In recent light of the complaints of Halifax Town Football Club and Halifax Panthers pitch at the Shay, I think it is a good time to explore whether it is the right idea for clubs to share stadiums, even though they play completeley different sports.

The big point to start with is the financial benefit of dual-ownership of a stadium. And clearly it must be large with the amount of clubs that do this. Huddersfield Town and Huddersfield Giants, Wigan Athletic and Wigan Warriors and one of the most recent stadium share Leigh Leapords and Manchester United Womens team. But with the recent earlier start to the Rugby League season, and the more games in the football season, pitches are now beginning to show signs of wear, which has majorly affected both Halifax clubs.

Halifax Town have seen six of their home games since the start of Decemeber postponed due to what is deemed to be an unplayable surface. On the other hand Halifax Panthers have not yet needed to postpone a game. Which is surprising as the Panthers sixth round Challenge Cup tie agains the Catalan Dragons took place a day after the most recent Town postponement. An indicator of the pitch being more suited to rugby then football. Would be very nice if this was the case for other rugby teams in the UK as well !

Surely the financial benefit of a stadium share is countered by the cost of pitch repairs and other changes that are neccessary to go between the two sports. Rugby will always cut up a pitch more than football due to the constant running and players full weight being tackled into the ground, meaning that a pitch for rugby needs to be soft. Whereas in football a need for a hard pitch allows the ball to move quicker with less friction. It is impossible to switch between the two fields types unless you have the facilities at Tottenham to just roll the pitch in and out when you please. And Halifax definitely don’t have the finances to create this type of facility at the Shay.

And when you focus more on the likes of Huddersfield Town and Huddersfield Giants, the pitch may not be the biggest issue. Definitely not for the latter.

Stadium shares from the outside should mean equal responsibility in terms of the amount of support they bring to the stadium. In Huddersfields case however, Town are head and shoulders above the Giants of Huddersfield in how many supporters attend the John Smiths stadium. Last season the Giants held an average attendance of just over 5000 people. In a 24,000 seater stadium.

Whereas Town have averaged over 15,000 people attending games last season, which was a relegation battle. This season this average is definitely rising with large home crowds against local rivals.

It is obvious that Giants don’t bring as much to the stadium as Town, so why do they still do it? It only hinders Town in terms of pitch quality having rugby league played there. And with the amount of Championship football games only rising why risk damaging the pitch excessively?

Surely a smaller stadium would benefit the spectacle of Huddersfield Giants, by making the crowd look more appealing to people of the local area. A move away, could mean the chance to finally give the club, which trys so hard, its moment to gain fans.

Wrapping it all up the benefits of stadium sharing in modern sport seem to be diminishing. With more games being played than ever, groundspeople have to take many steps to keep pitches safe and playable. Which of course means a lot of money being spent.

Let me know your thoughts on stadium sharing, and whether you think teams should look to split in order to save money, in the comments below.