is it me or USA MLS fields looks a lot smaller than the european fields.

[pico]

UEFA final and EURO 2008 fields seems a lot bigger than MLS field.

[durito]

Which stadium?

[pico]

KC vs CLB

[jtuck]

Dammit, you made me turn on an MLS game. It does look a little smaller but i think it has to do with the camera angle

[pico]

camera angle. MLS sucks. i rather watch japanese soccer than MLS.

[pavyracer]

The camera is much lower that the Euro because the stadium is practically empty and they don't want to show all the empty seats. It's bad publicity for the advertising sponsors.

[englishmike]

Pitch sizes in England vary from club-to-club, it's up to the individual club to mark their pitch how they want within certain dimensions. If a club have two good wingers on both sides they will have a wide pitch and play 'wide' football, teams without wingers will go narrower so their defence have less ground to cover. This link shows the info.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4200666.stm

[Sactown]

Pitch sizes in England vary from club-to-club, it's up to the individual club to mark their pitch how they want within certain dimensions. If a club have two good wingers on both sides they will have a wide pitch and play 'wide' football, teams without wingers will go narrower so their defence have less ground to cover. This link shows the info.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...nt/4200666.stm

Great info, I was always wondering how Englands fields alwaays looked way bigger. Interesting!

[pico]

Pitch sizes in England vary from club-to-club, it's up to the individual club to mark their pitch how they want within certain dimensions. If a club have two good wingers on both sides they will have a wide pitch and play 'wide' football, teams without wingers will go narrower so their defence have less ground to cover. This link shows the info.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...nt/4200666.stm

nice info

[englishmike]

For betting purposes, pitches can definetly influence the outcome of a game. A narrow pitch means the game will be played down the middle of the pitch and often become congested and making it very difficult to score. It's always a good move to check the dimensions of a pitch if you are taking the over on goals.

[pico]

For betting purposes, pitches can definetly influence the outcome of a game. A narrow pitch means the game will be played down the middle of the pitch and often become congested and making it very difficult to score. It's always a good move to check the dimensions of a pitch if you are taking the over on goals.

have you noticed norway division 2-3 games are very high scoring...8-0, 6-1 happens more frequently than you think. i wonder what are the dimensions of those fields.

[englishmike]

I'd say that would have more to do with the finances of one club against another but I wouldnt rule out pitch size, although when one team is eight goals better than the other I kinda think the pitch size could be irrelevent.

[pico]

norway games tend to have 3.5 totals...saw a 4.5 total once

[englishmike]

Serious? 4.5? I never bet Norway football, only because it takes so much fvckin time trying to find an even money edge in English, Scotish and Spanish i haven't got time. What order do you handicap your games, do you go straight to places like Norway or do you start with England/Spain?

[pico]

i start with japan, then russia, finland, denmark, norway, then czech, hungry, ireland, brazil...weekway ends with iceland. i don't bet north america soccer because they all suck.

sat and sundays, add germany, italy, france, england

uefa qualifyng games are on right now, i bet occasionally on my favorite clubs for fun.

[FedaMecan]

There are a lot of interesting stories about stadiums. For example the old Arsenal London stadium (till 2006 when they went in to the new emirates stadium) a lot of experts was sure that some teams just play bad in this stadium because it was a really small field to play.

[englishmike]

So when you're capping Russian, Finland, Denmark etc etc how do you know if a team has an edge or would be an attractive even money bet to you for example? The reason I ask that question is because within 3-4-5 weeks I feel I have some sort of handle on form, good teams, bad teams, home teams etc, i England and Spain, how do you do that with obscure euro football if youre not following it closely week-in-week-out....or do you follow it week-in-week-out? And if you do, how deep do you go or do you go strictly on league table and current form? Just wondered, I find this stuff interesting.

[englishmike]

There are a lot of interesting stories about stadiums. For example the old Arsenal London stadium (till 2006 when they went in to the new emirates stadium) a lot of experts was sure that some teams just play bad in this stadium because it was a really small field to play.

And conversely, when they went to the Emirates and had a bad patch right at the beginning, the papers said it must have something to do with the larger pitch.

[pico]

So when you're capping Russian, Finland, Denmark etc etc how do you know if a team has an edge or would be an attractive even money bet to you for example? The reason I ask that question is because within 3-4-5 weeks I feel I have some sort of handle on form, good teams, bad teams, home teams etc, i England and Spain, how do you do that with obscure euro football if youre not following it closely week-in-week-out....or do you follow it week-in-week-out? And if you do, how deep do you go or do you go strictly on league table and current form? Just wondered, I find this stuff interesting.

i look at their past perormance and bet small among across the board. worked out okay so far.

[pavyracer]

There are a lot of interesting stories about stadiums. For example the old Arsenal London stadium (till 2006 when they went in to the new emirates stadium) a lot of experts was sure that some teams just play bad in this stadium because it was a really small field to play.

I'm pretty sure the visiting teams at the stadium did not have a measuring tape.

[englishmike]

It's interesting to me because when I look on these forums and see posts by respected posters most of them say 66% is unatainable in the long run on sports and when it comes to baseball I think that's probably right but I do think if you do your homework,have an element of luck and generally pick home sides 66% in my opinion is attainable over a substantial length of time. 2-3 seems hard but 20-30 seems a lot easier, as does 40-60. Am I crazy?

[FedaMecan]

I'm pretty sure the visiting teams at the stadium did not have a measuring tape.

I don't think that this is so unimportant. When you look at statistics, Arsenals games gone bad at the beginning when they played agains verry run-intensive team, that don't play the same short-pass fame like Arsenal (this game was perfect for old stadium). This is not only my opinion.

[acw]

Very interesting thread!

Personally I did have a look at team/stadium dependent home team advantage, but could not find anything significant. There may still be something in it, but it will not be big.

For betting purposes, pitches can definetly influence the outcome of a game. A narrow pitch means the game will be played down the middle of the pitch and often become congested and making it very difficult to score. It's always a good move to check the dimensions of a pitch if you are taking the over on goals.

I will surely check if there is something into this.

[acw]

Hmmmmm!

englishmike,

Please have a look at the no. of goals that have been scored on White Hart Lane and then look at their pitch size.
Any comments?

[englishmike]

White Hart Lane is a big pitch and off the top of my head has a LOT of high scoring games.

[englishmike]

i think Tottenham are a good example. I think the better the team, the more the size of the pitch doesn't matter. Get 2 average teams on abig pitch and I think they'll be goals. I'm going to look into this.

[Dark Horse]

The size of the field is not adjusted to the home team, but can definitely play a factor when the players for the team are selected. I've always loved Barca's Nou Camp. Beautiful wide pitch, where it pays to stretch out the defense by playing with two wingers. That kind of spacing is ideal for triangles and, if the pitch is of good quality, quick one-touch passing. The other side of the coin, if I remember correctly, was Arsenal's old pitch. Highbury. Totally different game. Difficult for teams like Barca and Ajax, who prefer a wider field. For 4-4-2 teams that play a quick counter attack the width of the field is not that important. They don't have to create space but get it when the other team loses the ball. For them it's about quickness and, mostly, the length of the field. But for teams that like to play possession type soccer, and create space by quick passing, the width is very important. More so these days, when defenses have become very good at closing down space, than in the past.

[englishmike]

Very true. And teams with wingers will thrive on a wide pitch, especially if they have a big target man up-front (Peter Crouch)

[Dark Horse]

I kind of miss the old English style soccer. The kind that didn't fit in with the rest of Europe, but was always spectacular.

[englishmike]

Most of it was boring but it could be effective in domestic football but when those teams played in Europe they always lost. Skill and quick one-touch-passing will always beat the long ball game, that's why Manchester United are so good to watch. Whether you love them or hate them they play fantastic football.

[poetwarrior41]

camera angle. MLS sucks. i rather watch japanese soccer than MLS.

Whatever........The MLS Allstars are 4-0 against the world, and West Ham is going to be toast tomorrow! The best bet of the soccer year is the MLS All Stars, against whoever their playing. Ive lived rent free for the last last year off of the Chelsea game last year. I plan on living 2008/2009 after the West Ham game tomorrow.

MLS Allstars 3
West Ham 0

PS...... Their firm (fan club) got the shit kicked out of them on sunday! Please let those bitches go into Toronto popping that trash......

[englishmike]

Whatever........The MLS Allstars are 4-0 against the world, and West Ham is going to be toast tomorrow! The best bet of the soccer year is the MLS All Stars, against whoever their playing. Ive lived rent free for the last last year off of the Chelsea game last year. I plan on living 2008/2009 after the West Ham game tomorrow.

MLS Allstars 3
West Ham 0

PS...... Their firm (fan club) got the shit kicked out of them on sunday! Please let those bitches go into Toronto popping that trash......

Youre talking crap. I'm sure these boys don't even make the trip to pre-season friendlies, big game for you, not for them, you sound like a keyboard warrior, you're an embarassment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWGDXKSxjn0

[acw]

White Hart Lane is a big pitch

Are you sure?

http://soccerlens.com/premier-league-pitch-sizes/3683

[englishmike]

I'm shocked. Tottenham scored 46 goals at home last year (2nd highest, only 1 goal behind Man Utd ) and they conceded 34 ( 2nd highest and only 9 less than Derby who were cannon fodder for everyone and only got 11 total points) So what does this tell us? It tells us that Tottenham play expansive football that will result in a lot of goals scored but is so expansive they concede a lot as well. I would venture to guess, if you asked 100 people whether Tottenham have a large or small pitch, 90% would say large....which would be wrong. I'm not sure what these stats tell us other than Tottenham have a very average defence. Also, man City have the biggest and West Ham the smallest. Man City beat West ham 2-0 at West Ham and the score was 1-1 at Man City, so the team that plays on the biggest pitch(Man City) went to the team with the smallest pitch(West Ham) and won and in the reverse fixture, the team with the smallest pitch went to the team with the biggest pitch and got a draw. I've got a headache!

[max_asdf]

wow nice info in this thread