or over the line, but it's close enough, let them have it"? Rules are rules and if you start to ignore one, you may as well ignore the others.

The difference is almost a metre. That’s a considerable amount.

If we lodge an appeal can we replay the Worky game?

10m at Cas's ground is EXACTLY the same as 10m at Wigan's ground.

And we still wouldn't win!!

=#FFFFFFI'm sure nobody will swallow this but here goes
It's not though, as Wigan is further south than Cas so rotates slightly faster with the spin of the globe. This means time passes slightly slower in Cas than in Wigan and due to relativistic effects distances in Wigan are slightly compressed so 10 metres in Cas is actually further

Explains how Cas have the space to chuck it about more at home.

Time appears to tick slower and distances appear compressed as speed increases, but only (relatively) to someone watching from somewhere else. TBH though it would appear that both those places are moving faster than most since whenever you visit either it would seem that time has not moved on for quite a while......

Distance is a scalar measure and is a constant. It does not change relative to velocity.

Time is relative though. In Castleford, it's still only 1975.

Quote ="dboy"Distance is a scalar measure and is a constant. It does not change relative to velocity. Time is relative though. In Castleford, it's still only 1975.'" I suggest you try reading, for example, Special Relativity: For the Enthusiastic Beginner or even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction [i"Length contraction is the phenomenon that a moving object's length is measured to be shorter than its proper length, which is the length as measured in the object's own rest frame.[1 This contraction (also known as Lorentz contraction or Lorentz–FitzGerald contraction after Hendrik Lorentz and George Francis FitzGerald) is usually only noticeable at a substantial fraction of the speed of light. Length contraction is only in the direction in which the body is travelling. For standard objects, this effect is negligible at everyday speeds, and can be ignored for all regular purposes, only becoming significant as the object approaches the speed of light relative to the observer." [/i

Quote ="dboy"Distance is a scalar measure and is a constant. It does not change relative to velocity. Time is relative though. In Castleford, it's still only 1975.'" I suggest you try reading, for example, Special Relativity: For the Enthusiastic Beginner or even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction [i"Length contraction is the phenomenon that a moving object's length is measured to be shorter than its proper length, which is the length as measured in the object's own rest frame.[1 This contraction (also known as Lorentz contraction or Lorentz–FitzGerald contraction after Hendrik Lorentz and George Francis FitzGerald) is usually only noticeable at a substantial fraction of the speed of light. Length contraction is only in the direction in which the body is travelling. For standard objects, this effect is negligible at everyday speeds, and can be ignored for all regular purposes, only becoming significant as the object approaches the speed of light relative to the observer." [/i

Quote ="Mr Dog"I suggest you try reading, for example, Special Relativity: For the Enthusiastic Beginner or even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction [i"Length contraction is the phenomenon that a moving object's length is measured to be shorter than its proper length, which is the length as measured in the object's own rest frame.[1 This contraction (also known as Lorentz contraction or Lorentz–FitzGerald contraction after Hendrik Lorentz and George Francis FitzGerald) is usually only noticeable at a substantial fraction of the speed of light. Length contraction is only in the direction in which the body is travelling. For standard objects, this effect is negligible at everyday speeds, and can be ignored for all regular purposes, only becoming significant as the object approaches the speed of light relative to the observer." [/i'" Can you please add a punchline that is as funny as dboys?

Quote ="Mr Dog"I suggest you try reading, for example, Special Relativity: For the Enthusiastic Beginner or even https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction [i"Length contraction is the phenomenon that a moving object's length is measured to be shorter than its proper length, which is the length as measured in the object's own rest frame.[1 This contraction (also known as Lorentz contraction or Lorentz–FitzGerald contraction after Hendrik Lorentz and George Francis FitzGerald) is usually only noticeable at a substantial fraction of the speed of light. Length contraction is only in the direction in which the body is travelling. For standard objects, this effect is negligible at everyday speeds, and can be ignored for all regular purposes, only becoming significant as the object approaches the speed of light relative to the observer." [/i'" Can you please add a punchline that is as funny as dboys?

A six-year-old boy spotted Albert Einstein walking down the street and decided to try out his favourite joke on him. "Mr Einstein! Why did the chicken cross the road?"

To which the famous physicist replied, "My young burgeoning mind, zee question does not have a definite anzer. Vether zee chicken crossed zee road or zee road crossed zee chicken depends on your frame of reference."

We do not understand time - it's a theoretical construct. Distance we do

As Professor Brian Cox points out - "The distance between the two points is the same - it’s given by what’s known as the metric, which describes the Earth’s surface. The travel time is usually shorter West-East...a consequence of the rotation of the Earth".

10 metres is 10 metres, wherever you are!

A point on the Equator "travels faster", than a point in the UK, in the sense that it has gone "further", in the same amount of time...but it's all, as they say, "relative".

So if your pitch is laid North South does it take less time to pass the ball to one wing than it does the other? Obviously this will then need adjusting in the second half.

This is some outstanding thread drift.

Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

Indeed, but at this point in our season we're in serious [ineed[/i of a diversion.. any diversion.

What I want to know is whether the Toronto pitch would have made Chris Joynt more likely to fall over.

We do, but it is not as you claim. Cox was talking about local conditions. At near light speeds, all relativistic effects come increasingly into play, and the faster you go, the shorter the distance it is to get there. Until, at the speed of light, the distance to anywhere in the Universe is Nil.

As latitude increases so does the Earth's outward centrifugal force which counteracts gravity, thus reducing the apparent downward acceleration of falling objects.

Manchester at a latitude of 53.48°N is closer to the North Pole than Toronto (43.65°N). Thus the sight of Chris Joynt VOLUNTARILY falling to earth in front of his own posts would actually be EASIER to spot for an incompetent RFL official at Old Trafford than at Lamport Stadium.

I'm unsure as to how the difference in latitude would have effected Mick Wither's PHANTOM knock-on.