Six SPFL sides including Raith Rovers and Falkirk hit out at "grossly unfair" Premiership plastic pitch ban plans

A group of six SPFL clubs including Raith Rovers and Falkirk have hit out at the “grossly unfair” and “fundamentally flawed” resolution seeking to phase out the use of artificial surfaces in the Premiership.

Plastic pitches in the top flight of Scottish football could be abolished by the 2026-27 season after clubs in the Premiership brought forward a vote on Monday to rush through the plans.

Livingston’s relegation leaves Kilmarnock as the only confirmed top flight club next season to have a plastic surface, although play-off finalists Raith Rovers have synthetic grass at Stark’s Park.

The resolution requires nine clubs to vote in favour for it to be passed. The Scottish Professional Football League stated that the outcome of the vote would be announced “in due course”.

The board also confirmed that the two-year period of grace was in line with the recommendations of the SPFL Competitions Working Group, which represents clubs across the league.

And the Kirkcaldy club, alongside fellow full-time lower league sides Falkirk, Airdrieonians, Hamilton Accies, Cove Rangers and Queen of the South, have released a joint response to the proposal.

In a letter sent to the SPFL board, they suggested a number of compromises to ensure “sporting integrity” was at at the heart of any proposal – but that was completely ignored by Premiership clubs, who didn’t include any of the club’s suggestions.

A joint statement by four clubs - Raith Rovers, Falkirk, Accies and Queens – read: “In response to the proposal to ban artificial playing surfaces in the Scottish Premiership, over the past few months we have sought constructive dialogue with both the SPFL Competitions Working Group (CWG) and directly with Scottish Premiership clubs.

“We have done so because we believe the proposal to be fundamentally flawed on a number of levels and, if approved, will cause significant long-term damage to Scottish football by undermining sporting integrity, impacting the wider game and creating huge financial entry barriers to the top league.

“We unreservedly support the Premiership clubs desire to ensure that playing surfaces are always of a high quality, so worked together to create what we believe to be a constructive and well-considered alternative proposal, which we are publishing today.

“We recently had the opportunity to present our ideas to both the Competitions Working Group and those Premiership clubs not involved in the CWG, and we thank them for taking the time to listen to us.

“We are, however, disappointed to learn that the Premiership clubs intend to proceed to a vote on a blanket ban of artificial surfaces from season 2026/27, and that none of the elements of our alternative proposal have been adopted or incorporated into their final proposal.”

The six clubs have also released a paper related to the plastic pitch debate – saying that they hope to ignite a “public debate” on the subject.

They believe that the costs associated with maintaining a grass pitch could reach more than £750k per annum.

"We are publishing our paper today to promote a public debate on the subject. Our view is that this decision is poorly thought through, and we do not believe it is acceptable for just twelve clubs to make this decision, which could have a long-lasting and negative impact on Scottish football, as serious as the ill-fated 10,000-seat stadium rule,” they added.

“We believe that all clubs with the ability and ambition to reach the Premiership should be encouraged to do so, without having unnecessary barriers being created to demotivate and disincentivise them.

“Scotland is the world’s most northerly non-Arctic nation, and our climate simply isn’t always conducive to having perfect grass pitches due to high levels of rainfall, minimal sunshine, and high cloud coverage.

"The costs associated with achieving the highest possible standard of grass pitches, year-round, could be more than £750k per annum, with a large percentage of this attributed to the electricity required to fuel grass growth lamps.

"It is therefore very difficult for the majority of Scottish clubs to achieve the highest possible standard of playing surface, as it is cost prohibitive. There’s no question that a top-quality, UEFA-approved artificial surface is far superior, in every respect, than a sub-standard grass pitch, which we routinely see in the winter months of Scottish football.

“We would ask fans and supporter groups of all clubs to read our paper and to make their views known to their respective clubs. We believe our recommendations to be reasonable, practical, and proportionate to solving the issue the Premiership clubs wish to address.”

The SPFL has been contacted for a response to the statement and the contents of the letter.