Mark Milligan does a Delap aiming for Josh Kennedy’s head in the penalty box.

From the resultant scramble, Timmy scores the goal that sends us through.

Gee Vincentin, Kenny Murphy…that’s going back a bit. I can’t remember him much as a player, but from memory he might have coached the Knights (Melbourne Croatia) in the NSL.

Tony, I am of a vintage when I remember every time Australia got a throw-in anywhere near the penalty area the commentators would trot out ” and here come’s Australia’s long throw specialist, Kenny Murphy”. I still cringe when I hear the words “long throw”. Yes, Rory is very effective etc etc but it just brings back horrible memories.

Like you, it is interesting that his throws only really came to light last season given that he’s been knocking-about in the epl with Southampton and Sunderland for much of the decade.

With an Oz context in mind, I often cringe when I see Mark Milligan lining up for a ‘Delap’ – very ineffective in my mind.

I reckon it’s great that every now and then, someone or a team can pull a rabbit out of the hat and do something that we’ve never seen before (I honestly can’t remember any player coming remotely close to doing what Delap could do).

Also, I’m all for taking defenders out of their comfort zone!!

Players work on their free kicks, but you only want about two free kick takers. Some young uns should be working on their throws too.

It doesn’t have to be ugly football either, by having the ability to throw to the otherside of the field you open up more space and are more likley to be able to get the balll too the feet of a team mate in space.

The other impressive thing about playing Stoke is the home support. They are by far the noisiest lot in the EPL.

It will be interesting to see how things go for them this season.

I remember Arsene Wenger being pretty livid after losing away to two Rory Delap missiles early in the season (Arsenal really struggled to defend them and lost 2-1), but of course, when Stoke visited the Emirates on the last day of the season they copped a 4-1 hiding.

From memory the tactic was very effective in the first half of the season, but teams might have worked out how to more effectively defend the tactic later in the season.

What are the rules for ground dimensions in League? I thought the length would be fairly standard?

In aussie rules, the size and shape of grounds is of a bewildering variablity.

Obviously they are all oval, but some are more oval than others!!

For instance, the MCG is something like 175 long and 160 metres wide at the widest point, i.e. very close to a circle (not surprsing since it was a cricket oval first and foremost).

Some grounds are far narrower, and thus have a truer oval shape.

Some grounds have deep pockets and flanks, such that a shot from the boundary can be very acute, others are not.

The old Waverly ground was an abslutely massive ground, from fence to fence the ground was something like 230 metres long, the playing surface itself was something like 201 metres long.

But then you go the SCG, and the playing surface is something like 151 metres (and even that might be an exaggeration!!)

The SCG is so small that it has inspired a number of innovations: flooding; the combined full forward/centrehalf forward position, and variations of Pagan’s paddock incorporating both of the former elements.

As Art has said, I sort of like the fact that Stoke have stuck it up the big clubs (it’s nothing short of a miracle that they finished where they did first season back).

I’m pretty sure that the dimensions are decided at the start of the season and the clubs stick with it for the rest of the season (but I’m not sure if that’s a strict rule, or just more convenient).

But who could ever have imagined that a player like Delap would come along, and have seriously competent, experienced, professional and highly paid defenders (and we’re talking the likes of Rio and Vidic), absolutely bamboozled by the length of his throws.

Once again, for me, it’s a breath of fresh air – the last thing a game needs is defenders so much in control of a game that you know a team is unlikely to score.

As for Stoke pursuing a more technical game, well, to be honest – it looks a long way off!!!

What I found interesting in the piece was how the chairmen of the big clubs wanted uniform pitch dimensions but they could not get the two thirds votes required to make the proposal stick. A victory for the little clubs over the big clubs.

Of course, I hadn’t thought of the Delap speciality in the above discussion – good on Stoke for sticking it up ‘em!!

This also gets me thinking of a corrollary, and that’s your corner specialists – get the width to suit the range of your corner specialist, and that means goals!!

I’m not an expert on the subject, and I’ve never really given it any thought to be honest, but you might have a bloke who can swing them in, inch perfect, right on 40 metres – so clearly, you want to be able to use the full width of 75m in that situation – and have have ‘em queuing up at the back post!!

from Teamtalk.com

Rory Delap’s throw-ins will still be causing problems next season after the Premier League rejected appeals to make Stoke widen their pitch.

Stoke claimed 10 home wins in their debut Premier League season as visitors struggled to cope with their physical, high-tempo style and the not-so-secret weapon of long-throw specialist Delap.

The Potters narrowed and shortened their pitch to the minimum size, 100m x 64m, allowed by the Premier League after winning promotion and went on to score eight goals from Delap missiles.

This upset some of their rivals with some claiming all 20 pitches should be the same size, 105m x 68m, as required in the Champions League, but the proposal was rejected at the Premier League chairmen’s conference as it failed to get the two-thirds majority required.

Stoke chairman Peter Coates said: “We were determined to fight our corner on this. We argued that the rules have been in place for many years and, for many years, clubs have decided on their own pitch size to best suit their playing methods.

“It wasn’t just one club in favour of this proposal, but we put our case very strongly and spoke to a number of clubs beforehand.”

Chief executive Tony Scholes added in the Stoke Sentinel: “Tony Pulis hasn’t decided yet on what size the pitch will be next season, but we wanted to make sure he had the flexibility to choose. Every club has to play to its own strengths and it is perfectly reasonable to decide the size of your own pitch, within the rules of the game.”
Delap’s long-throws set up Stoke goals at the Britannia Stadium against Aston Villa, Everton (twice), Arsenal (twice), Sunderland, Bolton and Middlesbrough.

I checked Stokes stats from last year and they make quite remarkable reading.

Home record – 10 wins 5 draws 4 losses – 22 goals scored, only 15 conceded
(4th best defence for home games in EPL)

Away record – 2 wins 4 draws 13 losses – 16 goals scored, 40 goals conceded
(most goals conceded away from home by any team in the EPL)

By narrowing the pitch to 64m and playing a very physical style they have made it very difficult for superior opponents to score goals at their home ground. Ofcourse, it also helps Delap with his throw-ins.

However, put them on a normal pitch away from home and they struggle.

You have to hand it to Tony Pulis at Stoke as he found a way guarantee EPL surival for his team on a limited budget.

The same follows for football (though as a goal keeper it didn’t particularly help my cause. All hail the cow paddock).

It’s a long way away, maybe, but Hodgson’s comments are a reminder, at a tme when we are attempting to improve the overall quality of our football, that players need to right tools.

Maybe then these same home-grown players in five or ten years time will have a more assured touch, in part because they are being developed better and in part because they are being developed on better surfaces.

Players no doubt about it. The pitch looked from the stand immaculate. Could have been pre season rustiness but this was from Roar players who even in mid season last year had inadequate technique. Also without appearing critical of our own they are Australian born players.

Towser, did the poor first touches yesterday have anything to do with the quality of the pitch surface, as apposed to the size? or was it the quality of the players in your opinion?

you’re quite right that clubs playing on grounds used for internationals will come within the international ranges – and your examples bear that out.

But interestingly, we see that strong clubs like Chelsea, Inter, AC Milan and Barca are playing with widths of 67 to 68 metres (a relatively narrow pitch), which underscores this point about strong teams choosing to go with narrow pitches (I would see anything at 68 metres or less as narrow, and anything above 72m as wide).

Is there a big difference between 64m and 75m at the elite level?

Yes, absolutely!!! It’s a massive difference.

In pure mathematics, it’s making the ground larger in area by over 16%.

But most importantly, your back 4, for arguments sake, go from guarding channels of 16 metres to guarding channels of almost 19m.

It doesn’t sound like a lot, but in the course of a whole game, it makes a big difference.

If the back four focus on compressing the space in the middle, standing 15m apart, in the narrow pitch, there’s only 9 m either side of them, but in the wider pitch, there’s 15m either side of them – and all of a sudden, that extra 6m either side of the full back starts to look like a yawning gap! (that teams who play with width will try to expose).

Alternatively, if the full backs are marking attacking mids who play with width, the gaps in the middle start to look a bit more penetrable than would otherwise have been the case.

Of course, move beyond the international standard of 75m, and well, your talking about plenty of gaps!!

Personally, I think the greater width provides a greater test of a team’s defensive capabilities and tilts the balance a wee bit back towards the attacking team (which isn’t a bad thing).

I have vivid memories of Chris Trajanovski running around Leichhardt with sand flying all over the place. Ditto with Lindsay Wilson and Brett Emerton at Belmore.

Arsenal are the perfect example of a technically proficient team that played great on a compact pitch at Highbury, although I wouldn’t begin to know what the difference in dimensions is between Highbury and Ashburton Grove