The Turf War Returns

paulsurovell said:

 Perhaps you missed it, but I modified the facts in my opinion/analysis to take this into account a couple of days ago.

The obvious flaw is its irrelevance. 

jamie said:

paulsurovell said:

 I've posted multiple times that Vic made this statement just before he called for a fast-track to approve the ordinance. He made the statement during the 5-19-21 TC meeting, if you want the rest of his comments.

Most notable among his comments was that the TC shouldn't waste time on studies because if they did, Lembrich would be gone by the time they voted and they needed 4 votes to pass a bond ordinance.

At the time, Jamaine Cripe was slated to take Lembrich's place in Jan, and she had made it clear that she would be a second vote against turf.

Jamaine and Nancy's election to the TC was the other great result of the election last week. If you recall, I posted their call for a No vote, when I joined this thread. I'm very much looking forward to her serving on the TC. She and Nancy ran on the slogan "For the people, for the planet". Exactly the outlook that we need in this time of climate emergency.

 ok, so you admit that you never include Deluca's follow up comment when posting the other.  How many days apart were the two quotes?

In posting Vic's excellent summary that DeHart is the only Green Space in Hilton (and his references to the census tracts) I was very clear multiple times that this summary preceded his call for the TC to fast-track the bond ordinance to pay for an artificial turf field. 

DaveSchmidt said:

paulsurovell said:

 Perhaps you missed it, but I modified the facts in my opinion/analysis to take this into account a couple of days ago.

The obvious flaw is its irrelevance. 

What is this relevant to?

How many days apart were the quotes?

jamie said:

Time will tell.  I'm guessing the pro grass team already has some sort of a plan in place.  

I can safely say we are all pro grass at this point.  I want to hear what wizardry can squeeze additional playing time out of the current fields.

paulsurovell said:

 I've posted multiple times that Vic made this statement just before he called for a fast-track to approve the ordinance. He made the statement during the 5-19-21 TC meeting, if you want the rest of his comments.

Most notable among his comments was that the TC shouldn't waste time on studies because if they did, Lembrich would be gone by the time they voted and they needed 4 votes to pass a bond ordinance.

At the time, Jamaine Cripe was slated to take Lembrich's place in Jan, and she had made it clear that she would be a second vote against turf.

Jamaine and Nancy's election to the TC was the other great result of the election last week. If you recall, I posted their call for a No vote, when I joined this thread. I'm very much looking forward to her serving on the TC. She and Nancy ran on the slogan "For the people, for the planet". Exactly the outlook that we need in this time of climate emergency.

I also think the election of Jamaine and Nancy was a great thing for the township. But before we attribute reasons for their victory we shoukd acknowledge that they ran unopposed. 

tjohn said:

jamie said:

Time will tell.  I'm guessing the pro grass team already has some sort of a plan in place.  

I can safely say we are all pro grass at this point.  I want to hear what wizardry can squeeze additional playing time out of the current fields.

 There are two simple steps and third that would take more effort, to improve the field and increase playing time, without any wizardry.

(1) Stop automatic irrigation and fix broken sprinklers, both of which caused flooding at DeHart a couple of weeks ago.

https://www.stma.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/EffectiveWaterUse-updated.pdf

Let the turf and soil tell you when to water – don’t
just set the controller to water every few days.
Setting the controller to “Auto” and letting it go often
leads to overwatering and inefficient water use and
shallow, weak roots

rotation of play is vital, keeping in contact with the coaches and ensuring they are rotating around the field and not using the same areas over and over.

These three measures are a start. But most important, all measures to improve the field as well as general management of the field should be handled by a professional grass turf field manager.

paulsurovell said:

 There are two simple steps and third that would take more effort, to improve the field and increase playing time, without any wizardry.

(1) Stop automatic irrigation and fix broken sprinklers, both of which caused flooding at DeHart a couple of weeks ago.

(2) Rotate the direction and position of the playing field. Has not been a regular practice at DeHart:

(3) This isn't as simple as the above measures, but soil in some areas of the field is compacted, and there are standard best-practice measures to address it:

.

Number 1 seems like common sense.  I could say that about more than few homeowners as well.

Field rotation in Dehart sounds like wizardry to me unless I am not understanding the Google maps picture of the field.

Number 3 makes sense too.  Are the playing fields currently taken out of circulation in December and covered with greenhouse plastic until March as is the playing field in Memorial Park?

Now I am assuming that you have done the research in the course of your principled opposition to turf and can quantify the increased availability we can expect from these steps.

tjohn said:

Field rotation in Dehart sounds like wizardry to me unless I am not understanding the Google maps picture of the field.

The passage in the article isn’t really about rotating the fields themselves. It’s about rotating play on the fields — mostly using different parts for practices, I guess. (Because play during games happens where it happens, right?) There’s also a mention of shifting fields a few yards in one direction or another.

paulsurovell said:

(2) Rotate the direction and position of the playing field. Has not been a regular practice at DeHart:

A large portion of the DeHart playing area is an outfield. Outfields can’t be shifted a few yards in one direction or another, and the positioning of outfielders is fairly standard, so they’re going to take their toll no matter what.

ETA: If you, Paul, unlike the article, really are suggesting rotating the fields themselves, see tjohn’s comment about wizardry. That fixed-in-place ballfield is a sizable complication. But maybe you have a geometric solution already in mind.

DaveSchmidt said:

tjohn said:

Field rotation in Dehart sounds like wizardry to me unless I am not understanding the Google maps picture of the field.

The passage in the article isn’t really about rotating the fields themselves. It’s about rotating play on the fields — mostly using different parts for practices, I guess. (Because play during games happens where it happens, right?) There’s also a mention of shifting fields a few yards in one direction or another.

paulsurovell said:

(2) Rotate the direction and position of the playing field. Has not been a regular practice at DeHart:

A large portion of the DeHart playing area is an outfield. Outfields can’t be shifted a few yards in one direction or another, and the positioning of outfielders is fairly standard, so they’re going to take their toll no matter what.

 If field rotation means fallow time, then that cuts into availability in a big way.  

tjohn said:

 If field rotation means fallow time, then that cuts into availability in a big way.  

Here’s what the article says about rotation:

Obviously the key to keeping a good stand of grass is a multifaceted answer. First of all, rotation of play is vital, keeping in contact with the coaches and ensuring they are rotating around the field and not using the same areas over and over. Limiting field usage (no 18-yard box) during smaller events can at least ensure that the 18-yard boxes are in prime condition for games. If you have enough room, moving the pitch a few yards to the left or right. This changes the wear pattern since most of MLS soccer plays down the middle of the field, it also moves where the goalkeeper is standing. 

Nothing about rotating “the direction” of fields, and nothing about baseball/softball fields.

DaveSchmidt said:

tjohn said:

 If field rotation means fallow time, then that cuts into availability in a big way.  

Here’s what the article says about rotation:

Obviously the key to keeping a good stand of grass is a multifaceted answer. First of all, rotation of play is vital, keeping in contact with the coaches and ensuring they are rotating around the field and not using the same areas over and over. Limiting field usage (no 18-yard box) during smaller events can at least ensure that the 18-yard boxes are in prime condition for games. If you have enough room, moving the pitch a few yards to the left or right. This changes the wear pattern since most of MLS soccer plays down the middle of the field, it also moves where the goalkeeper is standing. 

Nothing about rotating “the direction” of fields, and nothing about baseball/softball fields.

I suspect that at least some of the people making suggestions about moving the playing fields around and re-orienting them don't really know much about sports.

ml1 said:

I suspect that at least some of the people making suggestions about moving the playing fields around and re-orienting them don't really know much about sports.

Or they hate baseball and softball and this is their strategy for removing the diamond.

(I’m joking. I think.)

DaveSchmidt said:

tjohn said:

Field rotation in Dehart sounds like wizardry to me unless I am not understanding the Google maps picture of the field.

The passage in the article isn’t really about rotating the fields themselves. It’s about rotating play on the fields — mostly using different parts for practices, I guess. (Because play during games happens where it happens, right?) There’s also a mention of shifting fields a few yards in one direction or another.

paulsurovell said:

(2) Rotate the direction and position of the playing field. Has not been a regular practice at DeHart:

A large portion of the DeHart playing area is an outfield. Outfields can’t be shifted a few yards in one direction or another, and the positioning of outfielders is fairly standard, so they’re going to take their toll no matter what.

ETA: If you, unlike the article, really are suggesting rotating the fields themselves, see tjohn’s comment about wizardry. That fixed-in-place ballfield is a sizable complication. But maybe you have a geometric solution already in mind.

Yes by "rotating the direction" I meant rotating the direction of play, although this is really semantics. I'm not suggesting anything different than the links that I posted. The irrigation recommendations address a real breakdown in management at DeHart which caused the field to be soaked even though there was no rain. I don't think rotation is necessary for the baseball field.

ml1 said:

I suspect that at least some of the people making suggestions about moving the playing fields around and re-orienting them don't really know much about sports.

 You mean the Sports Turf Management Association?

Edited to correct a spelling error.

ml1 said:

DaveSchmidt said:

tjohn said:

 If field rotation means fallow time, then that cuts into availability in a big way.  

Here’s what the article says about rotation:

Obviously the key to keeping a good stand of grass is a multifaceted answer. First of all, rotation of play is vital, keeping in contact with the coaches and ensuring they are rotating around the field and not using the same areas over and over. Limiting field usage (no 18-yard box) during smaller events can at least ensure that the 18-yard boxes are in prime condition for games. If you have enough room, moving the pitch a few yards to the left or right. This changes the wear pattern since most of MLS soccer plays down the middle of the field, it also moves where the goalkeeper is standing. 

Nothing about rotating “the direction” of fields, and nothing about baseball/softball fields.

I suspect that at least some of the people making suggestions about moving the playing fields around and re-orienting them don't really know much about sports.

 Bingo !

Dennis_Seelbach said:

 Bingo !

 Is that what you're doing in South Carolina?

paulsurovell said:

Yes by "rotating the direction" I meant rotating the direction of play, although this is really semantics. I'm not suggesting anything different than the links that I posted. The irrigation recommendations address a real breakdown in management at DeHart which caused the field to be soaked even though there was no rain. I don't think rotation is necessary for the baseball field.

The irrigation thing is a red herring.   While obviously the system should be maintained properly and only activated when soil moisture indicates a need, it is not a long-term core issue.

Field rotation at Dehart Park, if by which you mean orientation, would seem to be a non-starter given the small space to work with.

Field rotation, if by which you mean downtime, is, in effect, already practiced by the Rec Department.  Downtime which is required of any grass field  means less playing time.

So, for the most part, you carrying on about better field management is kind of like the project management line of b.s. where we say we will work smarter when we are behind on a project.

paulsurovell said:

Yes by "rotating the direction" I meant rotating the direction of play, although this is really semantics.

“Rotate the direction and position of the playing field.” Careful reading at your semantic service!

paulsurovell said:

Dennis_Seelbach said:

 Bingo !

 Is that what you're doing in South Carolina?

 nope...playing golf & trying to get rid of gov McDumbass & Lyin Timmy. Thanks for asking.

paulsurovell said:

ml1 said:

I suspect that at least some of the people making suggestions about moving the playing fields around and re-orienting them don't really know much about sports.

 You mean the Sports Turf Management Association?

Edited to correct a spelling error.

No Paul, you should reach out to the STMA and describe the specific challenges facing the Maplewood Rec Dept.  Moving playing fields around is a non-starter at Dehart.

paulsurovell said:

ml1 said:

I suspect that at least some of the people making suggestions about moving the playing fields around and re-orienting them don't really know much about sports.

 You mean the Sports Turf Management Association?

Edited to correct a spelling error.

whose work you didn't represent properly from a semantic perspective

tjohn said:

No Paul, you should reach out to the STMA and describe the specific challenges facing the Maplewood Rec Dept. Moving playing fields around is a non-starter at Dehart.

Paul has clarified, I believe, that he means the direction of play on fields that can be shifted a few yards left or right, not moving fields around in different configurations.

What “rotating the direction of play” entails in a soccer game on a slightly shifted field, I’m still trying to comprehend.

DaveSchmidt said:

Paul has clarified, I believe, that he means the direction of play on fields that can be shifted a few yards left or right, not moving fields around in different configurations.

What “rotating the direction of play” entails in a soccer game on a slightly shifted field, I’m still trying to comprehend.

 I was more puzzled with how that idea would work for baseball/softball.  

DaveSchmidt said:

tjohn said:

No Paul, you should reach out to the STMA and describe the specific challenges facing the Maplewood Rec Dept. Moving playing fields around is a non-starter at Dehart.

Paul has clarified, I believe, that he means the direction of play on fields that can be shifted a few yards left or right, not moving fields around in different configurations.

What “rotating the direction of play” entails in a soccer game on a slightly shifted field, I’m still trying to comprehend.

Current configuration is for one full-size field and one small field which are side by side in the grass portion of DeHart.  There are often games that run simultaneously on both fields.  It's not as simple as saying shift one field if a certain area is too wet.  This could result in overlapping fields which is problematic.

ml1 said:

I was more puzzled with how that idea would work for baseball/softball.

Me, too, until Paul added that he didn’t think it was necessary for those sports.

I personally favor a offset rotation for football fields.  The way this works is that the field of play is divided into 10 yard bands along the yard lines.  Each band is then offset from the next by 10 yards first to the right and then to the left and so on.  You vary this between games to lighten the load on the grass.

For baseball and softball, according to Paul's best practices, you just locate the outfield wherever tf you want to - even another park if you want.

This is all from Paul's book of turf **** and wizardry which you can use to argue that a well-maintained grass field can be as available as a turf field.

yahooyahoo said:

It's not as simple as saying shift one field if a certain area is too wet. 

The idea is not about weather mitigation, to shift if one area is too wet. It’s a maintenance idea: Shift for practices or as games allow to spread out wear on the grass.

DaveSchmidt said:

yahooyahoo said:

It's not as simple as saying shift one field if a certain area is too wet. 

The idea is not about weather mitigation, to shift if one area is too wet. It’s a maintenance idea: Shift for practices or as games allow to spread out wear on the grass.

 Kind of implies you have space to shift too.  For Dehart, however, it could have a welcome balancing effect.  Instead of the middle areas of the fields being muddy, the entire field can now be muddy.

tjohn said:

I personally favor a offset rotation for football fields.  The way this works is that the field of play is divided into 10 yard bands along the yard lines.  Each band is then offset from the next by 10 yards first to the right and then to the left and so on.  You vary this between games to lighten the load on the grass.

For baseball and softball, according to Paul's best practices, you just locate the outfield wherever tf you want to - even another park if you want.

This is all from Paul's book of turf **** and wizardry which you can use to argue that a well-maintained grass field can be as available as a turf field.

 and the fields will be maintained organically by grazing unicorns, whose rainbow manure will fertilize the turf, resulting in indestructible, perfectly uniform playing surfaces!