Exile 1976 wrote:Stan A. Einstein wrote:rncfc wrote:Stan A. Einstein wrote:Blackandamber wrote:OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote:county37 wrote:can I just point out to the less enlightened on here, 3 degrees would have been the air temperature, the ground would have a lot colder hence slippery pavements etc.
Exactly. Sure that many gardeners will tell you that meteorological air temp. readings of 3 degrees taken at 1.25 meters above ground can result in ground/grass frost.
That's because the ground has a much higher thermal capacity than the air. It takes longer to cool down than air and longer to heat up. At the start of winter when the air temperature falls to zero the ground stays above zero until there is a long cold spell. Then when the air temperature rises the ground stays frozen for a longer time.
That's correct. If the pitch was unplayable at 6-30 pm it was unplayable at midday, two o'clock, four o'clock and so on.
At least one person cocked up.
So now you're saying the club statement was a lie? Interesting. Just get over it man, a game was called off in the middle of winter - woopdy doo.
No. I am saying that the probability is that the earlier inspection was inadequate.
Nice to see that you are back and like so many others incapable of logical thought.
No Brendan, the referee and both managers were happy the pitch was playable in the earlier inspection.
Nice to see once again that you simply haven’t got a clue muc.
Both managers were happy the game was going ahead at five. Both managers were happy for the game to go ahead at 6-30. Nothing you have written takes away from my point.
Either the first inspection should have resulted in the game being called off or the second inspection wrongly called it off. My suspicion, and no more than that is that at five o'clock it was nearly dark. The floodlights may not have been on and the problematic corners of the pitch were missed.
No logical thought whatsoever. It's not nice to see for me, your lack of thought before posting is depressing.