BusanBhoy Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 A few comments, over a few different threads have me wondering about this whole field turf bit. Many seem resigned to dubbing this York U stadium, as our national stadium. While that should be a debate for another day, my question is if this stadium will end up being a white elephant, at least in football terms (real football that is - i'm sure it will suit the argos fine until people tire of the location (again another debate)). Basicaly I don't have much faith in this product. I'm not talking about its quality, but rather its perseption. I know there is this whole "fifa approved' idea, and I'm sure a boat load of experts can speak to its quality, but these are just truths, and like the whole WMD thing, truth matters very little. If players, managers and associations hear that they have been invited to play on a 'plastic pitch' will 'fifa approved' matter? When push comes to shove, and a clubs assets are on the line, will they be eager to release players to come play us? for us? will fifa force the issue in defence of such surfaces? I don't have the answers. only questions. I just feel nervous that this new venue mightn't prove all that sucessful for the senior programe. I'd be interested in any thoughts on this matter. Thanks BY THE WAY - GET OVER AND VOTE FOR YOUR SCARF CHOICE - THE 2's NEED YOUR HELP - CHEERS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 I don't see what the big problem is anymore. UEFA will now allow the fake stuff for Euro club competitions. I think all the naysayers will finally shut up when Inter and AC Milan install the stuff at the San Siro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusanBhoy Posted February 28, 2005 Author Share Posted February 28, 2005 you'll have to forgive me, I've been the last ten years in a fotballing backwater (world cup notwithstanding), but was your second comment for real? That would shock me. As to the first part, didn't one of the Moscow clubs have to change venues for their champs league games in the 03/04 competition? Also, other than the last U17's in (Finland ?) has another non friendly (international) competition played on it yet? (Women don't count, different game, different mindset). And didn't UEFA recently call two of their four pilot projects, with sythetic surffaces, failures? (granted these were four distict varieties) again - just wondering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 From the article linked below: UEFA competition matches may be played on artificial turf from the 2005/06 season. The decision, taken by UEFA's Executive Committee in Vienna, follows comprehensive and ongoing studies into the sporting and medical aspects of using artificial playing surfaces. "The need [for artificial turf] has been great for years, if you come from countries with bad winters, for example," says UEFA Chief Executive Lars-Christer Olsson. "The reason for this decision is that the quality has now reached a level where artificial turf is comparable to, or even better than natural turf in some cases." http://www.uefa.com/uefa/news/Kind=8/newsId=264028.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 Montreal is also planning a new stadium (or a renovated CCR) proposal for 2007. Seeing as the ground will not be shared, it wouldn't be surprising to see a grass pitch. If this is the case, I'd expect many teams to rather play friendlies there than in Toronto. We have yet to see a men's friendly on Fieldturf and have knowledge that some teams have refused to play us because of it, most notably Holland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueviking Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 yeah...its one thing for fifa to issue a memo allowing field turf. its another thing to convince teams from other countries to play on it. its hard enough to get a good team to come to canada to play...try selling a european club on flying across the world to play a team that is scraping the bottom of the world rankings.... then throw in the fact that you can only offer them a plastic pitch. good luck....that isnt a very attractive package....we will see fewer games than we do now...if that is possible. good teams have a lot of options on who they can play friendlies against...field turf might be as good or even better than grass, but until the players approve it...not fifa....the players themselves....then those high calibre opponents will play countries that can offer a proper venue. maybe one day it will be accepted. today it isnt...the issue isnt whether or not it is a good surface...the issue is will football countries accept it. it will take things like big european clubs making the switch, before the stigma is gone. there is no denying it...justified or not...there is a stigma right now regarding platic grass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouver Fan Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Well,field turf isn't a good alternative to real grass so therefore it will not be accepted by most footballing countries. Let the ladies use it.It's not as if the ball touches the surface very often when they play on it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny Boy Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Does it really matter what the stadium is called? I'm happy we got something useful. As for the surface, the stadium hasn't been completed yet. The last thing installed is usually the turf. So assuming the stadium will be ready by 2007, the pitch won't be in until the end of 2006. By then there might be a newer better version of the fake stuff. The fact that more venues are switching to the stuff means there is a market, and usually the best stuff on the market is what sells. I would like to think that the stuff getting installed in 2006 will be better than the stuff that heas been installed recently in other venues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Fieldturf is getting installed in stadiums that had Astroturf (Skydome, Big O, Ottawa) or stadium who's grass pitch was getting too much of a beating (Giants Stadium). Also, universities have moved to FT for the versatility and strong resistance to extreme use. Most new stadiums are built with natural grass (even in Seattle, the stadium was originally grass but the Seahawks had it changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Vancouver Fan Well,field turf isn't a good alternative to real grass so therefore it will not be accepted by most footballing countries. Quite true, but is it not better to play on fieldTurf than the cow pasture in Kingston (Paul Stalteri's take), or the frozen, post-gridiron fields at U of T (Canada-Mexico 2000)? Or the sand lots during African qualifying? It is true that certain footbaling countries would refuse to play in artificial turf, but some countries (African ones, and even Costa Rica) would. Let's play those ones on turf, and the "elite" ones on real grass at Commonwealth, Swangard, or Claude Robillard. The reality is that the trend is towards FieldTurf because of cost, despite the number of pristine golf courses in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 i must say i have played on field turf a number of times and absolutely loved it. i was a bit nervous taking big kicks at first for fear of kicking the turf (mistakes happen!!!) and really doing damage to my ankle. but once that fear went away the play was incredible. the speed of the game increases, you know where and when (once you figure out the bounce of the ball) the ball will go every time. i think we almost must have a national stadium with field turf. it'll allow for matches to be played during any month of the year, and yes, the "big" teams can play in edmonton - i suppose. i am hoping that they take the roof off BC Place stadium for the olympics and leave it off and then install field turf there as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soju Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I've never played on field turf so I have a question. Does it cut up your knees and legs when you slide on it or does it give like real grass? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Soju I've never played on field turf so I have a question. Does it cut up your knees and legs when you slide on it or does it give like real grass? It's not supposed to at all, but it's pretty much on par with grass. You slide too much and you get scraped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurosawa1555362267 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I'm a goallie and what I like is that the field is even, you don't see that patch of earth in front of the net where the goallie stands for most of the game. Also the bounces are always regular. The difficulty is when you get back on real grass, if the field is hard the ball bounces a lot higher. I hurt my akle like that last year. I underestimated a bounce on a hard field outside after playing on artificial grass for two weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.