The Ref Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 Article from our man Carmelo Rago who plays in Chile. http://www.canada.com/edmonton/sports/story.asp?id=118A60C4-D727-49F7-9863-24ACAEF308A6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.T. Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 well...the quality of artifical turf varies greatly. A playing surface of spiky weeds likes the ones in my lawn can be considered 'natural'...that wouldn't taint my opinion of Wembly's turf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 Sorry Ref but this is totally irrelevant to the discussion. Why? Because this surface is obviously astro turf or some other first generation artificial surface. The entire discussion has been about how the new and totally different surfaces do not damage players like the old surfaces. No more stress fractures or rug burns. The only reason players do not play on these surfaces (that I can tell) is because they have experienced or heard tales from those who have experienced the first generation surfaces that are harmful. I have never read any interview with any professional player who has proper experience with the new surfaces that was negative or that said he would refuse to play on it. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by ted The entire discussion has been about how the new and totally different surfaces do not damage players like the old surfaces. No more stress fractures or rug burns. But do we know this for sure?? What are some of the stadiums that use this high quality artificial turf today?? I remember reading some article a while back that mentioned no professional teams in Europe had this turf installed yet in their stadium. But I could be mistaken. Though I'm wondering how many soccer players in the world have played 60 games a year for 10 years on this turf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayWay Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 I've spoken to one person about field turf and the only negative thing he said about it was that it was slippery. owever, he only played on game so I couldn't give you nay feedback about the long term effects of playing on field turf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ted Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 quote: But do we know this for sure??... no professional teams in Europe had this turf installed yet in their stadium. Very few professional teams have this surface installed because it is still in the testing phase and has not yet received approval for competitions like the UEFA Cup. Most, I beleive, have it only in their practice facilities. When all the testing is done you will see an explosion in the number of stadiums with the turf installed. I would say the turf has passed the tests already but I am willing to wait to be proven right. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amacpher Posted August 22, 2003 Share Posted August 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Sigma Slovakia and Colombia recently played on fieldturf (I believe) at Shea Stadium. The Colombian coach had no problems with the field because it was just like grass. Who was in charge of marketing this event? I live 10 miles from Shea and this is the first I've heard about it! I'm too late now, I guess. Oh well, after reading some articles sounds like the game sucked anyway! And they did use field turf because they didn't have time to put in real grass to fill-in the infield dirt areas that are there for baseball. Its a wonder why they don't use field turf for NFL games in all those stadiums that are also used for baseball!? Too cheap, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ref Posted August 23, 2003 Author Share Posted August 23, 2003 quote:Originally posted by ted Sorry Ref but this is totally irrelevant to the discussion. Why? Because this surface is obviously astro turf or some other first generation artificial surface. The entire discussion has been about how the new and totally different surfaces do not damage players like the old surfaces. No more stress fractures or rug burns. The only reason players do not play on these surfaces (that I can tell) is because they have experienced or heard tales from those who have experienced the first generation surfaces that are harmful. I have never read any interview with any professional player who has proper experience with the new surfaces that was negative or that said he would refuse to play on it. Ted Irrelevant or not, it caused you to reply. I do not know what turf the stadium in Puerto Montt has, Mr. Rago does not elaborate more. I do conclude from his words that the artificial surface was installed for weather reasons, not because it reduces injuries. I do consider Mr. Rago to be a professional in spite of his young age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted August 23, 2003 Share Posted August 23, 2003 Puerto Montt's surface is a second-generation artificial surface manufactured by Tarkett Sommer called Prestige 60. The installation is FIFA-approved. There are ten FIFA-approved Prestige 60 installations worldwide, most notably at Chilean, Chinese and French (the famous "Clairefontaine") national training facilities, and at the training facility of FC Nantes. There is also one at Parc de Kent in Montreal (yes, FIFA-approved)! Source: http://www.fifa.com/en/development/quality/instalations.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ref Posted August 23, 2003 Author Share Posted August 23, 2003 quote:Originally posted by DJT Puerto Montt's surface is a second-generation artificial surface manufactured by Tarkett Sommer called Prestige 60. The installation is FIFA-approved. There are ten FIFA-approved Prestige 60 installations worldwide, most notably at Chilean, Chinese and French (the famous "Clairefontaine") national training facilities, and at the training facility of FC Nantes. There is also one at Parc de Kent in Montreal (yes, FIFA-approved)! Source: http://www.fifa.com/en/development/quality/instalations.html Thank you for the information. This makes Carmelo Rago's article very relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeta Posted August 23, 2003 Share Posted August 23, 2003 I think a certain bias exists in players when it comes to fieldturf, astroturf plus or whatever. They'll get over it with more experience. Clubs would not be training on the stuff unless it offered a very reasonable copy of their game day grounds. Not a bloody chance. I think everyone knows how I feel about this next generation plastic. This is the stuff, man!!! Maybe not perfect but way better than the worn out pitchs our locals have to contend with now. And you just added 6-8 weeks to the outdoor season on the praires. Exactly what the doctor ordered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.